>It's really amazing how much effort the religion of vegetarianism flows in a lot of sources and research that follows.
It's totally unclear to me what that sentence is supposed to mean.
>I'm not opposed to a mostly vegetable sourced diet. A lot of people do it for moral/ethical reasons, but hard science it isn't and has never been.
(That sounds to me (an 'ethical vegan') akin to "I'm not opposed to a mostly non-slave workforce. A lot of people have renounced slavery for moral/ethical reasons, but hard science it isn't and has never been.")
Maybe the "it" of the "hard science it isn't" half of the sentence refers the 'mostly vegetable sourced diet' of people who are vegetarian for reasons of their own health, which the rest of your comment seems to talk about exclusively , but you didn't make that clear. It seems probable that you meant to claim that "there's no scientific consensus that a vegetarian diet is healthier" (i.e. for humans). I won't comment on whether that's true or not, but just note that what you actually said was rather different. I think. It was confusing.
The first mentioned sentence is really stating that a lot of people (specifically vegetarians/vegans) have a bias much like religion in which they seek out to prove themselves right instead of finding out what really is, and when presented with evidence they are wrong, will further assert their being "correct" all the same.
"IT" is vegetarian/vegan diet as being healthier. It started off as a religious PoV and mostly still is. There's never been a closed clinical trial that showed that a vegetarian diet is any better than an omnivore or carnivore diet. Most studies already have a lot of factors and bias.
The "ethical vegan" is one who chooses to do so, because they don't want to be involved in the taking of animal life. This is generally a personal and moral reason. I don't have anything bad to say about someone that chooses this so long as they aren't trying to sway others out of a religious-like zealotry.
I’m not a vegan or vegetarian, but your posts on this topic range from persecutorial to bizarre. I can’t believe that you expect anyone reading your posts to be convinced by lists of accusations of evil, equivocation between cockroach bits and cows, or what diet leads to survival stuck “in the middle of any jungle, prairie etc.” there are better ways to make a point that seem less like self-gratification to the exclusion of making a real point.
It's totally unclear to me what that sentence is supposed to mean.
>I'm not opposed to a mostly vegetable sourced diet. A lot of people do it for moral/ethical reasons, but hard science it isn't and has never been.
(That sounds to me (an 'ethical vegan') akin to "I'm not opposed to a mostly non-slave workforce. A lot of people have renounced slavery for moral/ethical reasons, but hard science it isn't and has never been.")
Maybe the "it" of the "hard science it isn't" half of the sentence refers the 'mostly vegetable sourced diet' of people who are vegetarian for reasons of their own health, which the rest of your comment seems to talk about exclusively , but you didn't make that clear. It seems probable that you meant to claim that "there's no scientific consensus that a vegetarian diet is healthier" (i.e. for humans). I won't comment on whether that's true or not, but just note that what you actually said was rather different. I think. It was confusing.