• shapesandstuff@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You seem to have a very tough time matching what people say/write and what you feel like they mean with it.

    Let me rephrase the original claim so you may understand what the actual topic is you’re so furiously debating: Reducing global meat production would be a net benefit to the planet and every being living on it in the long term.

    Reducing demand for said production at a large scale WOULD (this is in conjunctive because it’s still a small movement so IT HASN’T HAPPENED YET - we all know that) over time force said production to scale down.

    Literally no human i have ever interacted with before you thought not buying a steak for a few months instantly fixes the world. We are painfully aware. Which is why we chose not to participate in that insane bullshit which causes all kinds of issues and harm anymore.

    Thank you for your time and energy, this has been awfully unproductive.

    • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reducing demand for said production at a large scale WOULD (this is in conjunctive because it’s still a small movement so IT HASN’T HAPPENED YET - we all know that) over time force said production to scale down.

      that’s not causal.

    • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reducing global meat production would be a net benefit to the planet and every being living on it in the long term.

      that’s true. what you said before was not.

    • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Literally no human i have ever interacted with before you thought not buying a steak for a few months instantly fixes the world.

      i never said that.

            • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              when someone takes you at your word, and then you need to walk back your position to a much weaker claim because they point out that you are writing checks the facts don’t support, it’s you who is practicing intellectual dishonesty. compounding it with strawmen, and then rhetorically implying it is, in fact, the person who called you out who is being dishonest is the height of intellectual dishonesty. you should be ashamed, and you should edit the comments where you lied so as not to continue to mislead other users.