Rex:
>Oh, before I move on, do you have any actual knowledge of the fruit
>quality or are you just repeating something?
As I have mentioned, I had a organic grower friend many years ago in
Wisconsin and we played around quite a bit with a refractometer. And, as
you may also remember, I was looking for a reasonably-priced refractomer
several months ago. It is interesting to test the brix of foods, which, as
I experience it, correlates very closely to good taste. So much so that it
is almost a waste of time. Why not just use your tongue? ;)
>If you're the official spokesman, why not back off on some of the sarcasm?
I have the same simple "poster" status that you have, Rex.
>Tom may have been poisoned with every bite.
These excuses become tiresome. You pull them outta a hat instead of
_listening_ to the very real possibility that fruitarianism is largely
untenable for humans (indeed, I wonder if it would be possible for any
species of mammal).
>Seriously, what are you trying to say? Yes, I understand he had trouble with
>fruit-whatever. I was hoping to help analyze what might have gone wrong.
>Am I
>stirring your ire by daring to think that his trouble seems slim reason,
>for he,
>you, or anyone to adamantly insist that no one else in the world can
>thrive on a
>particular diet?
Sure it stirs my ire that Tom shares his experience and you question his
perception of tasty fruit and bring up Love Canal as the reasons he failed.
>Were you gritting your teeth here? I was privately warned by someone on
>this list
>that they were a bunch of hate-mongering loonies. I found that not to be
>the case
>and so reported. They seem to be seekers. Certainly, I've never seen any
>excitement like you work up.
Zinc deficiency often causes lethargy. ;) Seekers, eh? I'm sure you have
delivered a "find" for them in your "fruitarianism would work with high
brix fruit" bit. They surely need another excuse...;)
>All in all, though, when reading back over my message I think I was mostly
>asking
>Tom some questions about the oft-repeated plagiarism claim and then adding
>in some
>chitchat to respond to his "wacko," "fanatical," "crank," and other
>charges of that
>nature. As spokesman, can you answer any of my questions or is your
>dander too up
>because of the Moony (not Moonie) quip?
I didn't notice your questions amongst the rest. As for the spokesman crack
once again: how about you take that job! Or here is another job for you: be
a successful high-brix fruit-only fruitarian starting today. Report back in
five years regarding your musculature, your teeth and gums, your penile
faculty, ability to think clearly, your bone density, and stamina.
Cheers,
Kirt
Secola /\ Nieft
[log in to unmask]
|