Today I Learned
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
view the rest of the comments
thanks for the reply
I didn't mean to be rude, but I thought short replies were the norm here.
I'm just skeptical.
I'm very much looking forward to your citations.
thank you!
This thread is averaging paragraph length responses, what could have given you the idea that short-form demands for citations on claims you could verify with a trivial web search was the norm here? That seems like total BS to cover for being called out over your habit of rather arrogant sealioning.
There's a great deal more data available which also supports my conclusions, I encourage you to engage with the subject matter directly in light of that.
your numbers are in per capita rates, but Asia is exploding in population, and still increasing in consumption per capita.
I don't think there is any reason to believe meat consumption is decreasing. it's probably increasing
For someone that spends this much time policing other people's claims, you're remarkably bad at interpreting data or the initial claims said person actually made.
saying it doesn't make it true.
if I've said something wrong, you can explain it
our exchanges, until now, have been solely on the subject matter. this aside belies an interest, on your part, in making the matter personal instead.
please, engage with the subject matter.
Would you mind consolidating your replies? This is going to get confusing. Also, no, I had already criticized your behavior prior to that comment.
where?
instead of criticizing my style, try to stick with the subject matter
It's like engaging with a bad-faith hydra - one of these is literally just a single word reply. If you can't even make your nonsense feasible to engage with why should I extend you the courtesy of treating you as anything other than the poor troll you're behaving like?
You've misunderstood my initial claims and/or the data, which are both abundantly clear - and on top of that you've spent this whole time acting like a jerk. I'm not going to reward this behavior.
this is just posturing and accusations. your evidence doesn't sufficiently support the claim you e made, and now you're making excuses not to present sufficient evidence. I strongly suspect you don't have it.
Lmfao I already provided evidence that 1:1 matches exactly what I said (because I based my initial claims off it), quit yer bullshit.
saying it doesn't make it true
It doesn't make it false, either. That's the nice thing about truth, it doesn't care what you think about it, it's just self-evident. Good grief you're really not very good at this.
anyone can read what you claimed, evaluate the supposed evidence you provided, and see it does not support your claim.
Well no, they can read the evidence and then draw their own conclusions. I'm not so arrogant as to try and speak for them, a moral burden you appear delightfully unencumbered by.
anyone who believes what you've presented supports your claim does not understand the claim or the evidence or both.
So now you're not only trying to speak for them, you're implying they're stupid? Bold move there buddy.
disengage
Wut? So you admit you can't... what, win on the merits of your argument? Was that your goal here? Well good, hopefully you choose not to be such a dick when engaging with people next time.
asking for sources for dubious claims isn't sealioning, but your accusation of bad faith is, itself, bad faith
That's not how bad faith engagement works, and my claims are not dubious, they're directly supported by the data.
for someone who purports to know, you are either lying, or out of your depth
not the data you've provided. do you have some more?