x
Click to expand

didactus

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 20
Steam Profile: Bazzelicious
Consoles Owned: Xbox 360
Video Games Played: CS:GO, AoE II
X-box Gamertag: Jiraiyadude
Interests: Muay Thai, Physics, Books.
Date Signed Up:12/03/2012
Last Login:3/29/2015
Location:Karlshamn Sweden
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#5294
Highest Content Rank:#5821
Highest Comment Rank:#1438
Content Thumbs: 111 total,  133 ,  22
Comment Thumbs: 5722 total,  6753 ,  1031
Content Level Progress: 80% (4/5)
Level 8 Content: New Here → Level 9 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 89% (89/100)
Level 249 Comments: Doinitrite → Level 250 Comments: Contaminated Win
Subscribers:0
Content Views:11362
Times Content Favorited:2 times
Total Comments Made:1414
FJ Points:5128
Git gud.


Funny Text/Links

latest user's comments

#164 - Someone might say anything wether true or not to make it stop.…  [+] (1 new reply) 1 hour ago on Description 0
User avatar #166 - jdrinfantry (1 hour ago) [-]
True. You will say anything to make it stop. but if we're talking about waterboarding in particular, repetitive torture is not even necessary.
He's not afraid of what you might do to him, he's afraid of what you just did.
It is a reasonabe method to gaining the MOST valued information only.
Using torture as a regular method of interrogation is out of the question, it's only used for that hit list the US has on terrorists anyways.
#159 - That's why is said extract.  [+] (3 new replies) 1 hour ago on Description 0
User avatar #163 - jdrinfantry (1 hour ago) [-]
It's the best method to extract new information from someone.
Ask anyone who's been through SERE training in the US military. At some point you break, and you tell ANYTHING you know. It's not like in the movies where you have the capability to withstand and or tell lies.

User avatar #164 - didactus (1 hour ago) [-]
Someone might say anything wether true or not to make it stop. It is not a even reasonable method to gain anything valuable.
User avatar #166 - jdrinfantry (1 hour ago) [-]
True. You will say anything to make it stop. but if we're talking about waterboarding in particular, repetitive torture is not even necessary.
He's not afraid of what you might do to him, he's afraid of what you just did.
It is a reasonabe method to gaining the MOST valued information only.
Using torture as a regular method of interrogation is out of the question, it's only used for that hit list the US has on terrorists anyways.
#34 - Dom här idioterna kommer släppa detta när faden att göra &…  [+] (1 new reply) 17 hours ago on Nordic Masterace 0
User avatar #40 - vikingesnumerouno (7 hours ago) [-]
Nå er jeg Norsk, men ja. Jeg er enig. Det er latterlig.
#29 - Not this ******** again... You can tolerate other p… 18 hours ago on Poor kid +16
#12 - Torture is a terrible method to extract valid information from…  [+] (6 new replies) 20 hours ago on Description +1
User avatar #158 - jdrinfantry (1 hour ago) [-]
You don't use torture to validate information, you use torture to get new information, that you can follow up on.
User avatar #159 - didactus (1 hour ago) [-]
That's why is said extract.
User avatar #163 - jdrinfantry (1 hour ago) [-]
It's the best method to extract new information from someone.
Ask anyone who's been through SERE training in the US military. At some point you break, and you tell ANYTHING you know. It's not like in the movies where you have the capability to withstand and or tell lies.

User avatar #164 - didactus (1 hour ago) [-]
Someone might say anything wether true or not to make it stop. It is not a even reasonable method to gain anything valuable.
User avatar #166 - jdrinfantry (1 hour ago) [-]
True. You will say anything to make it stop. but if we're talking about waterboarding in particular, repetitive torture is not even necessary.
He's not afraid of what you might do to him, he's afraid of what you just did.
It is a reasonabe method to gaining the MOST valued information only.
Using torture as a regular method of interrogation is out of the question, it's only used for that hit list the US has on terrorists anyways.
User avatar #29 - sherlockbatman (16 hours ago) [-]
information gleaned through torture is not valid. coerced information is not trustworthy
#10 - Multiple is an understatement. 20 hours ago on Scandinavia and the world +1
#8 - I thought it was 2015 but ok 2012 it is. 03/27/2015 on White Is Right -2
#11 - Ace?  [+] (4 new replies) 03/27/2015 on One Piece Comp 0
User avatar #15 - talonwooten (03/27/2015) [-]
DAMMIT. That's what I get for clicking a spoiler
#12 - crosskill (03/27/2015) [-]
I know that Ace and Whitebeard dies, but people who we are otherwise lead to believe are dead, somehow turn up alive in later chapters.
#14 - anonymous (03/27/2015) [-]
the idea is luffy doesnt kill anyone its different then everyone else
and the main cast wont die maybe 1 person by the end
it be cool if everyone ever met had some part in some final battle
User avatar #23 - angelious (03/27/2015) [-]
and then we have the hawk man in alabusta or something who survived a nuke via "what thats my grave"


also every crew member has some sort of "i believe in friendship and dreams" dude who dies so they can be all sad and broody until luffy does the friendship punch on the guy who killed the guy who killed the i believe in friendship and dreams dude
#10 - I just don't like the idea of being ordered to love, call me f…  [+] (3 new replies) 03/27/2015 on Controversy 0
User avatar #14 - thepizzadevourer (03/27/2015) [-]
This is really directed towards other Christians, so I'm really not preaching at you or anything. But if you want the Christian stance on the issue, we believe that humans are naturally selfish, so any love that we have will ultimately be self-serving in nature. God commands us to love because He wants us to grow closer to Him, so we can show His unconditional, unselfish, sacrificial love to others, rather than our own, inadequate love.

Also don't feel bad about expressing your opinions on an issue as long as it's done respectfully, if I can't handle that it's my problem not yours.
#43 - mattymc (03/28/2015) [-]
You might be too mature for this site, and i mean that in the most positive way
#41 - anonymous (03/28/2015) [-]
Nope, Satan is the one who says man isn't worth saving, GOD found a way from HIS Love to keep us throughout eternity, with HIM by cleansing us of our every little sin through the sacrifice of Jesus. Our inequities paid for with HIS stripes, because we are not perfect. Evil people who ally themselves with the devil still land in the Pit with the devil.
#8 - Last time I checked most newsstations across the arab world is… 03/27/2015 on Aloha Snackbar +5

user's friends

items

Total unique items point value: 2370 / Total items point value: 5720
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #1 - theluppijackal ONLINE (11/14/2014) [-]
I'm responding here because it's become a ***********
@50
>And that's not to say everyone will go vegan overnight. Veganism will grow slowly.

We can say it won't happen if the world goes vegan because we can already measure the resources that will go into crops. the resources that go into meat is wildly inefficient. the resources that go into crops are provably, measurably, sustainable.

what's more, the crops we grow for cows and such are already wildly overgrown. we put resources into them. We will stop putting said resources in if we stop growing them.

@51
veganbodybuilding.com/
It's also provable we don't need supplement in a vegan diet. In fact it's been shown vegans get more than adequate protein intake. you can get everything you need from a vegan diet with moderate planning, as shown by lifelong vegans, vegan atheletes, so on and so forth. it's the opinion of many professional medical outlet that vegan diets are fine for all walks of life
in fact the conservative American Dietetic Association acknowledges "appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases.
At most, we would need b12 pills but even then we don't need that if we grow the right crops.
User avatar #2 to #1 - didactus (11/14/2014) [-]
The highest protein source I found for non meat product was at 39% for soybeans, one of the most pesticide ridden crops in all the world, where they cut down trees in south america to grow more. And moreover infants can't live on vegan diets they need meat no matter how you put it, because they grow. Otherwise they become malnourished.
User avatar #3 to #2 - theluppijackal ONLINE (11/14/2014) [-]
We deforest for soybean crops because we grow them to feed animals.
what's more, how much protein the crop has by itself is irrelevant. the question was can we have adequate vegan diets. and the answer is provably, yes. in fact many americans get too much protein.

what's more, what are you basing your idea that you can't feed infants vegan off of? A few articles about vegan parents that had malnourished kids? that's mere annecdote. I wouldn't say omnivorous diets malnourish infants because a few omnivore parents had malnourished kids.

There are ways to feed infants vegan. Again, with adequate planning, as you would need with an omnivore diet.
www.vrg.org/nutshell/kids.php
User avatar #4 to #3 - didactus (11/14/2014) [-]
I wasn't talking about the animal crop, I was talking about the crop humans eat has 39% protein. And judging by the article, it's mentioned that they should take soy formula.
www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/why-soy-formula-even-organic-is-so-dangerous-for-babies/
They NEED protein it's non debatable, they don't need a balanced diet, they need an increasing diet to sustain their growth.
And yes a simple case does not mean the whole group is the same. And that many people get too much protein, I won't argue that because it's true, I mentioned earlier about wanting to decrease the need on meat, which we should it's both a massive waste in the industry aswell as we eat too much, but we shouldn't eliminate it from our diets. Having non meat days is fine, I see no reason as to why you can't cut down on meat that way.
User avatar #6 to #4 - theluppijackal ONLINE (11/14/2014) [-]
And the question of simply 'cutting down' on meat brings us back to the question of
1) can we justify hurting animals unnecessarily
[which many people agree and say no]
2) should we really continue to eat meat when it's currently contributing more to global warming than all forms of transportation combined?
User avatar #10 to #6 - didactus (11/14/2014) [-]
1) No, we can't justify it. but we can do it so that it doesn't feel unnecessary pain.
2) www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/global.html, We can cut down by alot. But we shouldn't eliminate it.
User avatar #12 to #10 - theluppijackal ONLINE (11/14/2014) [-]
it's impossible to kill an animal without it feeling pain. to suggest an animal doesn't value it's life is irrational. it's like suggesting an animal with eyes doesn't have an interest in seeing. Can we likewise suggest a human being with the mentality of a cow [or equivalent too] wouldn't be suffering if we killed it?

We should very much eliminate it. Switching to a vegan diet is actually more of an environmentally contribution than buying an smart car
User avatar #14 to #12 - didactus (11/14/2014) [-]
Animals suffer regardless if we stop eating meat or not and they will suffer a different pain if we choose to stop eating them. They will die neglected instead, does that shift the burden of responsibility to something else?, I stick with the idea we should make it more humane, but to suggest it's strictly bad to kill for meat is something many carnivores disagrees about.
User avatar #16 to #14 - theluppijackal ONLINE (11/15/2014) [-]
Also, again thank you for actually partaking in a fruitful discussion rather than shutting your ears and screeching 'bacon'
that puts you head and shoulders above many people here.
User avatar #15 to #14 - theluppijackal ONLINE (11/15/2014) [-]
Humans will suffer regardless of our own interference. Why shouldn't we still act to minimize human suffer?
Animals needn't suffer at our hands if we don't demand their meat, so why not seize demanding meat?

Also, again, carnivores are irrelevant. We don't refer to the lions in terms of any social or moral behavior. Humans are omnivores. Not carnivores.
User avatar #5 to #4 - theluppijackal ONLINE (11/14/2014) [-]
I wasn't arguing they didn't need protein.
Again, it wasn't a question of how much protein it has, the question was can we have adequate vegan diets. and the answer is yes

I wasn't debating as to whether they needed protein. you said infants can't be vegan. i went out of my way to show otherwise.
It's not a question of the diet, it's a question of making sure the infant gets adequate nutrition, which they can with a vegan diet.
User avatar #7 to #5 - didactus (11/14/2014) [-]
The thing is, you can't exchange protein with more food, just because you can find other sources doesn't mean the baby can just take a larger amount of food. Yet alone process it. I never suggested you thought they didn't need protein, but vegan food doesn't give adequate nutrition for the amount a baby usually eats to satisfy it's needs.
User avatar #9 to #7 - theluppijackal ONLINE (11/14/2014) [-]
Also, i need to go to work. I'm happy to respond to whatever you say when I get back.
this has been a lot more fruitful of a discussion than most and you seem mostly rational about this [which isn't a shot against you. I had the same mentality. i didn't want to give up my sushi]
User avatar #11 to #9 - didactus (11/14/2014) [-]
Fair enough.
User avatar #8 to #7 - theluppijackal ONLINE (11/14/2014) [-]
Earlier you suggested
>They need an increasing diet to sustain their growth.
Unless I'm misreading what you're saying


Also, you seem to keep pressing that you simply can't have vegan infants.
www.veganhealth.org/articles/realveganchildren
User avatar #13 to #8 - didactus (11/14/2014) [-]
I did say that yes, but I fail to see how that corresponds to me telling you that you suggested protein was unnecessary.
 Friends (0)