They're round because they're in the desert and the circular farming method is much more water conservative than normal farming methods. They have 2 long watering strips that constantly circle the farm watering the plants (the lines jutting out from the center).
>>2059617 When it is said you need protein, what it's meant is you need aminoacids, the "links" protein "chains" are made of, so to speak. Any protein you ingest, animal or plant based, is separated into aminoacids and then those are used to form the proteins your own body needs. Animals might have some proteins plants don't and viceversa, but it doesn't matter as both can have all the aminoacids you might need.
I still eat animals because they are fucking delicious, though.
The only reason meat is a better source of protein is because it has a closer amino-acid makeup to human tissue than, say, plants. There is nothing wrong with getting your protein from plant material, as long as it is complete protein. That said, you will heal from wounds faster by eating flesh, especially rendered cartilage and bones, marrow and sinew.
I repeat: their proteins are the same, plants just have different proportions of amino acids. I can explain more if you still dont get it.
Just because something is "natural" doesn't mean we should do it. All kinds of things are "natural" but that doesn't mean they're inherently better. So the "it's natural" argument isn't really a good one.
>>2060779 "Nature" doesn't exist. It's just an arbitrary concept made up by humans in order to rationalise the world. Sometimes people use the concept in order to naturalise, and thereby also legitimise, their own opinions.
Appealing to "nature" is just as bad as appealing to "muh tradition". Plus, these appeals are often used to support extra edgy opinions/ideologies, like libertarianism and pro-war standpoints.
>>2060925 If eating meat was "natural" to us, we wouldn't be cognitively capable of being vegetarian. Of course, the opposite applies, too. Being vegetarian is no more natural. All I'm saying is that nature doesn't exist, and that there certainly aren't any "natural" rules that we need to follow.
Humans don't need meet to do well. There is no nutrient in meat that can't be gotten from other sources. I haven't eaten meat in 20 years and literally nothing bad has happened to me as a result from not eating it.
My ma hasn't eaten meat in probably 35 years and she's fine too.
Up until I sustained a serious injury I was constantly exercising. I used to ride my bike six miles to work and back 5 days a week (and at the time I was living in the mountains, so basically none of it was on level ground). There are lots of vegetarian athletes, anon.
Isn't it possible that some people do just fine without meat and others don't, because of genetic factors? I hope we can get to that soon, that one can determine from genes and possibly gut microbial sample, what agrees with ones "stomach" and what doesn't. There's so much opposing opinions about nutritional science these days that it seems that you learn on daily basis that you have been doing it all wrong... it's got to be something that has to be personally tailored.
Thread replies: 33 Thread images: 3
Thread DB ID: 522222
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.