New Discovery

Organic potatoes are no different from any other. GMO does not increase FODMAPs.
Do you have any evidence that potatoes have been altered by GM? You have no case to make regarding fodmaps and spuds.
Potatoes of all kinds contain Amylopectin and amylose. Two types of starch.
These are NOT FODMAPS. That is potatoes are not a concern for FODMAP.
Clearly you are looking to understand your dietary problems but are not really trowelling down through the weeds to the knoweldge you need.
Forget GMO. There is a lot of “Frankenstein” garbage out there, and its only confusing your issue.

Clearly you have no idea what my knowledge-base is on this/these matter/s and that I confer with Medical-professionals food-suppliers and other experts on these matters, so ‘evidence’ or shut up, as the onus is on you to disprove mine and the above experts’ findings and conclusions?

.

Clearly you believe the lies you are told about GMOs, but the amounting evidence against them Clearly refutes your assumptions and what the [unbiased] Scientific Community now know about modified foods.

.
I would purport that you are not scientifically-educated enough, to understand where the responsible gateways of the issues lay.

LOL
If you have evidnce then present it, but the ad hom is not a way to convince me.

.
Starches are not FODMAPs lol

Yep once again i you have any evidence then present it.
Your cheap gibe is meaningless.
Do you even know what Amylopectin is or Amylose?

.

You refuted everything I said, you show the evidence why… I’ve already presented my evidence, sans errors.

That is true. We live in a blame filled (free will) environment which often justifies the very behavior threats of blame are trying to prevent.

I agree that you will live a happier life by accepting the truth of determinism on an individual level and, more importantly, on a collective level.

No. You’re being silly. You’re blaming when you do that… you’re blaming the blamer… aka… the victim. How can you poopoo blame whilst blaming? Prolly cuz you’re joking.

No, I’m not being silly Ichthus77. Where am I blaming “when I do that”? When I do what? I’m just giving an explanation of how human behavior works in a free will environment of blame and punishment.

Agreed we are more determined to choose to will the right choice then to blamelessly come upon that choice, considering all things,

Not remembering those things, we are bound to by by some outside sources of exgesis, and that is what IT IS.

But then what that is the eternally recurring question.

I asked you where I’m blaming the blamer? I was only explaining that threats of punishment can give a person the very justification he needs to act on his desires.

.

…seeing that it has been proven that such impulsiveinherent’ aggressive behaviour is the effect of inbreeding, what then is your solution in quelling such destructive behaviour without the use of threats of punishment?

This is a form of gaslighting. Someone who cannot (or won’t) admit they are wrong will blame their poor choices/consequences on others, and repeat their behavior using the misplaced blame to “justify” their behavior. They understand SOMEONE must be “to blame” (responsible)—they just won’t admit it is their own self. Or…if they will…they still gaslight the victim AS IF the victim is to blame. Or…they take the blame as a compliment.

speeds off at a thousand miles per hour, honking at everyone who doesn’t move out of the way, flipping off the ones I pass, and laughing at all the collisions

calls all of them retards

laughs at tickets and hiked up insurance cuz ima friggen bazillionaire

It has always baffled me how defenders of freewill insist that the reason a determinist is a determinist is because he wants to blame someone or something… rather than because determinism makes far more sense than freewill.

Determinist’s have to suffer this weird regression into some infantile “nah nanny boo boo it’s your fault I’m telling” mindset these poor freewillists aren’t able to avoid thinking in terms of when debating.

At the same time, some determinists claim it’s the freewillists who are motivated by wanting to blame, not them. Only, because they are the type who always want to blame, they can’t imagine anyone believing there is no freewill without them also wanting and trying to blame someone or something.

Determinism can’t just be obviously true because of how causality works. It has to be a sinister plot to escape responsibility.

This silly and time wasting routine became exhausting many years ago, which is why i don’t participate in debates with people who believe in freewill.

Who was saying something about slower traffic keep right? I passed by so fast i couldn’t even make out the car.

You’re being satirical, or else how could you ¿inauthentically? blame a non-self-determined person for their non-deliberate mistakes?

Deliberation is an illusion. Nobody even thinks, if no one really acts. How are we even having this conversation?

Are we AI because we’re patterned after the “always already” — or because we’re just running our programs — and… if only “persons” can “program” consciousness (¿even by accident?)… how’d our conscious species evolve from basically nothing?

Descartes smirks & side-eyes a thought bubble… “spiritual material”.

That was me. Just waiting for you to catch up & clearing the way.

speeds past

maniacal laugh

I already explained here that “free will” is a very misnamed concept for a certain type of very complex causality, which despite how it feels to us and despite the degrees of freedom which objectively open up as a consequence of its existence, is entirely deterministic.

You still seem caught in the trap of the false dichotomy i.e. the silly definition of freedom that is supposed to somehow mean “immune to causal determinacy”. Well, since by the most rudimentary and painfully obvious logic nothing is immune to causal determinacy, all that definition achieves is to cover over the real issues and create a dividing line for people to rally on either side of. That’s not only dumb but it’s also not doing philosophy.

What false dichotomy? We either have free will or we don’t. The degrees of freedom you talk about have nothing to do with whether we “could have done otherwise,” which is the meaning of free will in the free will/determinism debate. Within the framework of determinism, there is no room for free will because the belief that we “could have done otherwise” is an unreality. Not only is it impossible to prove free will true because we cannot reverse time to prove it, but this also means we cannot prove determinism (as the opposite of free will) false. This does not mean determinism allows us to escape responsibility. In fact, responsibility is increased when the corollary of “no free will” is put into real world practice.