npub1dqztjdy6q8rrgcmtff6atrgzrmc6x8c0tlgrvecerz9lq8d25wpsngwglw (npub1dqz…wglw) The data here similarly supports the following statement, which neither suggests that people stop eating protein-rich foods *nor* demands significant increased cost on the consumer:
"Chicken, which is leaner, more protein-rich, and cheaper than beef and pork, is a good choice of meat for people who want to cut their carbon footprint. The American and Chinese diets, which rely heavily on beef and pork, are not only expensive but also are environmentally unsustainable. Therefore, we should convince people who eat meat to make the switch to chicken instead."
The above is a thing that a reasonable person could be convinced of. It is an excellent argument for someone to take an action that is not only arguably healthier for them, but is also healthier for the environment. You can convince people of that, as long as they are *either* health-conscious *or* environmentally-conscious.
This is not what you have done. It is unrealistic to demand that people make expensive choices too minimize their impact. Pushing for solutions that will not be adopted is not helpful - it is as quixotic as the "eat the bugs" suggestion, which is universally hated.
Given your approach, you should not be surprised when people call you a faggot.
CMD /
npub1ec…6fchy
2023-08-20 00:57:18
in reply to nevent1q…x4qv
Author Public Key
npub1ecj3mfr9lzvx7wh6fmh59vz6eet324mdtdlp9qxzqvwuvpglwnxqv6fchyPublished at
2023-08-20 00:57:18Event JSON
{
"id": "53d41dd6cef45bd8ea033688c1adb143aaad62bfcba2ab3c333ff509344824bd",
"pubkey": "ce251da465f8986f3afa4eef42b05ace5715576d5b7e1280c2031dc6051f74cc",
"created_at": 1692493038,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"6804b9349a01c634636b4a75d58d021ef1a31f0f5fd0366719188bf01daaa383",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"p",
"90f2555ef2f0f747aee5b2ee675bf958bf1c839367ab8dc8350811867dc2a712",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"e",
"b6fc257b8a258f984a3362fa836da4b892ccb603b26b6c9b5ff4931786a69a14",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub",
"reply"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://bae.st/objects/b63e9886-e3d9-4c05-8c99-c72be2c52ded",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "nostr:npub1dqztjdy6q8rrgcmtff6atrgzrmc6x8c0tlgrvecerz9lq8d25wpsngwglw The data here similarly supports the following statement, which neither suggests that people stop eating protein-rich foods *nor* demands significant increased cost on the consumer:\n\n\"Chicken, which is leaner, more protein-rich, and cheaper than beef and pork, is a good choice of meat for people who want to cut their carbon footprint. The American and Chinese diets, which rely heavily on beef and pork, are not only expensive but also are environmentally unsustainable. Therefore, we should convince people who eat meat to make the switch to chicken instead.\"\n\nThe above is a thing that a reasonable person could be convinced of. It is an excellent argument for someone to take an action that is not only arguably healthier for them, but is also healthier for the environment. You can convince people of that, as long as they are *either* health-conscious *or* environmentally-conscious.\n\nThis is not what you have done. It is unrealistic to demand that people make expensive choices too minimize their impact. Pushing for solutions that will not be adopted is not helpful - it is as quixotic as the \"eat the bugs\" suggestion, which is universally hated.\n\nGiven your approach, you should not be surprised when people call you a faggot.",
"sig": "9e71195d390fd74cf48e4811e97899645c9b97cf3672a79bdb284a06302a89e04efb09ae798ee2caa46d4e7e8beff5bcb5d08b6c3b4df14daf8d56805b8e251d"
}