Hello, fellow global citizens, do you have the moment to talk about veganism.
The truly grassroots vegan revolution needs your help. The climate is changing and
it won't stop until we all do what the good grown ups on the TV
tell us to do. If we all don't do exactly what Big finance and
the smart grown ups at the un IMF, World Bank, big Foundations and
Fortune one hundred say, this poor sixteen year old human shield won't get her
future back. This is a real emergency, and there is no time to
ask questions. Yeah, and what have you done to change your life?
Like you said, you do things that you can do to look yourself in
the iron end and know you've done enough. What have you done? I
have done. I have stopped flying, and I have gone vegan. I
have a shop stop. Don't buy new things unless you absolutely have to.
Oh, hi, there it's ellen degenerous here. I was scrolling through the
gram and I noticed that a lot of people are talking about eating less meat,
which I think is a fantastic idea. It's a great idea for the
planet, it's a great idea for your health, it's a great idea for
the animal's health. So eat less meat. Unless you're a vegan and you
don't eat meat already, than good for you, so you don't even need
to pay attention to this. But for the people who do eat meat,
just try to eat less of it, just maybe just maybe eat it less
once a week or none a week, or just you know, if you
eat it every night, don't eat it every night, eat it less than
that. You know, four nights a week would be okay, but like
three or two nights or just one night a week would be the best.
Anyway, It's really the point is it's better for you, and it's better
for the environment and for the animals. Eat less meat hashtag eat us meat,
hey, be neat no meat, be neat eat us meat hashtag be
neat, eat less meat hashtag bye bye. I believe we need to reallocate
the world's resources because sharing is crucial. The Gammon crisis is a battle for
solidarity, a battle for human rights and children's rights. I feel so powerful
knowing that Helen de Generous and courageous sixteen year old human Shield Greta are also
vegan activists saving the planet with me. The UN needs to reallocate all the
world's land and resources. The science is clear. The smart adults from science
say that the global mega corporations in the World Business Council for Sustainable Development like
Bayamont, Santo, unilevera Cargill, Shell Akeia Neslei in the put philanthropists of
the Rockefeller Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, the World Resources Institute, the IMF
and the World Bank will all help reallocate all the world's land and resources and
ration as sustainable nutrient fortified plant based kibble so we can stop off gasing toxic
CO two and polluting the world with toxic human babies. The British Royal family,
close friends of philanthropists Jimmy Sevel and Jeffrey Epstein, just want to help
us reallocate the world's resources to save us from the climate. With all of
that activism, some might think you be exhausted. But look at you and
listen to you. You know the secret that in fighting, that in giving
back, in fighting the good fight, it doesn't exhaust you. It energizes
you. This is an emergency and we must do this now. Climate change
is a humanitarian issue, not a political The transnational corporations, banks and philanthropists
like the UN, the Royal Family, Jimmy Saville and Jeffrey Epps. Time
need to reallocate the world's resources and feed us nutrient fortified plant based kibble to
make everything happy and equal. Being vegan is so easy and healthy. I
am not a bigot. I will do this for the planet and the children.
Let's take a look at vegan YouTube for some recipes for sustainable vegan cuisine
we can eat in order to save Mammy Earth from the real, credible death
threats from the climate. How to do vegan in a food court? Everyone's
got a food court in a shop of mornie you. Let's do one here,
Let's go. I am so empowered as a member of this truly grassroots
and not corporate controlled revolution for the animals and the planet against the bigot science
denials who won't obey the good grown ups on the TV. Vegan pretzel available
here. Okay, now, most food courts are pretty much the same,
all right. Now, First, stuff on the left, sushi you find
any sushi place, they do vegan sushi at every single sushi place. You
make sure they don't put mayonnaise or anything that's not vegan, any sort of
weird fish. Stuff on there weird fish stuff in real animal foods are so
mean and bad and don't belong on my vegan so sushi suffocated and stab to
dead, packed up into pieces to be put in sushi, when you can
have vegetables in sushi. Tofu and sushi. So many things you can have
in sushi. Dad. There are so many good, nice things made of
soy that we can have instead of bad, mean, gross, racist real
foods. You white choose rotting dead fish when you can have vegan sushi bomb
straight away a vegan box. Most places do a vegan box. Now.
You don't want to eat any murdered fish here, look mercury fish suffering death,
No point a vegan box. Delicious, Look at that one, really
good. You can always get out of maami beans as well, a little
seaweed salad as well, or you can ask them to pare animal fruits so
gross, so sad, so bad. SOI replacements, so happy, so
tolerant, so good. Sushi places will always look after you. It is
so much more healthy and sustainable to eat tofuu made from mass produced GMO monsanto
soy grown by some of the extra people in South America living under a puppet
government military dictatorship funded by massive IMIR flows, given under the condition that all
the extr rural people their grow patented GMO soy and corn for export instead of
their heritage crops and spray pesticides and herbicides lie crowned up on all their soil
and devalue their currency, so they become debt slaves and must sell their labor,
land and resources for cheap to the fortune one hundred companies and members of
the World Business Council for Sustainable Development who can strip mine at the end of
their deaf slaves, grow industrial to ship to China for processing in to cheap
round up forty five tofu kibble they can sell to social engineered decord and distracted
narcissistic questionners who these transnational corporations and banks educated into thinking they're saving the planet
by doing exactly what the big investment banks and transnational corporations tell the screens they
worship to tell them to do. You can easily have instead of tendory murdered
animals, you can have tendory tofu, tendor stay tan, you know whatever
other old plant alternative other than pieces of flesh from an animal purchasing. This
is powerful activism and will help the IMF give sustainable debt to all those extr
rural people who grow my cheap food. The World Bank and transnational corporations are
helping us help those extra South American and African debt slaves to go green and
stop breathing toxic co two and killing and eating innocent animals, so we can
all move into corporate controlled, total surveillance smart city coffin apartments and pay for
our fortified vegan kibble, pharmaceutical drugs, and VR porn with social carbon credits
to save the planet from the totally real and not made up hashtag climate.
Chris Vegan, Oh well this is veggie. Okay, so they've got veggie
and vegan separated, which is good. These are all the animal body parts
that you don't want to be eating. Merry Christmas, Not so merry for
the animals. Let's have a look here. Oh, eggs are not vegan
obviously. Oh here look avocado and toast. Well, that looks really nice.
This jittery effeminates thirty one year old boomer is so inspirational to me as
a vegan activist. He is the best at purchasing vegan kibble. I wish
everyone could know how good it feels to eat soy and corn based vegan kibble
instead of real animal foods. I do not even miss real animal foods.
Real animal foods are mean and gross and not even good. Mass produced vegan
corporate kibble is way healthier and tastier and nicer and make me so happy.
If we don't all do this, the climate will keep changing and all the
bad things will happen, and Bambi and Simba will be murdered every day always.
Any of these cakes vegan? Oh my god, those cookies are Oh
no, I was just that says veggie, not vegan, So I was
just saying that these are vegan. Oh wow, awesome. Yeah, that's
cool. I had the thank you very much talk Bybee still tasted of this
soup. Oh my lord, that's that's amazing. Wow, arch of you.
I can't think of a better thing for them to movem bro. I
think one of the biggest issues with people going vegan is also the convenience factor.
Yeah, it's too hard. What we're going to do. This is
where I eat. I go to this supermarket, I go to this restaurant,
I get this fast food. I am not being used. I am
a grass roots activist saving the animals and the planet. I have not been
duped beyond Burger in all of their stores, and they advertise it every start
of dry pass, huge billboards on the highway. I'm like, player based
meat options. This is amazing. Wow, they're really normalizing it. There
the convenience factors through the roof. Yeah, incredible, unstry, absolutely,
and and they're selling out of it, so that's timportance. They did the
same at a in double. The veganism is healthy and rebellious. Animal foods
are not necessary. All our ancestors just take them because the patriarchy and capitalism
twelve Bowel movement today is normal and enjoyable. Spoy is a great replacement for
everything. Doctor Gregor is not frightening. If we don't all do this,
the planet will die. Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide and was working all alone.
If I spend more energy on vegan activism, I will stop craving real animal
foods and questioning. They go with their big friends. The bigger friends suggest
wanting to just try it. Try this. People start saying, oh,
this is delicious and I feel pretty good that it isn't actually an animal.
I don't like causing animal cruelty. I heard these are healthier as well.
They're better for the planet to they have just as much protein. It's huge.
It makes a lot of sense. It's huge. They have millions of
dollars in marketing, They have restaurants all over the world. They can reach
the mainstream like no other. They're doing all that adver twice and for us.
Yeah, I'm like, thanks, thanks for sparing the vegan message for
us. I'm so stoked. I saw the same people who were emotionally against
KFC, we're happily walking to Starbucks and get the get no larger. These
vegan activists are mentally and physically healthy, and I'm not sickly effeminist head cases
being used by multinational corporations, global banks, and big money foundations to push
the transnational resource consolidation agenda. I want to reach those low income families that
are just getting meat. They never heard of vegan before, and they got
They're walking to McDonalds and there's a MG vegan there totally, and they can
choose that over the slaughtered, enslaved dairy cow's body. That's mind stuff in
the other burgers. You know, absolutely, man, And I think that
you know, yes, KFC, they kill so many chicks, so many
dead chickens. Really in tons of realize it's not it's horrific. Yeah.
But if anyone can change anyone else, work has change. We change,
people change, businesses changed too. And if I was like, you can't
support KFC, you must only I just think like, we don't. We're
not in a position to have that flexibility to go. You could only buy
vegan food from here. We need people buying vegan food from wherever it's available.
You know, the world's like, oh my god. We need radical
change. We need radical change. We need people working from below. We
need direct action from a bottling in corporations putting on leading officers. We need
everything works together. The money is there. If we can save the banks,
if then we can save the world. I mean, I mean,
there's if there's something we are not lacking in this world's much long time coming
the stream. It's been a long time coming, but it's finally here.
I'm here with Jay Dyer. Jay, can you hear me? Can you
hear me? JJ's in the background there. I can hear him shuffling around.
He'll be here in a second. He'll be here in a second.
What's up, guys. It's got a bunch of people waiting. One hundred
and thirty people waiting right now. All right, If you guys have issues,
just refresh it. Sometimes you might give buffering issues. Yesterday, we
tried to do this. We tried to do this yesterday, but there was
an issue with the fiber optic allegedly. Allegedly there was a car accident and
it wrecked the fiber optic cable. What timing right? What timing? But
I'm here, I got Jay Dyer queued up? Jayar is about to jump
in. And we are talking today about why veganism is a moral obligation?
Veganism a moral obligation? Is veganism a moral obligation? Are we all morally
obliged to be vegan? We're gonna talk about the vegan worldview. We're gonna
talk about some of these arguments that vegans make. We're gonna talk about some
of the some of the vegan debate tactics. And I know Jay j can
hear me you there? Man? Where you at? Jay qued up?
Don't worry, guys, we had a little bit of a misunderstanding on the
time zones. But Jay's here right now. Let's see if I can.
Let's pull Jay up. Nope, all right, we got a bunch of
people in the chat. What's up Carnival. We've got Norwegian Noose in the
chat. You guys, make sure to check out his channel. We got
a bunch of the usuals up in the chat today. We've got a lot
of changes going on the Primal Edge Health channel here as you can see them.
In my new my studio, my office. The acoustics aren't perfect because
I got high ceilings. Check it out. I like the ceilings. They're
real pretty high ceilings. Not the best acoustics, but we'll figure it out.
Maybe I'll get some stuff on the walls there. It might put some
wood, some wood panels up on the wall. Maybe get some sheep skins,
that'd be nice. If I can get a bunch of apoca skins.
Anybody want to donate a whole room full of Apoka skins? Oh happily believes
set that donation to get the audio good in here. All right, So
today we're talking about veganism. Is veganism a moral obligation, whereas veganism a
cultural virus. Is it a moral obligation or cultural virus? I think it's
kind of funny when we see some of these vegan activists, as like those
guys James Aspy and Joey Carbstrong, they're applauding KFC. Right, these people
believe that that there is an animal holocaust, and they use this language very
regularly. There's an animal holocaust going on, there is an animal holocaust happening.
We need total animal liberation now, total animal liberation now. But how
great is it that KFC literally Hitler of the animal holocaust, that KFC will
sell us plut based kibbl How lovely a right waiting for jay? I heard
him. He's pouring some coffee. Now there he goes, he's poorn some
coffee. He's gonna show up and in just a minute. So veganism has
a moral obligation or a cultural virus. Obviously, we believe that animal foods
are absolutely crucial, and even vegans believe that animal foods are absolutely crucial.
All right, Vegans believe it, admit that there are nutrients that they're not
able to obtain from a vegan diet, namely vitamin B twelve. A lot
of them have to supplement things like zinc. It's very deficient in heme iron,
bioavailable iron that's actually digestible and assimilable by humans. They admit this readily.
They admit that the vegan diet is nutrient deficient. They admit that you
require animal foods if you're not going to be living off of supplements. And
some of these vegan doctors even talk about the dangers of supplementation. They talk
about how you don't want to be on pills the rest of your life.
As a way to try and sell the vegan diet. Right there was a
video on It was a vegan phobic I think it is this channel. He
made a mash up video of some of these vegan doctors talking about how we
should all go vegan, we should all change our diet so that we can
actually be healthy. You do not have to be on pharmaceutical drugs and pills,
all right, Well, as I absolutely agree that we shouldn't all be
on pharmaceutical drugs and pills. It's so funny because out of one side of
their mouth they're going to tell you we shouldn't have to take pills to stay
alive. We shouldn't have to take pills for our health. We should be
able to manage our health using dietary changes, using lifestyle changes. A lot
of them promote what's called lifestyle medicine, but actually lifestyle medicine. The groups
that promote this are actually funded by Seventh Day Adventists, a religious group,
a religious cult, a new age religious cult that's been around since the eighteen
hundreds. It is based off of channeling ghosts. Right. L and G.
White used to go into trances. Her eyes would roll back in the
back of her head, frying out in trances, learning from the spirits what
we should eat? All right, the Seventh Day of ventis fun lifestyle medicine.
The lifestyle medicine movement is also promoted by companies like Coca Cola. All
right, but then these same doctors who say we should use lifestyle medicine to
get off of pharmaceutical drugs. You know what they'll say. They'll say,
you've got to take vitamin B twelve on your vegan diet because they admit that
it's nutrient deficient. They admit that the vegan diet has inherent nutrient deficiencies.
That's my connection. By the way, I got a message that that it
cut out for a second from YouTube. It got a new fiber optic line.
It's been a little bit shoddy the last couple of days. We tried
to do this stream yesterday and it totally cut out. All right, I
think it's good. I think we're good. Now. If it does start
to load, just refresh the page. All right, let me go over
here to the chat and see what's going on here. Talk to the chat
a little bit. People say the connection is good. The Norwegian news says
vegan baby killers. I mean this is another thing, right, I mean
these people they talk about speciesism, they talk about they make arguments like,
well, we're all just animals, which we're going to get into that one.
They make arguments like we're all just animals. We're all the same.
Rizza says, we are all the same dog, your wool tang for the
children, We all the same. We all just rats and quick as and
cows. Yo, he did a peda ad. I would show the peda
ad right now, but last time I showed that ad, I actually got
a copyright claim filed against the video. They'll say we're all the same,
we're all just animals. Yet in their worldview they want to hold human beings
more responsible for not eating animals, but they don't want to hold animals responsible
for what they consider murder. They say it's murder to kill and eat animals,
it's murder to kill and eat animals. Yet how do they fight against
these mass murderers. How do they fight against the so called animal holocaust that
they claim they believe in? Well, they buy vegan kibble from KFC.
They buy vegan kibble from KFC, and they larp online like activists and call
people murderers. If you really believed that we were murderers, if you really
believed this, wou didn't you do more? Wouldn't you actually do something to
stop it rather than just babbling about it online? I mean, there's so
many ways in which their arguments fall apart. There's so many ways that you
can attack these vegan arguments. The most important thing, in my opinion,
is looking at their worldview, looking at the coherence of their worldview. Because
their worldview is incoherent and it falls apart and it crumbles in the weight of
their own claims. So Jay Dyer, the guest today. He's really good
at breaking down worldviews and looking at the basic presuppositions of worldviews, and he's
done some great debates on it in the past, so he's a great candidate
to talk about this stuff. Jay, Where you at, dude? Where
you at? Man? All right, let's see if we can get Jay
back in here. I might just have to do this as a solo stream.
Guys, he's in my chat, all right, so let me come
over here to the or he's in my zoom. We got a zoom right
now, he's here. Don't worry. It's not just me. It's not
just me, guys, all right, let me come over here to the
to the chat. How many animals are poisoned and hunted for plantag I mean,
that's another thing. They don't want to be consistent about that at all.
They don't want animals to die. They don't want They believe it's murder.
They believe meat is murder. Yet, how are they gonna stop it?
They're gonna call you names online? How are they gonna stop it?
They're gonna eat vegan KFC instead? What's up? Jay Dyer? It was
cracking man. Good to have you here. We got Jay die here.
Everybody, Jay Dyer's in the house. Let's get an audio check somebody in
the audience, maybe Norwegian News. Can you let us know if our audio
levels are unequal and tell me who to turn up or who to turn down,
just so we make sure everything's good for the audience. Welcome Jay Dyer.
You got to pick up every stitch. It's a season of the Witch.
Mhm. Has anybody ever told you you have the voice of an angel?
Yes, I'm sure, okay, I'm sure. I open my morning
window and I do that every morning, I say, and I wake in
the morning, and I step outside, and I take a deep breath,
and what's going on? Every falls into a line and comes along and says,
mister Dawry, you have the voice of an e No that well,
first, all the neighbors have to go, And I said, I said,
what's going there? We're just gonna do it. We're just gonna do
nineties jukebox today. We're just we're gonna seeing Creed songs together. Can you
talk me doube? Well, see there we go going to change were the
arms welcome? I tell you're welcome. Everybody, You're welcome, all right?
That's it. We're done. We'll see you guys next time. Streams
over. We can do we can do live veganism refuted, debunked. We're
done, Mike drop. All right, guys, So we finally got Jay
here. J. How you doing? Man? What's what's new with you?
What's on the J diary channel? Nothing? I was just trying to
jump up rush and uh, I was gonna quote the Rebecca Black. How's
the Rebecca Black song? Go about gotta get downstairs, gotta have my cere
al, gotta know that. So I don't know that one. I don't
know that when someone says, this is you do Friday Friday? But Rebecca
Black, you know that it's like the most infamous worst Internet song of all
time. I have to look it up. Man, I'm sorry, I
blew it. My My repertoire is I like nineties songs, some early two
thousands. I we can sing some more Creed if you want some some BLA
don't have to sing. We don't have to sing. I know you.
I know you gotta and no lack say that. My life is preated plain.
I love the Angel opens, Hurrah, colding Christius, anumb of the
Cry. Else how come everybody in the nineties sung like that. Creed was
the last one. He was the last one to hold out. He was
intolbody. Even Hoodie sung that way. I try to think of a hoodie
sound of a hoody song. Rather was a song, Oh my han Alanis
Morissett, Remember Atlantis, She went in the back to get high. I
sat on the roof and just cried and fell sorry for myself. Letter cry
as the tears rolled down that way. That's beautiful, Tristan cry. All
right, that's enough of that, you guys. We're here to debunk some
of the most common vegan arguments. I know Jay took extensive notes and we
started doing this yesterday, but we got rudely cut off by allegedly a car
accident that ran into my fiber off the cable, is what I've been told,
But you know who knows, who knows. But today we're going to
talk about all this this vegan argument madness, and let me actually got to
adjust the window here. Can I quote one last thing before we move on
to the seriousness? Absolutely? Can you sing it? I found it yes
seven am, waking up in the morning. Gotta be fresh, gotta go
downstairs. Gotta have my bowl, got a half cereal, see you in
everything. The time is going ticking on and on. Everybody's rushing. Gotta
get down to the bus stop, Gotta catch my bus. Gotta see my
friends kicking in the front seat, sit in in the back seat. Gotta
make up my mind which seat and I take? Damn, dude, Black
has it? Wow? Okay, you gotta watch that. Yeah, you
gotta watch that vide. If you've never seen that, I sent it to
you. You can do it later. But yeah, I don't have to
do it right now. She's known as having the worst song of all time
and it has like one hundred and fifty million billion views. I like it.
I like it, Like I said the Voice of an Angel. There's
gonna be there's probably some recruiters from from Hollywood in the chat right now.
Who are just you I have to sleep with to get my contract? Show
us that? Can I see that? Sure? Dude? All I see
is the pee wee he man. Sorry, this is shout out to Jim
Bob. This is one of Jim Bob's designs, and that's sick Man made
by Jimbob because find made by Jim Bob. On Instagram made by Jimbob at
made by jim Bob. He's got a great Instagram, great cartoonist, funny
dude. And yes, it's the same short I had on last night.
So there. I had the same headphones I wore last night too. Okay,
so I got my logical fallacies chart. I'm ready. We're all ready
to look at the vegan arguments. There we go. We're gonna look at
the vegan logical fallacies today, the common vegan arguments, because we're all just
animals, bro right, We're all just animals. We're all the same.
I've got Vegan foot soldier who I had a debate with, Vegan foot soldier,
a friendly discussion debate a while ago. I've got a picture of from
his instagram. Right here, Vegan foot soldier showing his KFC his vegan kibble
from KFC, because of course, the best way to fight the animal holocaust
is to buy the plant based kibble from literally Hitler. Colonel Sanders, Yeah,
dude, if you took off the glasses and if you got rid of
that go tee of Colonel Sanders, it would kind of be a look like
me. Actually, Colonel Sanders, did you not you notice that that he
made him look like a hipster. He's like a hipster. Oh, he's
got the wine mom haircut. You got a wine mom haircut. He's got
the hipster glasses and some kind of weird go tee and he's got this bow
tie. He's not actually a colonel from the Civil War. He's just like
a hipster douchebag. Yeah. Well, like three years, he'll be a
lesbian. Uh, he'll be a lesbian catwoman, cat lady. If you
if you just got rid of the goateee, he would look like that social
justice lesbian. Then they can convert all of KFC into like a vegan.
Yeah, well that seems to be the name of the game now right this
the vegan junk food is going to save the world. The beyond burgers are
going to save the world. This is how we're going to do it.
So let's let's see. I've got a we pulled up. We had a
we started yesterday. We showed a couple of pictures from PETA, everybody's favorite
animal rights organization, should What rights should animals? Should animals have? Says
this article from PETA. Peter likes to put out ads like this one.
With Joaquin Phoenix, and it says, right here we moving on the screen,
we are all animals. We are all animals, man bro, We're
all start us say the same bomb bomb wou tang for the chill, old
dirty bastard, or rape rest in peace, my cousin, old dirty bastard.
So yeah, I think what I was saying yesterday was that you get
basically just a naturalistic assumption. Here is the first criticism I would make is
the idea that because humans and animals share common characteristics, they must be the
same. And you get this kind of argument with people like ask yourself.
We'll say things like, well, if you can't find for me some special
naturalistic material trait that distinguishes an animal from a human, then if you're not
going to eat a human, you shouldn't need an animal because they're both quote
sentience. So sentience becomes this special category. But as you pointed out,
what exactly a sentience on a naturalistic world view, you don't know. Nobody
knows. The people who do philosophy of mind, the people who do consciousness
from consciousness research and study from a materialist standpoint, cannot tell you. And
typically they just don't think gets real. Most of the world who has that
worldview just simply says, there's not really consciousness. I mean, it's helpful
maybe to think that we have consciousness, or or that we that we have
a soul of self. There's not really a soul or of self. It's
just this placeholder. It's just this false notion that we have, and what
we are really experiencing is just the illusion of self identity and consciousness, because
your mind is just the process of an infinite regress of chemical reactions, right
right. And what they'll say is consciousness can be measured through neurotransmitters, all
right, So they're they're they're trying to link up causality with neurotransmitters. They'll
say, well, because you know, look we've got seratotin and dopamine receptors
and we've got electrical signals in the brain. Therefore that's consciousness. Well it's
I mean, that's that's an assumption that's unproven and unprovable. In their world
it is it's also still just part of the chemical determined process. So just
the it's like, you know, you're a computer is firing, you know,
electrical impulses, signals, electricity, is going through my computer. It's
still a determined process. That doesn't mean my computer has free will. And
I mean the people who have these kinds of worldviews Daniel Dennett, they love
to liken people to computers. You're just a determined machine. The same way
with these with with this mindset is that you're just a biological machine. Right,
So how do we get rights out of this? This is the key
point I was just trying to stress yesterday was that if that's the state of
affairs, if that's what is, how do you get from it? Is
to an aught? This is human's dilemma because aughts are the domain of ethics.
Is is the domain of what we're saying exists. Right, It's a
metaphysical statement, even if we don't believe in doing metaphysics, it is a
metaphysical claim or statement that what exists is just natural uh, pure pure physicalism,
naturalism, materialism. So that's the assumption of a lot of people.
That's kind of the normy worldview. Right. We grow up with this assumption
that oh, you know, we're just cosmic pond scum that evolved from from
stardust. Right, we're stardust farts that evolved out of the cosmic nothingness,
out of the void, and we popped out of the Yoni of nothingness,
and now we are just these determined, completely completely determined, robotic beings.
So then okay, so without even going to their pre presuppositions and picking apart
the you know, the silliness of the atheist materialistic worldview, if they assume
that, aren't they being a little bit hypocritical by giving us moral agency?
I mean, if we're just automatons, if we're just robotic beings, why
should we be expected to do anything? Aren't we just acting out exactly what
we're meant to act out? Isn't it all just predetermined? We're just billiard
balls bouncing and bouncing around in a cold, meaningless universe. Absolutely, you
would have the ultimate leveling of all states of affairs. So what happens just
happens. One event or phenomena is not better or worse than some other event.
They just are. So when we start saying that you should do this
or this is better than that, we're immediately bringing in these categories, these
notions that are ethical and metaphysical. Because if you want to talk about the
good, what's good for a being, what's good for a quote species or
whatever. That's a metaphysical thing. It's not a we don't have any self
evident notion of what the good is in that worldview. We need to know
what is the good? Is the good to depopulate most of the human species?
Or is that the best for the elite? Should we take the top
you know, highest IQ vegans, which what that would be? What are
there any of those I don't know, gains that ask yourself, ask yourself?
And being gangs the last two people on earth. Everybody else needs to
die, right the good of the earth? Is that the better option?
Or should we choose the largest number of vegans and spread the IQ spread across
a come on, come back, come back, come back, come back.
Now we're back, all right. You know, every once in a
while, I've got I've got a hamster wheel. I've got yeah, so
I've got a hamster wheel just full of hamsters and sometimes they stop running and
that's when the internet cuts out, the fiber optic cuts out. So excuse
the pause there. So this fallacy or is ask yourself chewing on the cables
to cut out your fifty six K? Yeah, it was a little rat
tea. Oh so this is the uh. I guess we can call this
fallacy that we are literally we are literally stardust evolved from cosmic pond scum and
a cold meaning in the star Farks Starfark Jones, where animate life evolved from
inanimate matter and came from nothing and turned shrews into human So we must save
evolution from climate change by aborting our baby's fallacy. So, I mean,
it's yeah, it's pretty ridiculous there. So we're just animals. If we're
just animals, why is it okay for animals to eat other animals as well?
Right? It's like without even breaking upon our facility, So how do
you not? Right? So they'll reverse it, right, like, oh,
we shouldn't eat an animal because we don't eat humans. But if we
are animals and animals eat animals, we should eat animals and humans. Yeah.
And then well, and if you ask them that very often they'll come
back with, well, don't you just know what's inherently wrong? Don't you
just feel exactly, don't you just feel that that's wrong? There's an appeal
to emotion, and that's so that's a that's a I want to mention that
too week because I meant to mention that yesterday. The most common fallacy in
these ads and that you just mentioned there is the very powerful, very prevalent
you see it ever in propaganda. It's the appeal to emotion. Uh.
The greatest example of this is the anytime there's a war coming or going and
you see some poor It might not even be real. It could just be
an image, right, a sad child crying. Uh, some child propped
over on a battlefield, or a boy on a you know, covered in
dust, dusty boy. Oh, don't you care about the kids and the
immediate thing? If you do not agree with the poster's position, you want
the kids to die. You hate the truth, You hate this situation,
whatever it might be. Exact same with uh, just lowes stock You most
basic level of propaganda that you see with this vegan stuff is appeal to emotions.
And because most human beings are going to be manipulated by their emotions,
they're not going to think about these situations rationally. They're going to react.
There's a reactionary you know, start crying or whatever you see there you go,
right, Unie a case, it's chili from TLC poor Chili from TLC
is just being so tortured here in this cage, all right. So I
mean the appeal to emotion, like, look look what they're doing into these
poor chickens. What if that was your mother? What if your mother was
that chicken? That's being you know, ground up by Colonel Sanders in his
giant Holocaust factories. And I mean simply appealing to emotions. Simply because something
gives you an emotional feeling doesn't mean it's right or wrong. Inherently, that
doesn't make something objectively right or wrong. Right. I mean, you can
program You can take a dog, right, and every time you ring a
bell you I mean, say you have a dog and you're training it with
an electronic collar, right, you can make it to where every time you
go to give that dog some love or pet it, you shock it.
Right. And people have done experiments like this on humans. Actually, when
you look at the mk Ultra and the behaviorist experiments and Skinner and some of
these other people, there's been some horrible experiments done on children and people.
But you can program somebody or a being to have an emotional feeling in reaction
to any stimulus you choose using operant conditioning. So does that make it right
or wrong because you feel something is right or wrong. Absolutely. Media can
make you feel that it's wrong to love your partner, right you watch like
THHX eleven thirty eight. They were made to feel like it was totally wrong
to have any human contact. Right. There was this dystopian film that Jay
and I did a kind of a review on back in the day. You
can check that stream out, guys. Yeah, these tests, these these
Palwvlov tests were also done on Will Smith because he sung the song you can
Ring My Bell that's about Pavlov's dogs. I'm joking. I'm just a dumb
joke. You can ring all right. So anyway, Yes, this is
what you see everywhere. And keep in mind that most of the usage of
fallacies, especially in propaganda or psychological warfare, it's always going to be the
lowest level, simplest stuff, because anytime things get complicated, most people are
going to tune out. So just use the simplest stuff, right. Appeal
to the basist desires as you see. I mean this ad has an element
of sexuality to it, right, Yeah, they always do that, imple
So you've got the the Pamela Anderson one, she's the buxom blonde and she's
all, you know, drawn up. Feel bad for her, because would
you want Pamela Anderson being chopped up? How are you gonna have your porn?
If you, you know, are your prawn? Excuse me? If
she's chopped up, right, exactly, they're gonna get your cummis. If
you see this creature, you wouldn't want that creature chopped up? Why would
you want bam be chopped up? Right? Yeah? So, I mean
so not only is it completely fallacious, right, it's not only are humans
not inherently the same as animals just because you claim they are, just because
you say they are, or just because they could be biologically classified as such
in these you know, the biological classification symptoms, that doesn't necessarily make it
objectively true in a universal sense. Right. So this is why it's really
hard, I think, for people coming from that materialistic atheist worldview to refute
any of this, or even refute anything, or make a coherent argument for
against anything at all. Is because from the materialistic atheists worldview, you believe
this, that's your basic presupposition, is that we're all just beasts, world,
just animals. We're all the same, So it's very hard for them
to refute that, right, And I think I mentioned this. This is
like the parts the whole fallacy, right, So the idea that because there's
some characteristics that are similar, then therefore they must be exactly the same.
So animals have some characteristics biologically the same as humans. So therefore humans and
animals are only in the same category, or only in the same species,
or only distinguished by sort of arbitrary characteristics. Ultimately, we're just the same.
Humans are just little more complex. Animals maybe not even more complex.
Maybe we're just shaped differently. Right, Yeah, but that's a fallacy.
Just because we share some characteristics doesn't mean that we are part of exactly the
same whole. We do share some characteristics, but we also share a lot
of very important dissimilar characteristics. For example, humans have the ability to reason,
to do logic, and yes, I understand certain animals can have some
basic cognitive functions, but it's certainly not the same thing as a human being.
And we would agree with the notion of humans possessing a faculty of reason.
Animals do not possess the faculty of reason, and so all the way
back to the history of philosophy. You know, even the Greek philosophers notice
this, that humans have this faculty of being able to reason to make moral
judgments. So the irony here is that. So you see that basically there's
two conflicting things going on here and multiple fallacies at work. Yeah, yeah,
I think we might have cut out there for a second. I just
when I watched the you guys, did you have to refresh at all?
There? I hope you guys didn't miss some of that. It might be
okay. We got some super chats too, Thanks you guys for them.
The superchats. It's always helpful. That does help us out here. Let
me pull up more stupid chats and help trist and get his dial up fixed,
all right, get my dial up. I need a new modem,
dogs, I need a new modem. All right, So let's read some
of these superchats. Well. First of all, yesterday we had some superchats.
Uh dof forty five eighty said twenty euros. Thanks man, sorry for
the failed stream yesterday we got Moses said, I appreciate the trouble you guys
go to keep these discussions going. Blessed, lent right on man, God
blessed, Thank you so much for that. Really appreciate it. We've got
five dollars superchat today from Salvador. Oh my goodness. It's funny because zoom
comes through, but then the live streaming cuts out. There we go all
right, cutting it out a little bit. Who knows what's going on here?
Ali Kat sends nine ninety nine. Thank you so much, Ali Kat,
really appreciate that. We got five dollars sticker from Sherry. Thanks a
lot. And then Dell Bridge sends five bucks. Says if no absolutes exists,
why do vegans claim that not consuming animals is an absolute moral responsibility?
It seems oxymoronic to me. Oh yeah, I mean that's that's something that
you always want to ask that you want to always want to ask somebody who's
trying to make a moral argument. Do you believe that morality is objective or
subjective? That's for me, That's where I usually will start with a conversation
like this, What do you think about that? Jay? Yeah, The
easiest way to approach this question, you don't have to get into the more
dense philosophy, is that you can just keep it on the ethical level,
and just ask the question of on what basis do we say this is right
or wrong? On what basis are we saying that you should do this you
should not do that. And when people of that persuasion that you're arguing with,
typically they'll just make really basic mistakes and they'll just say because that's what's
right, because that's what's the best, because we all know that's right.
You feel those are that's that's called being arbitrary, circular, and ad hoc,
and those are also fallacies. There we go, Telegram, We've got
Telegram group Eastern Orthodox Chat says, get on tele let's see you guys.
If you guys are in the chat watching, are we getting buff fring?
You guys getting buffering? Your errors at all? Al, it's back now,
We're back, all right, guys. Streams getting garbled a lot man
for how much I paid to get this fiber optic installed and you get this
internet working. This is quite frustrating. Excuse me, guys, sorry about
the cutting out. Yo. I'm starting to think you work with ask yourself
began games to destroy me, dude. I think y'all are teams. Are
you in cahoots? That's right. If it's buffering you guys, just refresh
the page and it should go back to it should be good. I think
we're good now though, all right, so let's say that what are you
living? All right? I think we're back. You just blew my mind
right there. I don't even know what you did. That was German.
I was speaking German. That was a pig Latin. Actually, really good
at pig lattin. You are, dude, You're in some Pentecostal cult down
there. You were just talking in tons. That's true, that's true.
How do you counter the philosophy of spiritual vegans and vegetarians, those that claim
consuming animals accumulates negative karma? All right? So a lot of these people,
some of them don't come from this presupposition of absolute of what's it called
absolutely material world. Some of them do come from this so called spiritual perspective,
right, So they'll say something like, hey, I'm really spiritual,
man, I'm not trying to consume the suffering and the death of that animal
flesh, all right. So this is a very different direction that the conversation
would go if you're having a conversation with somebody like that. Jay How would
you approach a conversation as such? I would say that I'm sorry, I
got distracted some drama going on here and I'm trying to shut that down.
Can you repeat the question real quick? How do you so people that are
coming from this kind of like monust perspective, Oh? Yeah, world one
karma pharma, yeah uh? I would say, First of all, how
do we know that this is operant in the world? I would ask that
question. I would say, why do you think that not necessarily saying that
it doesn't, but why do you think that there is some sort of retribution
that goes on for actions? Well, that would say, well, it's
so obvious, you know, like if you drop a ball on your foot,
it's going to hurt. That proves karma, okay, But sometimes it's
not obvious, right, Like sometimes we don't see justice come about when we
expect it. So if we yeah, so if we dropped the balling ball
on our foot and we felt pain, then why are we interpreting that as
like punishment for some I mean, how do we know that that's punishment for
a past life for the cuss word that we said two days before? I
mean, it's there's no way really to know what actions are corresponding to us.
So there's just this vague sense that there's like a cosmic karma. But
here's my point on that. It's just simply to say, the idea that
all of these actions are ordered in some meaningful way to punishments or blessings assumes
the notion of like a divinity. It would assume the notion of a of
a mind who is recompensing these actions. And so that assumes that there's an
intentional, personal, divine mind that's behind this, and so an impersonal force
can't met out what is right and wrong and fair and unfair in these cases.
It makes no sense because if it's just impersonal forces, you don't think
about the law of gravity, you know, or the number seven. The
number seven doesn't get you justice. The law of gravity doesn't give you justice.
So if you conceive of karma quote unquote as if it was directed by
some personal agent or deity, then that's actually moving away from karma. And
so it's almost like these people are trying to put moral agency to like personal
right physical laws. Right, let's let's moralize physical laws, which makes no
sense. Yeah, the law of gravity is not your friend or your enemy,
just right, And well, it's funny because you know, the materialistic
worldview. You just sucked down a battle vodka. Yeah, looks like it's
water. It's like mineral water. It's like kind of like a pellegrino or
something. Is that water that's like a German word. Actually it's just water.
Yeah, So all right, So it's it's funny because it's the materialism,
Like the atheist materialistic worldview does have a lot of similarities and a lot
of cross pollination with ideas from Eastern mysticism, right, like from Hinduism and
Buddhism. Yeah, Dawkins even says that he's perfectly fine with pantheism, and
a lot of those ancient Near Eastern philosophies are essentially pantheism. Everything is God,
dude, Like everything is God, dude. Well, well, Darwinism
essentially is pantheism, right, because so if natural selection and you know,
the transmutation of species that they believe in, but if if it's survival of
the fittest, that's what determines what survives. How do you know what is
the fittest? Well's who survives. So all these forces like the weather,
the sun, every single impersonal force that you can't control is essentially deified and
and to a certain extent, is in control of your fate. Yeah.
And that's why ultimately guys like Sam Harris, those that they will deny free
will and moral agency, they'll just say it's kind of an illusion. I
mean, maybe you need to be a quote good person for your own benefit,
But what does that even mean to be a quote good person? We
don't know. It's all arbitrary. M I got another image here, just
a Mama Earth. A woman has a mother Earth, all right. So
it's kind of that the same thing, kind of that, that idea of
the monism idea where we're all one. Yeah, we're all we are all
scabs on the crust of Mother Earth's skin. Yeah. And what's funny is
materialism and Darwinism actually does lead to this this pantheistic, polytheistic vision of life
where we're all part of this one great being. We're all just like Adams
and the toenail of the Great Joe Rogan. This kind of insane, nonsensical
belief. And that's what we see spouted a lot by a lot of the
you know, the more spiritual vegans. Right, So on one hand,
they're going to go for the naturalistic arguments. Right. Well, okay,
so if you're going to be appealing to like what's natural, they'll say it's
not natural for human beings to enslave an animal. Those animals want to live
out their lives. They just want to live. They'll say something like,
oh, you you are enslaving it, and you're hijacking as reproductive organs and
you're exploiting this poor animal, and that's unnatural. Well in their worldview,
go ahead, in their world was gonna say, is in their worldview,
how do they know what's natural and what's not natural? This is this is
another fallacy. It's called the appeal to nature fallacy. Right, Well,
we all know what's natural and it's just not natural to do that, But
what we think is natural or unnatural is going to be determined by our overall
worldview and governing presuppositions. So yes, this is a very common fallacy as
well. You see this a lot in the quote science community where they don't
even know that they're that they're committing a fallacy, but they're doing the appeal
to nature fallacy exactly. So what's funny is they'll they'll call you out on
the appeal to nature fallacy too. So when a lot of people when somebody
says, oh, well, it's obviously our natural diet to eat meat,
right, and I think that's a poor argument as well, right, Like
I wouldn't make that argument. But people will say it's a natural it's the
human's nature to eat meat, and the vegans will say that's an appeal to
nature fallacy. But then on the other hand, Joey Carbstrong will say,
it's disgusting you're riping these caves, you're molesting their teats. Yeah, you
must cans and mean too. So it's yeah, so they want it both
ways, and if you can get them to show that they want it both
ways, you've essentially helped them debunk themselves. You show them an they're being
arbitrary and that they're being uh, they're being inconsistent, which is very very
if you're interacting with these people, it's always helpful from the outset to establish
because a lot of people that they don't know any basic fallacies, they don't
know anything about, you know, kind of basic reasoning. If you can
and established from the outset where you get them to admit that should we be
reasonable, should we be logical, and should we be coherent and avoid fallacies?
If you get from the outset of the discussion, get them to admit
that even if they're not going to be consistent, they've at least admitted that
they should be and that will be in their mind to some degree. So
they're going to be holding themselves. And if they later say something like,
well, who says we have to be consistent about everything? Well you just
you've you've pointed out that they're contradictions absolutely. Well. Also, it's funny
because that argument of should we be consistent, if they're going to be arguing
from the perspective of a morally subjective reality, right, if they believe that
everything is morally subjective, that there is no inherent right or wrong, there
is no objective right and wrong, Why should we be consistent? Right?
There is no why, there is no should, there is no you're not
compelled to do anything that kind of in that worldview. And this is kind
of what happened with that ask yourself guy in Vegan gains You guys go back
a long time ago to that debate. It was an absolute joke, and
he knew, so at least ask yourself is smart enough to know that he
can't, in his worldview, say that you should you ought to do anything.
Of course, he's arguing that you ought to be vegan, that everybody
ought to be vegan, the entire time with everybody else. But his argumentation
only works on people who come from that materialistic, atheistic worldview, which is
why he can't question the presuppositions of it, and which is why I think
it's really important to go there in certain context. It's not always. You
don't always. It can be exhausting to always go there whenever you get in
an argument with somebody, But if you are comparing world views and you are
talking about the basic presuppositions of the worldview, you do have to go there
if you want to if you want to win the argument, and you want
to actually stick with the truth, and you want to actually bring everybody together
with a into a cohesive, coherent worldview, kind of have to go there.
So let me see here, So rights, what are animal's rights?
Right? So these people they like to bring this up, we've got peta
here. Peta. They're saying animals have the right to equal consideration of their
interests. For instance, a dog most certainly has an interest in not having
pain inflicted on him or her unnecessarily. So this is like classic Vegan rhetoric
right here, will unnecessary suffering, unnecessary pain? Like we said earlier,
how do you know what is necessary? Right? How do we determine what
is necessary or unnecessary suffering or pain? Right? I mean that's the question
that always they kind of crumble under that because they can't objectively say what's necessary
or unnecessary. Yeah, I mean these positions are, as you said,
grounded on the denial of objectivity, as they constantly predicate objective claims and statements
and truths and propositions. So yes, we want to always call that out
that like you can't have of you that's purely subjective in terms of morals and
ethics being relative, and then turn around and try to force everybody into some
radically ethical position. And this position is a radical ethical position. It's it's
like a cult, it's like a it's you called it vegangelicals, right,
I mean that's what they're doing here is go you know, proselytizing for this
view. And that's the first place I would go right in this in this
ad here that you've got put or this article you got pulled up? What
is a right? I mean, what does this mean? Yeah? I
mean, so ever since the Enlightenment, we've we've had our worldview in the
West focused on rights, natural rights, natural law, the rights of the
individual, the right to private property, the right to this that. I'm
not saying that there aren't rights. I'm saying that the way that people determine
these, or talk about these, or explain these is not self evident.
But most people don't even question this. They don't even think about it.
What do you mean or what is the right? How do you to determine
it? How do you know it? What is it? Is it for
everybody? Can you have them taken away? Is it branded to you by
the government? I mean, these are basic questions that a lot of people
don't even think about when they just use these slogans like it's my right,
it's my right to do this, it's my right to touch myself, it's
my right to chill my baby, it's my right to do so. It's
all these rights that have absolutely no consistency. They're just arbitrary. Yeah,
and it reminds me of Timothy Leary, who said there's a famous quote where
he was talking about convincing people to go crazy with drugs. He says,
I couldn't get people to do acid until I convinced them that it was right.
He said, once I really, once I realized that I could sell
things to people on the basis of a right, then it took off.
He said, let me let me just the correct the picker. But it's
even better than that, he said, until I told them that the government
was trying to take away their right to do it. Yes, so they
felt like they were being rebellious. So they're take my right. They're trying
to take my rights to get mandatory vaccines. They're trying to take my rights
to give my children the government to give my as Yeah, it's like,
so if you tell somebody that someone's trying to take this right away, and
notice how things the way that their social engineered society was by selling all of
these things as rights. Right, So the issue with r VW became rights,
the issue with the drugs became rights, and now all of the human
makeup stuff is now being sold as the right, and we're going to start
seeing the cybernetic cyborg stuff sold as right as well. Yeah, yeah,
that one's trying to freaky. That's going to be not only a human right,
but also maybe it's everyone's right. Like maybe maybe you're infringing on everyone
else's right by not joining these movements. Maybe you're infringing on everyone's right by
not taking certain pharmaceutical products into your body because you're going to be endangering then
so this is how you things people, This is how you a social engineered
people are doing this sort of stuff. We got some of the chat.
Let's say you're gonna enjoy this one. Jeff, You've got a highly intellectual
called toroidal Zeus. In the chat, he says, I am strong carnivore,
but I'm not a christ cook that believes that morally comes from God.
Moraley comes from your community. Culture equals moral code. Okay, yeah,
So this is the if you don't believe that morals are purely a subjective thing.
If you the only other option is to think that there are social constructs.
Right, of course, we can think of countless situations where in history
societies have constructed horrendous morals. So how do we know and how do we
adjudge when situations are even socially speaking horrendous, Right, I mean, if
if an Aztec civilisation is sacrificing ten thousand people a day on their high holy
days, is that cool for them? Bro? I guess that's what he's
arguing. So all right, So if you want to say that it's good
for them to have that morality and it's good at the same time for you
to have a completely opposite morality, then you don't actually have a basis to
say that moral relativism is good, because that's what the position is predicated on,
right, So it's it's it's even in its starting point. If you
say that all morals are socially constructed, you believe that that's universally true,
and you also believe that that's a good right because you're saying that people should
follow this, or at least that's where I was going to go with there.
Right, So you're saying that, oh, you guys are christ cocks,
right, Oh you guys are all christ cooks. I'm miss you,
edgy. So you shouldn't be a christ co Yeah you shouldn't, But what's
wrong with that? What's wrong with being a christ cook? Right? Evil
Christ cooks destroyed my people, my pagan buttz Ex says he and Carrits even,
but I mean it's it's to roidal Zeus. I mean they're kind of
a poor argument. Man. World code is more, all of the pagan
all of the pagan worldviews, will fall into a form of relativism, and
then in order to refute things like Christianity that they don't like, they'll fall
back on universal claims and universal arguments, universal logic, universal laws that they
simultaneously deny because they reject all forms of universalism because that's part of some kind
of plot to destroy their their booty magic. Yeah, so why why is
it so bad that all us christ Cups as you call us, are destroying?
Well, I mean, if it's if it's if our social construct says
to take down all the pagan religions, he can't, he can't reject to
it because that's our social construct. Well what if pagan Zeus says this,
I'm an atheist, bro, I believe in God. I'm an atheist.
He says, I'm not a pagan, I'm atheist. Well, we just
talked about how actually atheism does need to pantheism. You worship a you worship
you. You worship your idea of atheism, You think, your idea of
freedom, your idea of liberty, your idea of your ancestors. You worship
all these things. You worship the sun, the moon, the stars,
all the impersonal forces. Those are what are in control of you. If
you're an atheist materialist, you believe that the impersonal force of natural selection is
in large of you. So whoever decides to naturally select you in or out
of existence is therefore your god and your worldview. They're above you and they
rule you. So I mean, it's it's kind of self. Yeah.
Another way you can take that too, is if he wants to play devil's
advocant, say well, I don't actually believe any of those things possessed any
idea. They they're all just as matter, and I reject all that.
Then all you have to do is say, look, are you saying ultimately
that everything is meaningless in a grand sense. Most of the time they'll say,
yeah, sure, I don't have a problem affirming that, And you're
the weakling who just can't own up to the fact that everything is meaningless.
All you have to do is say, well that thing is meaningless than your
life is meaningless. And they'll say, yes, my life ultimate is meaningless.
I'm not afraid of that. Then you just say, well, is
today also meaningless? And are your sentences today meaningless? Yes? At that
point he's refuted himself a well someone else who got north Man double O seven
says we Pagan's was forced on Christianity. They scream, which is to our
men in them and troll them on burning fires? Why is that that right?
While you believe that's bad, you believe that's wrong. Isn't isn't it
everything? Isn't everything subjective? And is it might make a lot of these
Pagans are also into might makes Right. They read that book, and they
read a lot of the same literature that the guys in It's funny because prison
culture actually influences to a great extent the neopagan movement. They're reading books like
the forty eight Laws Power, the reading books like might Mix Right and a
lot of these other books that the people that are in prison. Man,
that's pissing me off. All right, it's back. What's up every body?
Yeah you can hear me? Okay, right, yeah, okay,
the voice is crazy. They say Tristan sounds like batman. Yo. Yeah,
you know you said like to me, you said, like this dog
about to start singing some barry while you're here in a minute, how's my
sound? Asked? She's listening in the other room. M I don't know
what's going on here, all right, so he says, my guy said
starting ondo. He's fixing my he's fixing my internet. Apparently, it sounds
like you've been doing whippets. You if you do a whipp your voice is
over a bit. Is it better now? Can you hear me? Now?
You sound finn. It's just you sound like you've been doing whippets.
I have been doing a lot of whippets before, like ten or twelve before
every stream mane. It's like a drug of all time. I remember it's
so stupid in high school and it's like I was so dizzy for like twenty
seconds. That was awesome. I did whippets in college once two times,
and I remember it, well, it was really stupid. That didn't make
sure good. It's so weird, but I think I think we should be
good. You guys hear me now? Is a voice still messed up?
They says, I sound Finn, Do I sound oka? Just sounds like
you sound like really low, like Verry White. That's so weird. We'll
see if I can mess with the voice meter how it works. Due,
It's actually kind of cool. Oh, don't people keep complaining about it.
He's not the normal high pitched Tristan that I'm used to. I mean,
normal voice sounds like this? Is that better? Ye had to stop sucking
helium and start sucking whippers? Hey, guys, you sound better normal,
Just talking with the helium voice and then it'll sound normal to the audience.
Does this sound Does it sound normal? Now? How does this sound?
Oh? Jay, I just adjusted my thing on the voice meter program?
Yeah, all right, cool? Sorry for the for the audio issues,
guys. Okay, perfect, they say, Oh they know they're laughing about
the helium. They say, the helium voice is perfect. Okay, I'll
talk like this just to make up for the If it makes my voice more,
I'll talk like a vegan. I try to try to do. I
can try to do a vegan gaze in freshion Tristan. Tristan did a voice
clans to get rid of all his test saucerone juice Juice clans to get rid
of his so he could impersonate ask yourself better. Okay, well is all
right, how's my voice? Now? Let's see what Jessica says. It
just sounds like a different voice. I can understand you. You sound like
you have a cold. It's okay, like everybody can understand you. Just
sounds like you have a cold or something. It's so weird. What if
I maybe it's the gain, dude. I think it's the connection, like
it's if it's a little faster or slow, you know, it'll kind of
yeah, okay, all right, well whatever, we'll just move on like
we can understand what you're if that sounds fine? And just do you just
sound like you got very white boys? Everyone just keeps telling me in the
chat, Jessica's telling me, all right, whatever can we make use of
this while we've got you? Could you sing very white for us? Or
do you not? Do you know any very white so trying to think of
a very white song? Were I don't know any very white songs that well
except for the I don't I can't think of a verry white tongue at all.
Everyone says, slightly sick scouting voice. Maybe I'm just sick. Maybe
I've had maybe I've got the uh people, I got the crown, them
can't get enough of you, baby, all right, Maybe you've had so
much meat and testosterone that you've just like peeked out at testosterone max. It's
a sweet deficiency. This is the new Tristan is that he actually has very
white boys. Now that's my se deficiency. We've got a thought predictive program
in film, says Elle. You should check out some of the thank you
for the super chat by the way, man, thanks for everybody for donating
via the super chats. Check out so the streams that jade Iro and I
we've done a few movie streams. I don't remember the names of them.
We've got what were some of the movies we review THHX eleven thirty eight we
did. We did a whole stream on Terry Gillian movies that was really good,
Me and You and Hasher. Shout out to Hasher. We did spring
Breakers and Under the Silver Light, which was awesome. We did. Do
we do any more movies? We did The The Oh, we did Demolition
Man in THX. We did dystopian movies. I think all right, I
just unplugged the microphone and plugged it back in. We'll see if that helps.
Maybe it will help you sound normal? That sound normal? Now,
let me just we start audio engine here. Okay, now I probably will
sound better. Now, how's that, everybody? Dud dude, I'm trying
to think of that very white song, and I'm like, I keep hitting
a wall every time. It's like I can hear the first few baselines,
the first few little bass notes. All right, so let's see thoughts on
predictive programming and films. Definitely check out Jay's channel. If you don't already
know about Jay's channel, you and I can still talk. I still hear
you. Yeah, but the audience gets a little buffering. All right,
we're back. Toro oto Zeus says one more point. So just because we
were talking to toroidal Zeus, he says, you might want to ask what
is the point of morality and ethics? The answer is he gives us the
answer, even though there's no objective truth. He has the answer, he
says. The answer is it's the software we use to interact with other humans.
That's why it comes from others. That's incoherent, that doesn't make sense.
The software we use to interact with other humans. That's morality. What
do you think about that? Jay? Well, I mean that just kind
of avoids the question because the question wasn't where it derives from. I mean,
you can stay that that's where you think it derives from, but that's
not given an account for it or making it coherent. I mean, so
he's basically just saying restating his position, But we're asking for a justification and
explanation of the position, and the examples that I gave would still hold.
So just saying that it's a software that you get from other people is just
okay. But how does that answer the question of how do you adjudicate between
true and false? Right and wrong? Just restate your position that we have,
Well, it's a social construct, okay, So how do you explain
when certain cultures are degenerate or when my culture says that I should destroy your
culture? If it's a social construct, do you have a problem with that?
He'll just have to say, No, that's your position, bro,
that's not my position. That's just like your opinion. Man, is it
universally the case that it's a software that we get from society? But your
position was relativistic and based on a fine number of empirical observations. So how
do you get a universal claim from a limited number of observations? You can't.
Yeah, And this is one of the issues, is that you're constantly
trying to get universals and relying upon universals and making moral claims while saying morality
is subjective. If it's subjective, then you'd stop arguing for moral claims.
If it's subjective, what's the problem with us believing it's objective? Right?
If it's subjective, all truth is subjective, then isn't that truth also subjective?
Exactly? And conversely, they at the same time want it to be
objective. Right, So if you say all truths are relative, that's a
universal truth claim that defeats itself. Yeah. So then they just say it's
consensus. It might makes right, and it just becomes it becomes circular.
Then everything is meaningless. All meaning is just derived from groupthink and whatever the
greatest number of people believe, or if just the most powerful person with the
most powerful weaponry believe something, that makes is it true? And that is
absolutely silly. So you guys, sorry, somebody said, when you read
the super chats, we don't even hear it because it cut out a couple
times. Apologies, guys. Dell Bridge was acting asking about predictive programming and
films, and I told him to check out some of the streams that Jay
and I did. We talked about TCHX eleven thirty eight, We did spring
Breakers Beneath the Silver Lake, and we did some other films, the Terry
Gilliam films. You can check out those streams that we did on Jay's channel.
They're on his channel. Some of them are on my channel too.
Those were fun streams. And then Commander of the Groper what is it,
Commander of the Groper Revolution. I gotta make sure I get your whole name
there, because it's long. Commander of the Groper Reich says, you on
minds or telegram? Friends, I'm not Jay, You're on telegram right,
Yeah, we do have an Orthodox Christian chat on there. And then the
guy who made a donation earlier said he's got his own telegram as well.
So the Orthodox community is growing on telegram, he says, So you can
check that one out as well. In it, we got Zoelo Mexicano says,
I am the coconut weird christ cooks but my Aztec ancestors weren't savages.
If society dictates the mortals, then Christian society is correct. There you go,
I'll read that without an accent. So if society dictates morals, then
Christian society is correct. Because so if its might makes right, then what's
wrong with what's now? I guess if it is might makes right then and
you don't like it, then I guess in that materialistic kind of pagan worldview,
then I guess the constant revolution would be necessary, right, and you
would just see that, which is, you know, I guess you want
to create a world where there's constant revolution and embrace that, and you think
that that's something good. I would say that that's kind of It's not.
Where were all those posicians pantheism, paganism, They all for the most part,
you might have some exceptions with like Valhalla or freaking annoying. All right,
we're back, So Jay, do you want to repeat that last point?
Sorry guys? Yeah, So I was just saying that most of the
time the pagan systems are the people are really just LARPing, and it's a
situation where at root it's just atheistic and it's like, if you go listen
to the debate I did with bog Lord Dave, that becomes evident that he's
just like, well, look, it doesn't really matter whether he's missed or
true or not these pagan stories, it's basically just me coming up with a
program for me and my people. Well, that's just arbitrary and subjective.
Again, well said, well said, we got some more. You guys
are keeping up with the superchats. We really appreciate that you guys are definitely
directing the conversation with these superchats. Now, so let's see. Is morality
all right? Thomas says, is morality argument for God valid? If you
could clarify that question, Thanks for the dollar ninety nine. If you want
to clarify that question. I don't really know what you're getting at, Jay,
Do you know what he's getting at with that? You skipped for a
minute, and I could cut out for a breech second. I missed that.
What was it? So freaking annoy? Okay? It says, is
morality argument for God valid? That's the question, don't is morality argument?
Is the moral argument for God valid? I guess is what he's asking?
I mean depends on how the argument is framed. I mean, you could
have an invalid You could have a moral argument that's invalid. Like you said
something like, look, we all believe innate lely that there's some notion of
right and wrong, so there has to be some kind of generic god out
there. That's an invalid argument. I would not agree with that. But
if you took a moral argument and made it in a form of a transfi
argument, it could be valid. Y, all right, good, good
one, All right? So location five one five. I think we're still
live now, guys. I'm sorry for the shoddy internet. I'm hoping this
gets resolved really soon. I've got some cool debates coming up with some vegans,
some vegan activists that want to come on and talk about their activism and
debate stuff. So I'm looking forward to that, but I need to get
the Internet sorted out first. Apologies guys. Thank you Jay for the patients
with this, and thank you audience for the patients and for the donations.
These donations will go towards fixing my internet and trying to get this stuff working
correctly. Can you touch on relationship between Jews and Christians and how to see
Jews religiously in relating to the world. So the Orthodox position on Judaism on
the Jews, Jay, you got an opinion on that one, you got
a yeah. I would say that we would see Judaism as obviously departing from
Orthodox Christianity early on in the Book of Acts. So if you read the
Book of Acts, you'll see why the two positions go in different directions.
Obviously, it centers on the person of who Christ is, whether he's the
Messiah or not. But I would believe, I believe if you read Romans
nine, ten and eleven, especially Chapter eleven, Paul foresees eventually a future
conversion of the Jews in mass We don't know when that'll be. We pray
for that obviously, but that's true. And so in that and most of
the Church fathers, by the way, do also affirm the future conversion of
the Jews. So we don't say that there is no future place for Jews
in my understanding, And I could give you many of the Church origin teaches
that Saint Cyril Alexandria teaches, that Saint Anthonatius teaches that many many, many
Church fathers say that there will be a future conversion of the Jews and everybody,
right, I mean, all the nations are Eventually, we don't exactly
know like the like, oh, this will happen, and then this will
happen, and then this will happen. I mean, we we have a
lot of sort of speculations. But most of the fathers say that as that
time gets nearer, it will be clearer to the Church and to the Saints
exactly what's going on. But uh so we don't say that Judaism is like,
oh, it's a separate path to God, like some kind of freemason
freemason doctrine of all religious into God or something that like the lot of Protestants
or you know that a lot of protests. We don't. We don't.
We don't obsess over Palestine and this kind of stuff. We simply pray for
the conversion not just of all people obviously, but also for the conversion of
the Jews. And Paul says in Romans eleven that when that happens, and
some of the fathers think that Romans eleven means that when that conversion does happen,
he says it will be like life from the dead, because he says
they will be grafted into the vine that's more naturally their own vine. I
mean, we are gentiles grafted into their vine. And Paul says that there
will eventually be a point in which they will be grafted more naturally into their
into their vine. And it almost sounds like this is my personal speculation,
not saying it's necessarily true. My personal speculation on this point is that he
almost sounds like there will be an apostasy of the majority Gentile Church. So
the majority Gentile Church will apostatize, and that will lead to a reconversion of
or a conversion of the Jews grafted into the vine. That's just my personal
speculation, though. Yeah, we gotta I like this one. Two Dollars
from Cholo Mexicano says, revolutions are just people going in circles. Haha,
exactly, revolution revolving over and over again. What gets done. Nothing,
It's just bloody uh, just bloody messes and everybody trying to climb to the
big top of the big pile of filth at the end of the revolution.
And yeah, I think that's what materialism gives you, that's what might makes
right gives you. Everybody trying to be the might that makes the right.
And you know, I know we've got some you got some people in the
chat here that are are really upset with with what we've said about this.
But you know, I do think that's where the just that you know,
the pagans, Oh my ancestors, you hurt my ancestors. I would say,
go listen to the debate I did with bog wor Dave, because I
think, you know, he exemplifies their position. He's a well spoken guy.
I mean, obviously I disagree with him, but he isn't terrible at
rhetoric. I mean he makes their point, their argument. So maybe they
just like thot bogg wor Dave. I don't know, but I mean the
root of this response is that how does paganism avoid rel relativism? I mean
ninety nine percent of the time, it doesn't avoid relativism. Most of the
time. They'll just go, yeah, so what it is? Uh?
And then if that's if that's the case, then you know we're back at
relativism. And it's very easy to refute relativism because it's self refuting. All
right, man, you guys, the super thank you so much for the
super chests. Guys, they just keep coming. We're not even able to
uh, we're not even able to get back on task with the vegan refutations.
But let's uh, you know, I'll take it. I'll take it.
Man. It's been a while since I've been live, and I appreciate
the super chests. Location five on one five says, wait here we go.
Let's see, uh the way we got canal Espaniol says, is there
much of a connection between Freemasonry and Judaism free Masonry and Judaism, Well,
I mean, when you look at the history of Freemasonry, it is.
I don't think that the history of Freemasonry shows that it's like an exclusively Jewish
organization. I think I've heard the argument made that, oh, you know,
Freemasonry is Judaism for gentiles, and there are quotes from people claiming this.
But Freemasonry is not inherently a Judaic Jewish thing in my opinion. In
fact, Albert Pike, I mean Albert Pike basically conceives of it as a
syncretistic system where you're trying to find general principles in all the religions and trying
to basically create a society an organization that is the true religion of all the
religions. So there are elements of Solomonic temple philosophy, there's elements of Coabbalism,
there's elements of Zoroastrianism, elements of Christianity, elements of Neoplatonism. By
Thikoreanism, it's an attempt to create a synthesized, generic, quote unquote religion
of all the religions. So it's the it's the forerunner to the New Age.
And so in some senses I could I would say, if you meant
like mystical Judaism, there's a lot of similarities with medieval Cobblism, yeah,
and Freemasonry, but it's it's not exclusively that. And if you read,
like Manly p Hall, the Secret Teachings of All Ages, that's what this
whole book is about. You know. He's got all sorts of it,
goes back to the ancient religions and tries to warn them all together, and
he claims that they're the Freemasonry, is the extension of all the mystery schools,
and that they hold the keys to all these mystery schools, and that
they are the true heirs to the secret teachings of all ages, including the
secret mystical Kabbala which comes out of Judaism, but not exclusive. People in
the Chat are fussing about this. I know I've read Albert Piker read all
these people, and I know I've read Cobbalists, so I know what.
But Kabbalism is, in many senses itself just Neil Platonism. Albert Pike does
not say freemasonry is Jewish and based on Kabala. You can go read Morals
and Dogma. I read the whole Morals and Dogma in two thousand and eight.
He doesn't say that, but he actually does draw from Kabbala. That's
part of what he draws from. He doesn't say it's Jewish, so you
can actually go read Italism. Kabbalism itself, as a bunch of different systems
is very similar to Gnosticism and neo Platonism. It's obviously borrowing from those lists
we got. We got a freemason in the Chat who's offended to says Freemasonry
doesn't come from Egypt. Lol, don't get your history from f and Manley
Hall. Manly p Hall never said that. I never said that. Maybe
someone in the Chat did. But Manley p Hall says that many people.
Hall is a con man who spends like twenty lectures telling you about astrology.
And then the end that whole lecture series is, by the way, you
need to accept the United Nations and have a world government. So there's just
such a con and he talks in this weird Masonly nineteen twenties slingman boys Manley
P. Hall. Yeah, so nobody on the way. And I'm not
saying Manley P. Hall. I'm not saying Manley pe Hall runs free Masonry.
I'm just giving one example of a prominent Freemason who you can all read.
You can't talk about this so without everybody taking your quotes on a contact
and like you make one statement, it's like you're freaking you dorks who are
all triggered. You're just as big of dorks as Manley P. Hall and
freaking Albert Pike. You're just as lame as them. And your interpretation of
free Mason isn't even the true freemasonry, right, Everyone, all these Freemasons,
they all say, well, that's not the real freemasonry. That's not
Yeah, you all think you have the keys, you all have the secrets.
We get it, all right, let's we'll move move all By the
way, the Jacobsen text, I've got it here somewhere in my books.
I can pull it out here a minute. But she talks about it as
a political tool the British Empire for centuries. That's that's another important element that
you can't forget in freemasonry, is that it's a central tool of the British
Empire. All right, Location five point fifteen. Look, appreciate all the
super chats, man, thank you so much, But we were here talking
about we're trying to talk about veganism. We're debunking the common arguments in veganism,
and uh, you know, we're bringing this chat in a little bit
of a different direction. But thank you for the super chat. You got
one more, he says. Some people say a lot of the revolutionary issues
Jews are at fault. Opinion, I'd say, there's you can study history
and you can look deeper into this yourself, and yeah, I think I
don't really have an opinion on this. I don't think that the Jews are
at fault for every single revolutionary movement in the world. There are there are
definitely historical threads of certain groups of you know, the Jacobins, and you
look at the French Revolution. There are certain threads of certain groups of people
being involved in a lot of these revolutions, But that doesn't mean that every
problem in the world comes from them. I think that's a fallacy that a
lot of people make. And yeah, I don't know, Jay, what
do you think about it? I know, I know that's gonna. I
would blame the Vatican over Judaism because the Vatican had an extreme amount of power
in the West at the time of the Renaissance. And while you can find
different strands of mystical influence in the time of the Renaissance, it wasn't the
Jews who got usury allowed in the West as a whole. It was the
Papacy. It was the Papacy who promoted the Renaissance traumatic doctrines. Now you
could say, well, but there were Jews that leave these things. Yeah,
but they didn't have power. The papacy had power. So if you
want to if you want to lay blame, you can blame the papacy because
the papacy was the most powerful institution in the West for centuries. Uh,
and it promoted all these things that all these tribes and all these pagans are
not about I think it's just it's funny. There's there's a lot of a
lot of people who seem to h to want to latch onto the idea that
so here, this is making me mad, all right, So go read
a cult Renaissance Church of Rome's that's documented very easily in a historical, uh
historian book cult a cult Renaissance Church of Rome, eight hundred page book that
documents the papacy being the source of usury in the West. Yeah, so
all right, And when you say is a Judaism that's behind these things?
What you're looking at? I mean, so to say that is Judaism behind
that, like there's some monolithic Judaic conspiracy and that all the Jews are in
on this is absolutely ridiculous. Although of course there are Protestants involved in certain
revolution Gary movements. They are Protestants involved in the bringing about of the Federal
Reserve Bank. They're also Jewish banking families involved. Not all international banking is
run exclusively by Jews, of course, there are aspects. So I think
there's the nuance gets lost in historical narratives, especially on the Internet, when
everybody's looking for sound bites and clickbait titles, the pay and the pagan thing.
What they want to do is they want to find blame in genetics because
they worship and they're obsessed with genetics, so they want to lay the blame
on other genetic uh foils to their superior genetics. And this is just stupid
manipulation that they're actually being manipulated because pagan movements themselves are all run and controlled
by a bunch of Feds and retards. Yeah, well, I guess you
know the Rockefeller family being very powerful in the US. This is I mean,
there are a lot of these Protestant families who are very powerful there and
they want to blame everything on on the on the one, on the juice,
the blood libel type thing. But you know that. I think if
you study history, you realize things are a lot more nuanced. So anyways,
this is not what this chat was meant to be about. But thanks
guys for super chats. Appreciate that. If you've got super chats that are
related to the topic at hand, we'd appreciate that. All right, So
it was like an hour on a complete tangents in your chest. It's exactly
due. It's like, as soon as you start talking about paganism, then
they got to bring up majuice majuice. But we were here to talk about
vegan arguments. So I know, man, I know, well, we're
talking about veganism. We're debunking a lot of the common arguments for veganism and
the theological stuff, and then the pagan showed up. So we'll just ignore
that aspect now and we'll we'll move on. So I know you got some
notes there on some of these other common arguments that that the vegans make.
Jay if you want to uh, if you've got one that you think is
important that you want to hit on, Uh, Well, we hit on
right special instructs, we hit on the appeal to nature, we hit on
burden of we didn't hit on burden proof. Let's see what's another common one.
Another common fallacy you'll see is the one where we did appeal to motion,
where people will say, uh, are you familiar with no true scotsman?
This one comes up to. This is a This is a great one
because basically it's the idea of purity, like no truth, Uh, scientists
would ever believe in creation, right, So it's not an actual argument.
It's just this appeal to ambiguous purity, or that that we all have a
common idea that of what a scientist really believe. We all know scientists believe
in facts and not creation. Right, But there's no, that's not an
actual argument, right, And you'll see the same type of thing like,
well, any uh, honorable, sensible, dignified human being would not need
to eat another sentient being, right, you'll see this kind of that's the
no true Scotsman fallacy, That as if there's some common notion of what it
is to be a human being, and that it's somehow wrapped up in the
dignity of a human being not to eat an animal. What about a dog,
Like, I mean, a dog is a sentient being and a dog
will happily. My dog will have so much fun slowly killing a chicken.
We'll quite enjoy that. Yeah, well, no true dog would eat another
Okay, Yeah, well real dogs are vegan, right, you gotta make
your real dogs go vegan. There you go. A real human being would
never get that's another easier way to say it. That's the version of no
true Scotsman fallacy. Another one we could point out is the another one of
the most obvious ones is the ad hominem. Right. I mean, you
hear this all the time, but we can't pass this up because it is
a fallacy, even though it's the most common one, and people just sort
of handwave it now because you're so used to add hominisms. But if somebody
were to say, Tristan, we know veganism is true because you're a jerk.
Yeah, baldman bad for sure. Bald man bad is a basic ad
hominem. Right, what's another bandwagon? This is a common one where you
have everybody like, Look, most people now are are learning about veganism.
Most people are coming on board with the world. It's twenty twenty. We're
cutting kids pps and veganism is the future. Man, the world is going
vegan and there's nothing you can do to stop it. Yet, big it's
the bandwagon fallacy. Great, Yeah, you hear this slogan all the time,
right, it's twenty twenty. Come on, it's twenty twenty. That's
like this the new sjaw fallacy. It's twenty twenty fallacy. No matter what
they want to argue for, it's twenty twenty. I must be right,
kid with the times, bigot let's see what else. I have another one
on this list here that comes up often. Hey, we've had a good
twenty minutes with no interruptions now, I mean interruptions as far as the as
far as the internet goes. We're good on that. We still got the
we still got this one could be This one could be mentioned as well.
It may not come up a lot, but it could come up. And
a lot of people forget this fallacy. And it's called the fallacy fallacy,
which is the notion that if something is argued badly, then the converse is
true, which is not which is not correct. So in other words,
let's say you had a guy who was a proponent of carnivore and he made
a bad argument, like he said, Uh, we all should eat meat
because we evolved to eat meat. Bro obviously evolution. Evolution doesn't make mistakes,
dude, Right, that's a bad argument. And so a vegan hearing
that argument could say, Boo, yeah, I just prove veganism because that's
a bad argument. Yeah, that actually doesn't prove veganism, right, So
because a counter position is argued badly aka the fallacy fallacy, doesn't prove your
position necessarily see that there could be some cases where that does happen, for
example, at a paradigm level, if it was to the illusion of all
other possible positions. But this is not an argument about paradigms. When we
talk about a bad argument at the normative way, well, what these vegans
will do a lot too is during debates to say something like, I mean,
these vegans, they can get really obnoxious during debates, right, And
if you say something, if you make an argument, and then in your
argument, at the end of your argument you say, and you're an idiot.
But that's not your argument that they're an idiot. They'll try to say
that's an ad hominem. That's not an ad hominem. I'm just saying that
you're an idiot. My argument isn't that you're an idiot. My argument is
that veganism is morally ridiculous, and that you, as a moral subjectivist,
have no right to tell anybody what they should believe, do or say morally,
and you're an idiot. My argument. Any of the studies that are
funded by or supported by vegans, they won't look at any of the counter
evidence confirmation biased and so look, I've got seventeen studies from Kellogg Corporation and
the Seventh Day Adventist Church that proves organism is the healthiest lifestyle. Yeah.
Well, it's funny because they'll they'll reference the Seventh Day Eventist studies constantly,
they'll causantly reference Seventh Day Adventist ideology and studies. But then they'll say,
anytime you bring up a study that will prove the opposite of what they have
to say, though, that's that's funded by the meat industry, that's funded
by that's funded by somebody who once did a study that was funded by the
egg industry, and it's that therefore it's absolutely useless, all right, So
it's uh they're a little bit arbitrary with that as well. Uh yeah,
another one is. And then simultaneously they'll do that, and then they'll use
the genetic fallacy with you and they'll say, Tristan, I just gave you
seventeen studies from Seven Day Avedis and Kellogg and all this stuff. And then
when you sign a study from say a doctor who's a carnivore, they'll say,
that's a biased study, bro, you can't be citing those carnivore guys
or somebody who's a kedo guy. You can't do that. That's a genetic
fallacy. First of all, right, because well, on the one hand,
we're not saying that because they so to a study that is only from
Kellogg, that they're bad. It's that they're picking and choosing only those right,
And so if you were to counter with them, they'll have it's okay
for me, but not for thee right, Like you can't cite a guy
who's a carnivore. They'll call you out for bias, and they'll say,
oh, that's a genetic fallacy because you're but we should call them out for
geneticals. Say, look, the source is irrelevant. But if you only
have that source and you won't look at any opposing argumentation, uh, it's
it's useless. But most of the time, when I hear these arguments,
because the people in this realm worship science and scientism, they're just throwing studies
back and forth like it's so pointless, it's so obnoxious. And to do
this, I have a study, I have this study. He doesn't even
know how to read these or interpret them at all. And then what happens
is it turns into just a big circle jerk of oh my studies are better
than yours, and they're both trying to say, oh, your studies are
invalid, and both sides could be very arbitrary in this. Like a lot
of the people from the carnivore or keto or just non vegan side will come
with their studies and they'll say they'll say, look, here's this epidemiological study
that shows that blank, blank, and blank, when ten minutes before they
dismissed their vegan opponent's study by saying that's epidemiology. Epidemiology is really poor science
and is very very difficult. Yeah, similar to that false cause, like,
they'll they'll also correlation causation, like we're not sure exactly in a lot
of these cases what the real cause of, say an illness might be.
For example, Oh, you've been eating meat for all your life, and
that's why you developed all these these illnesses. Well, that could be from
eating low quality, processed so called meat. Right, So we can't just
assume that there's a simple one to one. What how about like pesticide exposure
environmentally? Right? I mean, we know that autism rates increased dramatically around
fields that are heavily sprayed with pesticides. We've got all this other stuff environmentally
that affects us, including electromagnetic radiation on native VMF. We've got all these
things that do affect us. And to blame all your health issues on one
thing always, I mean, it's kind of nonsensical and both sides can be
very varied guilty of the same thing. This is why, ultimately I think
if you're gonna refute veganism, arguing over the science of the health of veganism
versus non veganism is a dead and pointless argument, and it really doesn't end
up fruitful for either side. It just ends up both sides saying your study
is bad and my study is good, and walking off both thinking that the
other. You know, I btfoed you, I really I destroyed you,
and you're stupid. Both sides end up thinking that. So, I don't
know. As far as like the argumentation for against veganism, I definitely prefer
to go at it from the moral standpoint and use their own moral assumptions,
their own assumptions about morality, and use their own arguments against them so that
they make the claim, the speciesism argument that they make very often. You
know, they'll talk about speciesism, they'll say, well, speciesism is arbitrarily
treating one species different right in giving moral making it to where we can kill
animals, and whereas we know that it's wrong to kill humans, therefore we
shouldn't kill animals. You can turn that around on them and say, okay,
well, why is it okay for animals to eat other animals but it's
not okay for us? Are we going to go and prosecute the lion for
murder? Are we going to go prosecute mosquitoes for murder for eating our animal
blood? Are they morally wrong for doing this? Right? So they're going
to be calling upon them, they're going to be using these naturalistic fallacies,
and you can really easily make them expose their arbitrary the arbitrary nature of their
arguments and their bias against humans, right because they are species is against human
beings. They want to make the claim that human beings are somehow different from
animals and we have moral agency, when they just claimed that we're all the
same. So right there, they're refuting themselves and they're showing that they don't
even believe the basic presuppositions that they're claiming. They believe and that they're using
to make their argument. I find that more fruitful for them because they see
how arbitrary they're being. And they'll usually just end up going in a loop
after that. But eventually, maybe they'll think back on it and think,
Okay, well maybe something is a little bit amiss in my worldview, and
hopefully then question the deeper assumptions later on. Maybe they won't. Maybe they'll
just walk away thinking they want and you know, appealing to emotion we talked
about earlier. The appeals to emotion are really common, but some of them
do end up eventually, most of them do end up. They all end
up leaving veganism. Anyways, Remember eighty five percent I think it was eighty
four percent of vegetarians and vegans within I think it was three to five years
leave the their what do you call the religion, right, they leave veganism
vegetarianism eighty four percent of people. So the recidivism rate going back to so
called carnism is very, very high, and there are a lot of reasons
for that. First of all, it's nutrient deficient. Nobody can go long
term on these nutrient deficient diets. And the second of all. They eventually
end up realizing how stupid it is, sick of being the most obnoxious person
at the dinner table when they have to go visit their uh their they're you
know, inhumane families and sit at the dinner table while they're eating meat.
They get sick of it, and they want meat, They crave it.
It's obvious and as they will often point out, you're right to not get
into the health debate side of it, because they will often tell you that
veganism is not a position related to health. It's an ethical position. You're
not supposed to You're not supposed to take this because it's healthier to you.
That's selfish of you, dude. Yeah, yeah, it's not a Veganism
is not a diet. Veganism is the exclusion of what is it, the
exclusion of animal foods and the reduction. Let's let's look up the definition of
veganism again, because this is actually hilarious if we go to definition according to
the Vegan Society, the definition of veganism is. It seems like the chat
has chilled out now the pagan the Pagans are not so pissed anymore. They've
they've I've settled down there, right, So the vegan society, let's find
this definition of veganism a way of living which seeks to exclude, as far
as is possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation and cruelty to animals for
food, clothing, or any other purpose. All of this is completely subjective,
possible, completely subjective. What do you mean as much as possible?
Who determines what's possible? Right? Do you mean physically possible but not emotionally
possible? What if I'm not emotionally able to not be vegan? What if
I can't emotionally give up my connection to me? What if it's not practicable
for me to give up animal foods because I feel like shit and wither away
and feel like crap? Right? But what if my health is crashing?
Does that make it impracticable? So this is very subjective. And then also
exploitation. Who determines what is exploitation? Right? How do you know what
is exploitation? How do you know what cruel What is cruel what is cruelty?
Right? So what is practicable? What is possible? What is exploitation?
What is cruelty? So it's very very crappy legal ease here. I
mean, imagine if this was a law. Imagine if this was like international
law, Like we are declaring this a hard law. Veganism as a way
of living which seeks to exclude, as far as as possible and practical,
all forms of exploitation of cruelty to animals for food, clothing, or any
other purpose. Man, the lawyers would have a freaking have a really fun
time with that one, because it's completely open to interpretation and is very very
loose, slippery legalise. So, I mean, even the very definition of
veganism is something that I think is very important to bring up. How do
you know what's practicable? What is practicable? Not practical practicable? What does
that even mean? It sounds a little more fancy than practical practicable. You
add another syllable. It sounds why you guys gotta use all these college words
because he was in all these college wars. There's another one. You'll see
the false either or UH. That comes up a lot. You'll see that,
like like either you have to admit this is part of uh ask yourselves
dilemma that he tries to posit with you with the trade is that either you're
gonna eat humans, uh or you or a vegan, so on a simpler
on a simpler level, that's the false either or foulacy. Yeah yeah,
yeah. Well, so let's maybe we talk a little bit about name the
trade, because that's some of these vegans they think that that's like, that's
that's there, that's their that's their God, right, that's their their second
coming of of Peter Singer and his heavy petting zoo. Is the is name
the trait? So name the trade. Argument is name the trade that makes
Let's just let's find the exactly what does a what does a human possess different
from an animal that makes it okay for you to eat an animal? Excuse
me, what's the trait that an animal possesses that a human lacks that makes
it okay to eat animals but not humans. So when we start appealing to
the fact that we are made in God's image and we have the faculty of
reason and this kind of stuff and animals are not, then he'll try to
appeal to you can't go there because that's meta and that's matter, and we
don't go don't go into the MATCHI mata has nothing to do with anything that,
Yeah, it does that's the whole that's why we don't grant to you
at this point. So when they say, name the trade that makes that
makes humans different from animals, where it makes it okay to eat animals but
not okay to eat humans, all you have to say is human beings are
made in the image and likeness of God. Right, So they'll say,
well, you can't go there, that's not proven. Yeah, but we're
arguing world views. That's what that guy doesn't understand is that he's operating on
a classical foundationalist assumption of how words and language and truth operates U And once
you try to point out that that's been refuted and that Wine refuses that even
up to today, So from David Hume all the whip to Kwine, nobody
has solved these dilemmas. And you'll notice you see there that ask yourself stuff
coming up because he's got he's actually promoting this at the behest of whoever his
logic professor is. He doesn't actually know what he's talking about, but he's
got a handler who sort of promotes his stuff. Does he have a logic
professor? Is he actually a student? I didn't know that. I thought
he was Yeah, I highly doubt it. He doesn't know. He does
seem to have a lot of time like most students. Maybe he seems like
one of those one of those perpetual students whose parents pay for him to go
to school from the age of eighteen to forty five. And yeah, so
that's why he won't allow the conversation to deal with anything meta ethical or metaphysical,
because he wants you to assume classical foundationalism and to start the argument given
all of his premises, but to assume naturalism. He wants you to assume
materialism, which is complete nonsense. Why should we assume naturalism and materialism and
based compiricism too, So we gotta grant me all my assumptions, and I
will lead you to my conclusion exactly exactly. Let's see what are some other
comedy vegan arguments, because I mean that one falls apart really quickly, and
that's the one that they think is like the pinnacle. You tell me one
that you've heard a lot, and we'll see if we can find a foul
Like what's one of the more common ones that they will say, Tristan blah
blah blah. Let's pull up some let's pull up some vegan debates. How
about that. We've got some vegan debates here, we can we can check
out some of these vegan jellicals. Let's see. I've got one, this
one, this one. So this guy's in the uh I put him.
He's got the best shirt that I've ever seen on a vegan. Sorry,
I have no need to get an ad blocker on this machine. Three two
one, all right, he's got the Soy Boys shirt. Oh you guys
can't see it yet? Excuse me? Can you can? I can?
I run to the restroomal quick while you play that clip? Yeah, take
it, take a break, run in the bathroom. I'll play the clip.
Let's see. There we go. Jay's gotta go fix his makeup.
Guys, we got a quick break here. Let's see all right, let
me come back to the super chats. We got Eric Partello sending two bucks
says, keep up the good fight, guys, Thank you man, thank
you so much. Just a little announcement, we do do have a member
section of our website if you guys want to see exclusive content. We've got
a lot of exclusive content there on the site. I've been I've had some
fun debates with vegans on Instagram, and when there's a good Instagram live,
what we do is we archive it and we save it for the memo.
You've got a private members forum where we do monthly coaching calls, and you've
got to primal edgehealth dot com slash members or yeah, primal edge health dot
com slash membership. Let me look, let me make sure, let me
figure out what the other urels. Sorry, guys, I always forget to
talk about some of these things. So primal edgehealth dot com slash membership,
it's the first link in the description down below. You guys can become members.
We do monthly coaching calls on their community of like minded people. It's
not like a troll community. Where we support each other and where you can
learn from each other, and you do get discounts on our products from our
website as well. We've got a lot of new articles on the website.
We've got a free guide to how to include more organs in the diet,
how to eat more organ meets, Jessica's awesome secrets to make a nutrient dense
animal foods and organ meats. And then of course, if you do want
to support us, you can support via PayPal. That is always helpful.
The demonetization, the being hidden in the algorithm is always affecting us. Our
channel is actually the growth of this channel was we were getting three thousand new
subscribers every month consistently. Right, three thousand new subscribers every single month.
Now we get like two hundred new subscribers a month. Right, They've effectively
cut off the growth of this channel, even though we get more views on
a lot of these videos than we ever have. So please support us if
you feel so inclined become a member. Check out the membership section. Also,
you can check out the Carnivore cookbook Zero Carb Recipes for people who really
love animals. This is available at crime ledge health dot com. Show you
how to make the mostdents whole, unrefined foods. The only foods that the
body requires what are animal foods? The only foods that you can live off
of exclusively are animal foods. You can't live exclusively off of plant foods.
You will wither away if you do not supplement heavily. Then even with heavy
supplementation, you risk heavy degeneration. So check out the Carnivold cookbook. Jessica's
book Zero card recipes for people who really love animals and become a member of
the website for exclusive content. We've got some exclusive interviews there. We've got
some really good instagrams. Do some Instagram lives every once in a while that
are pretty fire. We save those and we save those debates, and we
put them up there for the members of the website. Chase taking a break
right now, They're gonna watch some vegan videos in the next segment. How
long? Oh, there you go? Cool, Sorry, there you go,
multoc guest multi guest three. All right, here we go. So
we've got this young gentleman. He's a the uber vegan here. I'm gonna
have to change the audio settings. The vegan uber men shown screen here over
vegetable Ubervitch, the uber SOI so vegan uber minche Humane Hancock is here,
Humane Handcock. This is a real person. This is not satire. That's
his real face. That's not a cartoon of the New Mail right, like
he starts the video off in full soy face. He's a sadder version of
the Wodjack. You know, the Wodjack. All right, So I'm gonna
have to change I'm gonna change the source. Jay You're not gonna hear me
talking, but you'll hear this video and I'll just I will stop whenever you
want to stop. The audience will be able to hear you the video and
me. But because of my text skills, this is how I got to
do it. That's fine. I am at the London School of Economics and
Political Science where the student union have voted to place a ban on the sale
of beef on campus. I'm here to see what the students think and if
they would support a ban on the sale of the flesh of torture cows.
Let's see what they have to say. I'm Mark Hoffman. I'm the dean
of the General Course in Global Mobility and Teaching International Relations department, and I've
been at the LLC for a very very long time. Okay, you need
specifically so you're aware of the potential ban on the sale of beef on campus.
Yes, yeah, And do you have an opinion on whether you would
support the ban or whether you be against it. I think I think it's
important that it's a choice for people on the campus to have non beef based
food back bas fods and that kind of stuff. In terms of the ban,
itself. I'm not sure. I'm convinced that's probably a useful way to
go. I can see the merits of it. I don't need a lot
of meat myself, so I wouldn't bother me particularly. But I think movie
sustained sources of beef and you know where the beef comes from, that would
be an important part of a campaign. And outright, Ben, I'm not
sure about it. So the potential on the campus he wanted, he wanted
the longest style microphone is quite problematic. I think just the fact that the
consumption of beef overrule will be labeled as enronment environmentally on like unfriendly. I
think it's an issue. I think it's not beef as like a whole.
But it depends where you buy it. I mean, if you're getting it
from America, if you're getting it from South America. I mean, the
chemicals involved in that process is very different. If you say, for example,
get Scotch beef, and also with Scotch beef, you the meat being
produced there, not much else can grow, not much else can be produced
in that land, whereas in contrasting like South American stuff, if they're like
taking down rainforests, and such, then it's an issue. But I think
what I'm trying to say is it's more down to people having a greater appreciation
of what they're eating and where it's coming from. Feel like that's the decision
we're making. Do I really go in the supermarket podcast or whenever buying the
animal and that's arbitrary discrimination between them? What is the difference here? To
rewind this at the beginning of this argument, he cuts it up in a
weird way. Do you think that's the act of buying the animal products?
Then, is kind of contradicting your own morals? Possibly something? You know
what? You know what, I will say this, I will give vegans
credit for this one thing, which they don't intentionally try to do. But
the way that they have framed this debate when they go to name the trait
and all this stuff, this does force people to recognize that the debate is
not just about this or that fact, but that's actually it's actually our entire
worldview. It's metaphysical exactly. It comes down to the worldview, and it
does force it. So that's why that's why that's the only place where I
like to engage with debate, Right Like I don't like to engage in the
you know, the stupid back and forth the study. Well, that's why
they don't want to engage us on that debate too, because they know that
we can beat them there. Because what they want to do is trick a
bunch of normies to have the same naturalistic presuppositions that they have and point out
to them how on the naturalistic assumptions, then yes, you could lead a
person to veganism. Absolutely. Yeah, you know, I think it's funny.
Uh, they don't want to engage us on that argument. But for
some reason, on every single platform, I've had to ban Isaac because he
just obsessively comments trying to get me to debate him. I'm not sure what
Ask Yourself wants to. Yeah, he wants like a he's got this narcissistic
wound that occurred. And look, Isaac, those narcissistic wounds they heal with
time. Right. You know, you got to build up, build up
your narcissistic powers by bullying some more normies and then, uh, and then
maybe you can jump back on with the debate with somebody who will actually challenge
you and challenge your metaphysical presuppositions. Because I know you don't want to do
that, but it's funny. I don't know that he has to keep qualifying
where it's like, Okay, imagine that there is a zombie virus. Let's
let loose and it only affects half of the population, and we know for
certain that there's absolutely no way to save the zombie virus. And grant me
this, and grant me this, and grant me this, and grant me
those, and and then in that case, would you say that it's wrong
to eat animals? So it all relies on hypotheticals. Let's let's give me
a fake hypothetical situation. And in this fake is a computer on another planet,
and this computer was not made by any god. Does that computer runs
the monkey? The monkey in the Cantalope fantasy fallacy? Yeah? Sorry,
you know, I know this cut out for a second there, guys,
But I think we're back now. I think we're good now. So yeah,
they absolutely do. And they do a good job at making people realize
that this is not a physical argument. This is an argument on on on
something so simple as like health. And this is this goes down to the
deep metaphise presuppositions of your worldview. But of course the vegans will not allow
you to make them question that. If you make them question that, they
start to self destruct because they are the most normy of the normies. Right,
They've just figured out one way to bypass a lot of people's rational mind
and to put them in kind of a kind of a schizophrenic state, almost
right with these questions. So yeah, let's let's hear what if he ever
goes somewhere with this argument, because I think he says it's a university professor
fails to justify animal abuse. But the way he edits this, he he
intentionally what this guy does. He goes out and he tries to get the
stupidest people to give him stupid answers and make the vegan look smarter than the
idiot retardants that he talked to. So it's kind of a it's kind of
a dishonest approach to it. See, I have to change the audio settings
for you so that you can hear the Okay, wow, there you go.
What extent is kind of contradicting your own morals pleasure of why we eat?
But I suppose we have to look at why we're doing it, and
if we have a good enough reezing, perhaps it can be justified. Do
you think we have a good enough freezing in terms of why we eat meat?
Yeah? Why why we eat animals? In terms of food sourcing?
Probably arguments that know, in terms of that there are better, more healthy,
sustainable ways of putting food on your plate. Okay, I'm gonna I'm
gonna stop that right there, because this is where the average normy who just
spends his days watching TV and listening to the rhetoric on the television, they
can't refute this because they buy into all this bullshit that they hear. Right,
how many times has it been repeated to most of us that animal foods
are bad, Animal foods are destroying the planet, Animal foods are making the
climate change. The gods are mad, the gods are angry, the climate
is changing. Oh shoot, I don't hear you. Hold on, Are
you muted? Some people's choice? Jay? Can you check if you're muted
on your I don't hear you. I hear shoot, all right, my
speaker is working. I think you're muted on your end. Jay. You
hear me though? Right? Uh h h, Jay, can you hear
me? You can't hear me? Now you can hear me, I can
hear you now, Yeah, okay, we're good. All right, Sorry,
guys, I miss what you were saying, and I think the audience
wasn't able to hear it as well. What was that you? You didn't
hear what I said? I haven't heard anything for about a minute. All
right, So but you heard the argument that he made, right, it's
unsustainable to eat meat. I did heard that part, yeah, all right.
So basically, I'm just saying most normies are so programmed by the cultural
zeitgeist. They believe that the hashtag climate crisis is coming to kill them.
The climate is changing because people won't eat the kibble. The climate is changing
because animals exist and cows are farting, and they're making the climate change.
And this is absolutely untrue. And this is complete social engineering. Right.
They're going after your most crucial and important food source. They're telling us that
our source of life, our source of food, not our source of life,
but our source of food and sustenance. Here, the only way that
we can feed our families off of our own land is with animal foods,
right, And they're telling us that's unsustainable. That's bad. Most normies aren't
going to push back on this, especially at you know, a place like
Oxford where the social engineering is so thick, because that's where it's spreading out
of, right, Oxford University, Harvard University, Yale. These are some
of the intellectual strongholds of the Anglo American establishment, and this is where a
lot of the social engineering begins and starts and then spreads out through television,
through media, and through all these mouthpieces and useful idiots like Herbie Hancock here,
I'm sorry, Humane Handcock here, and Freud and sleep Herbie Hancock.
Every time you hear Herbie Hancock, you think of that line and Tommy Boy.
But so yeah, so the guy has no refutation for this. But
anybody who's watching this channel would be able to refute this, right if you
look at the the environmental devastation and destruction that's done by soy production, by
vegetable agriculture, by the gmo revolution, by the green revolution, where we're
destroying our top soil. We're tilling up that top soil, spraying all these
agrochemicals on it that are wrecking the soil. And of course you have consolidated
food supply run by transnational corporations bank rolled by the international banks. These people
aren't going to talk about that, are pushed back on that, but it's
very important to show them that they're absolutely wrong that agriculture in the big egg
industry is destroying our soil, and it's for vegetable agriculture the beyond burger and
the impossible burger way more destructive than beef. Beef can actually regenerate soil.
You need animal inputs to grow vegetables unless you're going to be using a bunch
of toxic NPK fertilizers, a bunch of toxic pesticides and agrochemicals and machinery.
So these people are hypocritical as shit and don't even realize it. Well,
this is the unfortunate effect of choosing to be in normy them. If you
choose to mock people like myself or you and call this conspiracy theorists and you
you you, you decide that you want to be in in the matrix.
Uh, then you're going you're going to pay the cost uh when when you
reject the truth. Right, so you're going to go along with the narrative
of climate change and overpopulation and all of this stuff. GMOs that you you've
been talking about, You're going to default except the normy lifestyle, the normy
diet, the normy worldview. And this is going to be destructive for you
because that entire worldview is engineered to make sure that you are alienated, alone,
childless, in a coffin apartment in a smart city, and it's it's
engineer for your destruction. You're actually buying your own destruction. So it's not
it's it's not actually hurting us who live in the real world. You you
know, living out there actually being sustainable, not being sustainable in this phony
co p a sence, but actually being sustainable in Ecuador. So you know,
we've got we've got two different world views of this false counter culture that
these people are involved in. They think that they're the rebels. It's all
completely corporate created counter culture, and they laugh at people like us who actually
live healthy lifestyles, who actually seek spiritual health, seek seek physical health,
and they want to castigate us as quote conspiracy theres But the reality is that
that you can't make reality what you want it to be. You either conform
to reality or you suffer the consequences. Yeah, yeah, I've got the
sun I don't have to cover this. I got this skylight up at the
top, and it's like burning my head right now. So baldman bad's got
to put his goofy hat on. Guys, I've got my I got my
my farmer hat on today. But absolutely, man, I mean, these
people have no idea what's actually destroying their health, and they're blaming it on
the animal foods that they barely eat. Anyways, this guy barely eats me.
You know this guy probably, this guy's got pre diabetic looking body.
I mean, the guy obviously, he's unhealthy, pudgy, pale, old
professor at this university. And this guy probably wonders why it feels like shit
all the time. And he's thinking that meat is a problem, that animal
foods are a major problem, when you know, animal foods are first of
all, not inherently unsustainable at all. Second of all, the very economic
entities that created this globalist system of food production, the very economic entities that
created these massive slaughterhouses, consolidated the meat processing and meat packing industry in the
United States on behalf of four corporations. Right, you got JBS, Cargill,
Tyson Foods, and the other one I forget this name, it's not
bunge. But the meat packing industry is completely consolidated. But those same corporate
entities are also pushing the plant based kibbl on you right. Cargill, who
owns much of the meat processing industry in the United States. It's responsible for
what the vegans call factory farming, which in and of itself, the term
factory farming is it's kind of a red herring, and factory farming itself is
essentially a straw man. These people are getting you to destroy your ability to
feed yourself off your own land, getting you to destroy your ability to get
nutrient indetched, nursing, nourishing animal foods because of the economic system that they
set up. So you have the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, which
consists of some of the biggest polluters in the world. You've got BP Shell,
You've got Cargill, You've got Monsanto, bay Or Pharmaceutical mrk ikea,
Starbucks, Google, all members of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development talking
about we're going to be sustainable, We're gonna change, We're gonna make everything
sustainable, and they are pushing for plant based diets they are pushing for banning
meats, and they're pushing for a global economic order that will essentially EXAs big
agriculture, big pharma, and the mass production of these plant based junk foods
in lieu of the healthy foods that you actually need to survive, making you
further dependent on pharmaceutical drugs, making you further dependent on a massive supplement industry
that is also dependent on massive inputs of slave labor. All right, so
all these vegans happen, all right, I'm back. So anyways, that
cobalt that's required for all you vegans to take your vitamin B twelve supplements,
they're using fermentation to make that, and they have to use raw materials that
come from slave labor, from child, from children in the congo. All
right, So you are destroying the planet in order to harvest all this cobalt
so that you can actually take your vitamin B twelve supplements, eat your plant
based kibble that's mass manufactured by the very economic entities who you believe is creating
this so called animal holocaust. And you are right actually destroying the ecology or
whatever you want to call it. You're actually destroying the top soil you're actually
destroying your own gut. You're actually destroying economically the global South and a lot
of the poor nations in the third world countries of the world with your choices.
But you think it's good. You're patting yourselves on the back, telling
yourselves that you are so enlightened, that you're so much better than everyone.
So it's totally backwards. Sorry, how's the connection? Now? They had
to cut out? Right then? All right? You hear me still?
D right? Jay? Jay? You there? Yeah, I'm here.
Sorry, okay, okay, cool, let me switch the audio over here.
All right, let's listen to his argument. See where he actually goes
with us. Take that's going to be a different argument. Yeah, I
mean, do you think that's the sensory pleasure people get from eating animals?
Is that a good enough justification for the violence to the animals? Probably not.
Do you see any ethical issue with the act of killing at all?
No? So if I was to kill my camera man, would that be
an ethical issue? I mean, I mean, I'm not gonna dove into
that too much. But in a human context, a human like humans killing
humans, of course, we're told that like this goes against every kind of
natural, like justice, like like human nature. But I do not have
an issue with killing an animal. I think you do it efficiently and like
you have to value it, you have to value like. Sorry, now
he's gonna say, what if I kill you and I value you for the
caucus, for the meat and as long as I respect it, that's okay.
So you wouldn't accept it in a human context. No, So my
question is as good to hear. My question is what is the difference,
I guess, the moral difference between killing the animal killing the human. Yeah,
I mean that's a good question. That's a fucking good question. I
mean it's tough. It's just like food chain. I am very willing to
see an animal as something I can consume and it's something that you. Okay.
So again with that name the trade, right, they always got to
do the name the trade argument, and this dude completely fails the name the
trade thing and it works on most ormies. Right, this name the trade
argument, that what's the difference? Why can't I kill animals but I can't
kill you? These people who believe that we're just beasts. If you believe
in this beastial philosophy of Darwinism, of materialism, then you can fall prey
to this, all right. So that's why I think it's always important to
go down to the paradigm level. You look at the foundations of their worldview,
their epistemology, where they're coming from, and you question that. But
of course this guy, he's an Oxford was Oxford University student, and he
doesn't even think to do that, you hear me, right, Yeah,
I'm sorry. You can slay by vegans online or what you can a whole
bunch of drama. At the same time, I started looking at that when
it cut out for like a minute, so I'm sorry, I got I
got distracted. Did I cut out again? I mean a minute ago?
Not right now? Yeah? Okay, all right, So basically the name
of the trade shit all over again? Yeah, I mean, does it
again? You have to accept their starting point. So if you want to
accurately critique or respond to a vegan, you're gonna have to be willing to
call out and not admit their starting points. And most people are not going
to do that because most people don't think in a worldview sense. But I
think that the content that you put out, the content that I put out,
what we try to do is actually train people to be able to recognize
these, uh, these fallacies, these these incorrect procedures and reasoning. And
if you can't do that, you will get duped by this stuff. Like
it's very easy to get duped when you grant people their starting points. That's
why transcendental argumentation is so powerful. Presuppositional critiques are so powerful. It is
because you don't allow the person to to let you be led down their path.
Right. You're you're saying, wait a minute, before we go down
your road to your desired end, Let's talk about why I'm on your road.
Let's talk about the meaning of the road that you want to take me
down. How do I know that you even have a road that's coherent to
go down? Maybe you're leading me off a cliff. Maybe this road ends,
you know, at a cliff, So you want to you want to
not even start down their road. Right, So, if I'm interviewing this,
if this dude's interviewing me, I wish you would come up to me
and ask me questions. I guarantee he wouldn't air the clip, but you
wouldn't come on. I mean, I would say Herbie Hancock, John Hancock
or John Hancock come on and debate myself where you could go on to debate
Jay. Come on, man, come and talk to me or Jay or
both of us. We'd love to, uh to actually hash out this conversation
with you, because, yeah, let's do some simple questions. What are
ethics, where do ethics come from? How do we know what is morally
right or wrong? How do we know what's morally right or wrong? And
they're going to come down to appealing to emotion, which they'll tell you you
can't appeal to emotion. That's a fallacy if you try to appeal to emotion,
because they understand some of the logical fallacies. These people have studied it.
But they will make the same mistakes that they claim other people are making,
so it's uh, they'll do special pleading. This is another one you'll
see a lot with these kind of people, is is that you're held to
a standard that they're not right, Like I don't have to justify my claims.
You got to justify your claims, Well, why do you think it's
okay to promote the unnecessary suffering of animals? And you can say, well,
why do you think it's okay to promote the unnecessary suffering of humans on
a vegan diet. All right, if I was forced to be on a
vegan diet, I would be suffering. That would craz No, mate,
I don't have to answer that question. The burietening proof is on you,
mate, so they'll switch the burden proof, right, Yeah, absolutely sorry.
Let's let's watch a couple more minutes of this, uh, and then
we could start wrapping up. We can finish this video and then we could
wrap it up. We've been going for like two hours. You guys,
got any more superchats, throw them in there. I want to thank all
you guys for the superchats, even though a lot of them were totally off
topic. I see the people who are asking the off topic superchat questions.
They're gone now. They don't even care about the content of this. It's
not funny. They just come in and they just go around. They try
to bring things in their own little direction. They don't care about the content
you're actually trying to make. They want you to talk about what they want
to talk about. So it's kind of annoying. But you know what,
you guys are welcome if you stay on point one. Guy's still here.
No, there you go, there you go. Some of them are still
here. So some of them do care. And I know that name.
I know you've been around for a while, so you're not guilty of that.
But there were some people in there. They don't care about this content.
They just want to spread their They just want to spread their questions about
and that's cool. It's the internet. Do what you got to do.
So let's sell. Let's finish this. Using my judgment, I can kill.
And if I was to say to you, using my judgment, I'm
happy to see this cameraman as meat and I want to eat him, that
wouldn't necessarily make it moral right. They're just my I mean, some murders
and rapist they see themselves doing something okay, But we'd say there's a victim,
there's a victim to your choice, and when it comes to killing an
animal, I guess there's a victim to our choice. So the question becomes,
how do we justify the act. You said before that if the action
is hurting someone else, then it's justified in being banned. Do you think
that's killing the cow or breeding and using the cow? Is that hurting the
cow? Okay? So so hurting right, unjustified hurting what you just pointed
out. I mean, there's so many assumptions wrapped up into this that it's
wrong to hurt beings, or that beings in all cases, that we should
avoid suffering. I mean this is arbitrary, Like on what basis do we
know that it's wrong or we that we should avoid suffering? Now I think
that yes, in the sense you can say that we should avoid unnecessary suffering.
But this argument is being expanded from avoiding unnecessary suffering too. Therefore we
should not eat meat. That's where he's trying to take this what is necessary?
How do we determine what's necessary and what's not. It's not even necessary
for me to be alive. I mean, if it's good for us to
eat meat, then that is a necessary suffering that is part of this world.
And also yeah, absolutely, and a lot of these people they're going
to say, oh, well, he and I don't adhere to the Christian
worldview. I don't believe in a god, but I'm more aligned with Buddhism,
with even Hindimism. What Buddhism said. Buddhism says that life is suffering,
so life is suffering, Yet you want to get rid of all suffering.
So I guess you want to get rid of all life, right,
And some of them are actually they actually do and they will be consistent with
that, and they want to stop all suffering in the animal world. So
if this guy asked this to me, I would say, what, how
do we determine what suffering is necessary? How do we determine something is suffering?
How do we determine something is being harmed? And what's necessary or not?
But also, okay, so if we should stop all unnecessary harm and
suffering, what about insects eating other insects? What about animals eating other animals?
What about I mean, we are chickens we had That'll be necessary,
right, That'll be necessary. It's natural to say, well, that's just
natural. We're interfering in their natural life. He said, well, how
do you? Then? We have special bleeding and we have the appeal to
nature. Felts and human beings are apparently not natural in their worldview too,
So everything's nature. Accept human beings in their world beings, yes, another
version of special please, and also trying to reconcile their deep knowledge that there
is a fall and that the natural world is fallen, right, but without
actually adhering to the truth of the theology of the fall right, Like,
everybody sees that the world has fallen, but they're unable to reconcile it or
describe it in their worldview without proper theology. And that's why I think it's
important to read stuff, you know, to read like the Church Fathers and
to actually understand why we have such a weird interpretation of nature. They'll also
appeal to authority too, Like this guy when he's out here doing this kind
of stuff, he was doing it with the professor too, where he's like,
we all know climate change international institutions, right, they'll do this thing
where it's like we all know. And that's just not just the appeal to
nature, but the appeal to authority that these international institutions have declared that the
sun has no connection to climate and humans are the cause of the change in
the climate. Those are appeals to authority. Yeah, we're obviously in the
sixth mass extinction. You know, this is the sixth mass extinction. The
world is dying. Everybody is dying. Extinction, rebellion. We're here trying
to save the world, to save the planets, and if you all just
go vegan and eat the kibble and cut off your genitals and abort all your
babies, we will definitely, we will definitely stop the climate crisis. And
it's I mean, it's you know, there's so many ways that you can
that you can approach this, that you can debunk it, but they always
pick the normies who are never going to challenge them all this stuff. And
if somebody does challenge them, will they edit it into it. I don't
know. I don't think I would add too that that I do want to
make one clarification because somebody will probably make a point about this. So in
the cases of appeal to authority or in the cases of appealing to scientific journals
and papers, I'm obviously not saying that you can't ever bring in the testimony
of an authority or an expert, or appeal to a paper. The point
is that you're not going to solve a large scale question by appealing to specific
papers, because this is known as the underdetermination of data problem in philosophy,
is that that specific instances data cannot tell you which paradigm explanations are necessarily true
or false. You can have a lot of data that can fit perfectly into
two different paradigms. So you might have to be end up comparing the two
paradigms three, two, Hello, one zero? Whens it now it's back.
It's like it goes out for ten to fifteen seconds when it does.
Yeah, hey you hear me back? Cool? Yeah, all right,
So let's listen to him finish up with the with the professor here with a
good professor. I mean, you know they say they have all these ethical
methods of killing. That sounds like antymoron. You could say there is some
cost treating meat where there is some benefit to a you meat that it tastes
nice. Maybe that's squared. Maybe ethically it's not quite squared. I mean,
what do you think? Do you think that a sensory pleasure can justify
violence? That seems to be darker? To be honest, when we say
it like that, how would we morally justify the act? Oh? I'm
not sure? Do you do you think that the act of buying the animal
products then is kind of contradicting your own morals? Possibly? Again, something
if I started thinking about more deeply contemplate doing different kinds of things. Something
I'm keen to talk to you about is kind of looking at an argument from
consistency. So if we imagine I appreciate the honesty, do you think that
this essentially pleasure that like the taste pleasure we get from the animals, is
that more important than their life and they're and their suffering. It's the sacrifice
I'm willing to take. Yeah, But but in any of the context,
would you accept pleasure as a good not justification for violence? And you got
me stumped fair enough. I appreciate I'm putting on the spot here, you
know, the whole realm of oh Jainism where every life is exactly equal.
And obviously some people won't take it that far, but I don't agree with
that. But but then you could say, they'll look at you and say,
how they're you're inhumate for killing the fly. But I see, I
wouldn't kill I wouldn't kill the fly. I mean, I don't believe a
fly is equal to me or you, But that doesn't mean I need to
kill them. I suppose do you think? So he doesn't believe the fly
is equal, right, So he's being speciesis here, he's being arbitrary?
So what makes it different? What makes a fly different from a human Herbie
Hancock, Come on, man, yeah so so yeah, it's interesting that
they think that name the trait is so powerful. And I guess again,
from the Bench's point of naturalism, it would be really powerful if I accept
all his assumptions about metaphysics and epistemology and ethics. Naturalists. Yeah, it's
a pretty solid argument, but you haven't justified your starting point, and that's
where ironically all the philosophy goes. This is actually, this is illustrated because
if you have the normy kind of empiricist approach, this is kind of where
you would be led if you follow along this train of thought. Yeah,
well, I mean you'd be led into any you could be You could be
led into any nonsense, degenerate activity you want. It could be justified.
Right, there's a way that you could frame an argument for the normy kind
of the naturalist worldview where you could justify almost anything. Right, You can
justify mass murder as well as a normy is it's just evolution, Like,
don't you want to win evolution? Well, let's kill all the males and
take the females and breathe them, right, I mean, it's like you
win evolution. If you do that, it just might makes right. So
I think the materialistic worldview, it's not able to refute much of anything,
and it's not able to hold its own ground's much of anything. I think
that's kind of that's kind of the ultimate my ultimate takeaway here from a lot
of these Vegan arguments. Most normies fall prey to this stuff. It's not
hard for him to fall prey doing yeah, all right, yeah, that's
why you got a basic lawsuit. I think what we've been trying to outline
here today is understanding basic fallacies. If you want to print out just you
know, go online, print out the list of like basic fallacies, you
know, and if you're if you're aware of just a few of the more
the more obvious ones, you'll you'll be doing pretty good because most of the
time, ninety percent of the time, you're getting at hominem, you're getting
straw man, you're getting bandwagon, you're getting appeal to authority, you're getting
appeal to nature. Those are usually the all right, now, it's come
back, all right, Well, I see the pattern and how the and
how my internet goes in and out, and I'm going to try and get
this ironed out with my service provider. Thank you to every for all the
generous super chats. We come over here and see if there's any superchats left.
It is exhausting debating these vegans, but it actually does. It falls
apart really quickly if you ask them the right questions and you turn their questions
right around on them. So, if you guys want to debate the if
you guys want to debate the scientific aspects of veganos, you want to debate
the science of plant based versus omnivorous versus a carnivorous diet, you guys have
at it. But I'm all about what really works. It's about what works
in your individual context, what works in your situation as far as diet goes.
If you want to eat a plant based diet, I got no problem
with it. You can do that. I'm absolutely fine with it. If
you want to force it on the world and try to take away our animals
and our right to feed our kids and our right to feed ourselves, and
if you're going to poison kids with your nutrained, deficient diet and starve your
kids with it, I think that's problematic. And I think that's morally wrong.
So is veganism a moral obligation? Jay, No, it cannot justify
its ethical assumptions in any in any sense at all, So therefore its argumentation
is entirely not convincing. There you go, I got Eric Partello sent a
super chat says, keep up a good fight, guys, Thanks a lot,
Really appreciate that. Into the further send five dollars super chat says,
vegan n nt What about the opposite NTT that makes wild animals okay to eat
meat but not humans? Exactly exactly. You turned it right around on them.
Name the trade, name the trait vegans. Why can wild animals eat
animals but humans can't? All right? Guess that's it. Thanks a lot
for joining everybody. You can find more primallege health dot com. Make sure
to check out Jay's channel. Where can they find your work? Jay?
What can they expect from you moving forward? Yeah? You just go to
Jay's Analysis and that's my website. You can go to my YouTube channel Jay
Dyer and uh with This week we cover and some really interesting stuff relating to
ancient cults and heresies that have popped back up. We covered an interview last
night with Nina Byzantina about psychopaths. And then I did a video yesterday on
the movie Gretel and Hansel, which is kind of a weird, trippy witchcraft
telling of the Gretel and Hansel's story. It's a new movie. That's cool,
cool, all right. So I'm sure Jay will come back on at
some point to do another stream. We had talked about talking about. Let's
see, we had the book The Changing Images of Man and oh yeah,
yeah, with some stuff too. I think that, I mean, this
is such an important document as far as social engineering goes. I mean,
what we see with all this whole Vegan movement as well, and the pushing
of New Age philosophy, the use of universities and media for the programming of
the masses into this new vision of what man is, a man's place in
the universe, because just like we're talking about here, man being made in
the image and likeness of God completely refutes the Vegan argumentation if you use this
properly and if you actually if you actually understand this now they're trying to reshape
and reformat our relationship with ourselves, our vision of what we think we are,
where we come from, where we're going so the Changing Images of Man,
This book by the Stanford Research Institute, the Center for the Study of
Social Policy at SRI International. Joseph Campbell was involved in this very very interesting
one. We're going to talk about this soon. Maybe we'll do a multi
part series on this and tie this into some of what we see as far
as cultural zeitgeist and the social engineering ghosts. But you guys can find more
primemuch healthy dot com. Become a member of the website if you guys want
to get exclusive content. We've got some fun I did a couple of funny
what's it called the debates with vegans on Instagram. You could find those videos
in our membership section in our private forum. We do twice monthly coaching calls
on there as well. Then you get discounts on everything that we got on
our website. I want to thank you guys for supporting. If you want
to support via PayPal, you can and you are encouraged to. You know,
these videos get demonetized, they get hidden in the algorithm, and we
appreciate all your guys' support. We appreciate everybody here sending them super chats.
Let's see location five one five. I see you sent some nice fat superchats
today. Thanks man. Let's see Okays up in the chat. Okay is
always here moderating the chat. We've got the Norwegian noose who stopped by.
We have my buddy Carnival stop by, so a lot of we want to
thank all the bigots in the chat for hanging out, and thank you guys
for supporting the work. We do. Make sure to check out Jay's analysis
and yeah, I'm out of here, guys. Awesome, dude, thank
you. Yeah, all right, we do