: Mike's views seems to spread his eco-fascist dogma all over this site with no regard for serious argument or discussion, usually regressing to neanderthal four-letter-word outbursts in an attempt to silence any competition. Whilst this post may resemble a personal attack upon Mike, it is not as this is a tactic which only he would employ, and all without the words "fuck" and "shit" which he all to frequently uses. I think what I am saying is that if you are going to lord over everyone with your mightier-than-thou attitude you could at least use decent argument, without acting so childishly. As much as I hate to say it you could take a leaf out of Mr G. Halletts book. His views and points may be utter (to use on of your words) "shit" but at least he has the decency to structure them into educated arguments, which (if your subscribe to his warped sense of logic) actually make sense.
Really, Mr. Carrot. You disappoint me.
(taking a few seconds out to stroke fluffy white cat...)
Would you care to provide any lucid reasons as to why my arguments and points are, as you put it "shit"? I can provide any number of references from independent bodies and academic papers that back my views up, having read up on them in some depth.
I'm prepared to put a formal symbolic-logic analysis of my views up to back up that point - my views may be based on assertions (as are everyone's) but they are _not_ self-contradictory - which makes them entirely logically consistent and not "warped" in any sense. Of course, since there isn't an XML DTD-type for the logical symbols (I'm working on it!), such an analysis will have to be done using ASCII art, but I'm perfectly ready to do it - if you can marshal your own thoughts into something I can actually argue against.
Oh, and there's an interesting article on the cover of this week's New Scientist - apparently, sulphur-rich preservatives in food which get digested by sulphur-eating bacteria and lead to the production of sulphides in the gut, which are a contributor to diseases like bowel cancer. Guess which sorts of food emerge as the #1 in sulphur levels? Fast food and meat. Another point to the McLibel defence team...
(for uninformed people - one of the issues debated in court by McDonald's was that a fast-food diet has been linked to cancers of the gut. Although the judge ruled it "unproven" the evidence to support this claim gets stronger by the day).
Until you can provide specific examples of my illogical nature and faulty reasoning, I'm forced to conclude that it is you who are the irrational one.
(Of course, since I am finite and human, not to mention slightly pompous, I could well be wrong, but I've thought long and hard about the issues.)