Random Politics & Religion #00 |
||
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
Verda said: » Jetackuu said: » September 2012 BPI f Quote: BPI makes the product by grinding together beef scraps and connective tissue. The company then uses a mixture of ammonia and water (ammonium hydroxide) to prevent the risk of E. coli or salmonella contamination. There's nothing wrong with it, and McDonalds hasn't used it in years, even before the outcry started, apparently. The typical myth is that it's what they use to make their nuggets. fonewear said: » It's like finding a woman that cooks and cleans and is attractive and not insane, it's a myth !
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael said: » Bloodrose said: » The human psyche tends to look at how well a meal or food item is presented in regards to tastes. This is supposed to trump how well something smells or costs, or even how prestigious it's origins sound. When you're at a restaurant, you tend to "eat with your eyes" more so than your other senses. If it looks good, it has to taste good, right? Doesn't matter if it smells like 4 day old festering barfsoup in a toilet. Maybe it works that way for people in general, I don't know. The last time I ate at a fancy restaurant with artsy plating the food didn't even taste as good as something off a dollar menu. It was a popular place, though, so clearly some people thought it was good. On an individual level, people have all kinds of ideas and preferences as to what tastes good to them. Some choose taste on a psychological level that is in tune with their dietary needs. Some have a psychological preference to sweet foods, others to savory, etc., but 90% of the time it still comes down to how something is presented. Basically, it has to look appetizing. Even if it's off of a dollar menu. Personally, I don't think the hoity-toity super upscale food looks all that appetizing, and as good as it's designed to taste, wouldn't appeal to me aesthetically or in taste. Maybe you guys have burnt your taste buds too much !
Who knew pink slime would be such highly political debate !
We should appoint a pink slime czar to get to the bottom of this.
[+]
Stupid debate like I don't know trans gender bathrooms global warming gay fascism 9/11 conspiracies etc !
Verda said: » So you were claiming it was a huge myth. It's not a huge myth. It's made and used. They used it for hamburger and nuggets from my understanding. Are you turning this into a semantic argument now? It's not a myth it was used. Or exists. That is what a myth would mean. McDonald's uses it and it's to reclaim unsanitary beef. It's gross and who knows what long term health problems it could have. Scrubbing beef with ammonia isn't my idea of a quality meal. So I will be avoiding any place that practices that. They say they stopped, but my trust level in them already bombed so who knows what they replaced it with. If I had to venture a guess, I'd guess they're still finding shitty grade meet and treating it up with chemicals to sanitize the fetid flesh. I'm not going to sit here and explain something to you like you're a child who can't do your own research, instead of believing the media hype. FYI: just because something is made and used doesn't mean that it's what was being reported and that it was being used in the way it was reported, and yes it is partially a semantics argument, because that's where the misunderstanding on your part lies. To the bold: no, they do not use beef to make chicken nuggets. Your "understanding" is wrong, and that's what I'm pointing out. It's a McDonald's conspiracy man they are putting addictive pink slime in there to get you to eat more Big Macs !
fonewear said: » If you want to see some good stuff to eat watch. No Reservations with Anthony Bourdain. I like Mike Colameco's Real Food on PBS Create. He's always chowing down on something that looks awesome.
[+]
Oh and as for myth, go use a dictionary, as your understanding of what that word is and means leaves something to be desired. I'll give you a hint: something can have a root in something real and still be a myth.
The simplest solution is to eat the pink slime at Burger King.
It's good cause they "char broil" it !
[+]
Verda said: » So you're turning it into a semantic argument. Oh I didn't mean it's a myth in general. I meant it was a myth only to the use of chicken nuggets which I failed to mention until later because you're supposed to read my mind duh! yah great argument buddy. McDonalds themselves admitted to using it. And since it wasn't part of the original statement I'm not gonna entertain your semantics about chicken nuggets because for one thing it wasn't in your original statement and you're pulling it out of your *** quite clearly as a cover, and for two, it has nothing to do with anything I originally said at all about not wanting to eat at a restaurant that uses pink slime. No, it's a semantic argument from the start, but nice try. They don't use "pink slime" and even if they did: there's nothing wrong with it. As for "it not being in your original argument" it was, because it's in your video, I'm not pulling anything out of my ***, and it has everything to do with you believing media hype over facts. Speaking of questionable food remember Taco Bell ? They had some crazy filler in their "beef"
If only we cared about important issues like what type of "beef" Hillary is made of !
You guys better settle down this is turning into an English class ! Verda said: » You might want to read that dictionary while you have it out Jet. Or learn about how language works. For the sake of argument lets assume you did mean only chicken nuggets, which you left out of your argument until after I had proven you wrong. Then that falls on you for not even providing that information at all until I had proven you wrong. In English, if you leave out a direct object to your sentence it means in general. So your statement was taken as a myth, in general. A myth in general would mean in all cases. I didn't mean only, as they use it for neither, but I've covered it before. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=pink+slime+myth Yes, in general the subject of the pink slime in your video is a myth. Verda said: » Saying there's nothing wrong with it is your opinion and you can keep it, my opinion is washing fetid flesh with ammonia is bad practice and not good. BPI exists. BPI's page talks about their own product. BPI is suing over damages to the public image of their product, which they couldn't do if their product didn't exist, and McDonalds used it and has admitted to using it in the past. Nothing about that is a myth. And if you're going to claim you meant to say it was a semantic argument from the start that's just stupid. Not only did your next statements not support that fact but were made as if to say BPI is suing for damages to their company, but your original statement made no mention of anything but a generalized statement that it was a debunked myth. Structurally, saying it was used on chicken nuggets was a debunked myth doesn't even make much sense. It's not my opinion, it is the opinion of the FDA. Again: the pink slime as referenced in the video you posted was an over hyped media myth, regardless of what parts of it are true. I'm sorry, did you not watch your own video? Verda said: » Now you've changed stances once again. I can't even take you seriously anymore. First it's in general. Which is proven false. Second it's only chicken nuggets. Then you claim you've only ever meant chicken nuggets. Then you claim no no it was always in general that you meant. The only power to your argument is your pithy bad attempts at insulting my intelligence, and I rate that on a scale of weak sauce to pathetic somewhere in the pathetic range. Nothing was proven false, but again: nice try. Wait, where do you think I attempted to insult your intelligence? Is this real life? My stance hasn't changed btw. The giant boobs didn't distract you ! I'm impressed !
Verda said: » I'm sure telling me I don't know the definition of a common word is not pointed at my intellect at all. You haven't made one valid argument, your entire form is only structured around trying to get a rile out of people with childlike statements. I have shown you proof. Saying the truth isn't true doesn't make it untrue. You have shown no proof. Only switched stances about 100 times, insulted my intelligence a few times, and linked to google search for you in an attempt to again, get under my skin. The only attempt you made at any proof that it was a myth (which stance are you on now, that it only wasn't used for chicken nuggets or that it was a myth in general? Since you change every other post it's hard to keep track) was one line from the wikipedia article stating that BPI was suing. Over the product you claim doesn't exist. Or no wait. Isn't used in only chicken nuggets but it does exist, but only for beef. And McDonalds did use it. no Wait they never did. I mean in general. I mean chicken nuggets. Man being you must suck. You have shown no proof, and really aren't speaking the truth when you post a video that is based on a myth. I haven't changed my stance at all, and I linked you to google since you were apparently too lazy do actually do research to know the actual truth, instead of what you think it is based on your media myths. I never said that the product didn't exist, do you really have that large of a problem with understanding what a myth is? I mean I can understand the misconception, but you should at least understand that it is wrong, but considering you still believe in the pink slime myth, hey. YouTube Video Placeholder yay no pink goop[/quote][/youtube] Oh and being me is ***
 |
||
|
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|
||
