It is usually bad for people to die, and so good for them to keep living. Overall in our society, people who weigh more for their age and gender tend to die more, and so many are concerned about an “obesity epidemic”, and seek ways to reduce people’s weight, such as by getting them to consume fewer calories. Such as from drinking sugary soda.
At the end of the day, weight is about accumulating carbon. We release stored carbon through breathing (O2 in, CO2 out). So every weight reduction program must be some combination of "eat less" and "breathe more" - i.e. less carbon in, more carbon out. Of course, "breathe more" doesn't mean "hyperventilate", but more like "metabolize more" - a.k.a. exercise.
What is health more correlated with - metabolism or metabolic efficiency?
"' feel more comfortable identifying people by their politics (unsuccessfully)"
BWAHAHAH! You're a far right winger through and through ... why are you not proud of that? Why deny it when it is so obvious?
"Further, it's not clear at all as to how my nutritional assertions in any way associate me with either the left or the right."
They don't, you cretin ... it's your *body of comment* that identifies you as a right winger. As I said, it's simply *predictable* that you would take a right wing stance -- defending the Coca-Cola corporation -- here. You don't seem to understand what that word means, but then you are dumber than dirt so it's no surprise.
" Self proclaimed 'truth_machine' that my comment, which put forth the same argument as Dr. Hansen, represented an "arch right winger"."
No, you dolt, that's not what I said at all. What I said was that *you*, being an arch right winger, *predictably* took a right wing stance. The stance could have been just slightly right wing and it would still be predictable that *you* would take it. But the stance of defending the Coca-Cola corporation here, given the points made by other commenters about how poor the argument is, is quite right wing.
"It's not that hard to follow this simple thread."
No, because *you* are super right wing, as you have demonstrated numerous times. Again, your comment was *predictable* ... of *you*.
" And by extension, since I am simply arguing Dr. Hansen's position, Dr. Hansen is "arch right wing" as well, right?"
A typical right wing failure of basic logic -- fallacy of affirmation of the consequent. That Robin and you agree in this instance does not alone tell us anything about his overall ideology.
Of course you understood. I never thought you didn't. I knew that you were simply being dishonest,
Then who was being dishonest when you wrote "It's not that hard to follow this simple thread. Not sure why you're having such a hard time with it." Or is that just a troll's version of irony?
Use a little introspection. Who is the one inflaming the immediate discussion with accusations of immoral behavior?
[Readers capable of some objectivity should also note that Robin's previous post, explicitly on the left-right distinction, primed that aspect of this discussion. If you ask me, Robin has been taking great pains (even at the expense of logic) to prove he's a legitimate rightist, and I do him no disservice by agreeing.]
Of course you understood. I never thought you didn't. I knew that you were simply being dishonest, as was the so-called 'truth_machine', because you, and the so-called 'truth_machine' feel more comfortable identifying people by their politics (unsuccessfully) in order to ... what, exactly, wrt nutrition? I wasn't accusing anyone of being a leftist or a rightist. The so-called 'truth_machine' was. I find it hilarious that people like you and the so-called 'truth_machine' are so obsessed with left/right politics that you can't even have a discussion of nutrition and exercise without invoking it.
Further, it's not clear at all as to how my nutritional assertions in any way associate me with either the left or the right. To clear up my own confusion, I asked that so-called 'truth_machine' if, since my nutritional assertions aligned pretty closely with Dr. Hansen, if he then would conclude that Dr. Hansen is "arch right wing".
Can you explain to me how anyone's left or right or any other politics in any way is relevant to nutrition? Or are you just going to laughably continue, in your trollish way, to act as if it is?
Ha! Now you've made me laugh. Thanks for helping me start the weekend on a light note!
Reading fail. Self proclaimed 'truth_machine' that my comment, which put forth the same argument as Dr. Hansen, represented an "arch right winger". So I asked the so-called 'truth_machine' if he thought Dr. Hansen is an "arch right winger".
It's not that hard to follow this simple thread. Not sure why you're having such a hard time with it.
Because nutrition is super right wing? Ha! And by extension, since I am simply arguing Dr. Hansen's position, Dr. Hansen is "arch right wing" as well, right?
At the end of the day, weight is about accumulating carbon. We release stored carbon through breathing (O2 in, CO2 out). So every weight reduction program must be some combination of "eat less" and "breathe more" - i.e. less carbon in, more carbon out. Of course, "breathe more" doesn't mean "hyperventilate", but more like "metabolize more" - a.k.a. exercise.
What is health more correlated with - metabolism or metabolic efficiency?
"' feel more comfortable identifying people by their politics (unsuccessfully)"
BWAHAHAH! You're a far right winger through and through ... why are you not proud of that? Why deny it when it is so obvious?
"Further, it's not clear at all as to how my nutritional assertions in any way associate me with either the left or the right."
They don't, you cretin ... it's your *body of comment* that identifies you as a right winger. As I said, it's simply *predictable* that you would take a right wing stance -- defending the Coca-Cola corporation -- here. You don't seem to understand what that word means, but then you are dumber than dirt so it's no surprise.
" Self proclaimed 'truth_machine' that my comment, which put forth the same argument as Dr. Hansen, represented an "arch right winger"."
No, you dolt, that's not what I said at all. What I said was that *you*, being an arch right winger, *predictably* took a right wing stance. The stance could have been just slightly right wing and it would still be predictable that *you* would take it. But the stance of defending the Coca-Cola corporation here, given the points made by other commenters about how poor the argument is, is quite right wing.
"It's not that hard to follow this simple thread."
It is for an imbecile like you.
No, because *you* are super right wing, as you have demonstrated numerous times. Again, your comment was *predictable* ... of *you*.
" And by extension, since I am simply arguing Dr. Hansen's position, Dr. Hansen is "arch right wing" as well, right?"
A typical right wing failure of basic logic -- fallacy of affirmation of the consequent. That Robin and you agree in this instance does not alone tell us anything about his overall ideology.
Of course you understood. I never thought you didn't. I knew that you were simply being dishonest,
Then who was being dishonest when you wrote "It's not that hard to follow this simple thread. Not sure why you're having such a hard time with it." Or is that just a troll's version of irony?
Use a little introspection. Who is the one inflaming the immediate discussion with accusations of immoral behavior?
[Readers capable of some objectivity should also note that Robin's previous post, explicitly on the left-right distinction, primed that aspect of this discussion. If you ask me, Robin has been taking great pains (even at the expense of logic) to prove he's a legitimate rightist, and I do him no disservice by agreeing.]
Of course you understood. I never thought you didn't. I knew that you were simply being dishonest, as was the so-called 'truth_machine', because you, and the so-called 'truth_machine' feel more comfortable identifying people by their politics (unsuccessfully) in order to ... what, exactly, wrt nutrition? I wasn't accusing anyone of being a leftist or a rightist. The so-called 'truth_machine' was. I find it hilarious that people like you and the so-called 'truth_machine' are so obsessed with left/right politics that you can't even have a discussion of nutrition and exercise without invoking it.
Further, it's not clear at all as to how my nutritional assertions in any way associate me with either the left or the right. To clear up my own confusion, I asked that so-called 'truth_machine' if, since my nutritional assertions aligned pretty closely with Dr. Hansen, if he then would conclude that Dr. Hansen is "arch right wing".
Can you explain to me how anyone's left or right or any other politics in any way is relevant to nutrition? Or are you just going to laughably continue, in your trollish way, to act as if it is?
Ha! Now you've made me laugh. Thanks for helping me start the weekend on a light note!
I understand all that. What I don't understand is why the idea is laughable. (You arch-rightists are always saying you're misunderstood!)
Reading fail. Self proclaimed 'truth_machine' that my comment, which put forth the same argument as Dr. Hansen, represented an "arch right winger". So I asked the so-called 'truth_machine' if he thought Dr. Hansen is an "arch right winger".
It's not that hard to follow this simple thread. Not sure why you're having such a hard time with it.
You think Robin's a leftist? Or just not arch?
Because nutrition is super right wing? Ha! And by extension, since I am simply arguing Dr. Hansen's position, Dr. Hansen is "arch right wing" as well, right?
Thanks for the laugh!
"I don't actually see evidence that the soda firms will in fact promote a false belief."
So you're admitting to being grossly intellectually dishonest.
You're dishonestly bullshitting. And learn what "begs the question" actually means -- it's something you do a lot.
"it would matter for your conclusion that overall we should cheer the soda companies for this campaign"
Indeed. Hanson's response is blatantly intellectually dishonest.
Robin isn't interested in what the scientific literature generally tells us, just in cherry picking it for the purpose of making sophistic arguments.
So you're a dick. Not everyone else is.
Extraordinarily stupid and childish hyperbole ... most likely a right wing ideologue.