Girl eats nothing but chicken nuggets for 15 years...

turbolapp said:
I forgot about this thread.
I've nothing to add about the calorie in/calorie out statement and don't care to continuously repeat myself.

With regards to the other matter, I'll take advise on parenting from abunch of 20 year old single guys and no children with a grain of salt.

I will say that, for the record, with regards on how to feed picky eaters, I would suggest you read the literature before you comment again. Most of it says: feed them what they will eat while slowly introducing all the stuff they won't. Hense, why both my children are required to eat 1 bite of EVERYTHING served at every meal. I notice how none of you commented on the fact that my oldest (remember the one that only liked 3 things) now eats almost everything we do. Why? I guess it's because, as is the style of this board, many of you enjoy ganging up on the only "mouthy bitch" around.

Anyways, next time do me a favor and at least READ and COMPREHEND before speaking. That way you can argue your points more effectively.
Click to expand...

Not all of us are 20 year old single guys. Some of us have kids, and we all know how picky kids can be. The point is - you're the parent. You can make them eat a balanced meal through various methods, yet you choose not to. All of the literature suggests a balanced diet is better than a kid eating nuggets every fucking day. However, they are you kids, and if you want to feed them shit, go ahead. Nobody cares more about your kids than you do.

But you're still in the wrong, and it's still bad parenting. You're like one of the broads on the Jerry Springer show trying to defend the indefensible.
 


turbolapp said:
I forgot about this thread.
I've nothing to add about the calorie in/calorie out statement and don't care to continuously repeat myself.
Click to expand...

You don't have to continuously "repeat yourself" because you're dead wrong and I proved you dead wrong with (HOLY SHIT!) factual evidence.

But people like you would rather stick your head in the sand than admit it or even just walk away and shut the fuck up.

Instead, you come back in here acting like no one could understand what you were talking about.

News flash: its not our reading comprehension that sucks. It's yours. All the evidence that contradicts your inane ramblings was laid out for you (as you requested).

Finally, don't talk down to people about their age. It only speaks worse about your character than you've already shown it to be.

First of all, you've proven yourself to be such a huge idiot most 20 year olds are more intelligent than you (however old you are).

Second, not everyone that is telling you that you're wrong is a 20 year old fresh out of high school. I'm in my mid-30s and worked as a clinical research coordinator for 8 years before going IM full-time. (OH SHIT! SCIENCE AGAIN!)

turbolapp said:
as is the style of this board, many of you enjoy ganging up on the only "mouthy bitch" around.
Click to expand...

Nice victim complex you have there. I bet its really satisfying to play that card once you've actually deluded yourself into almost believing its true (but you know its not).

TL;DR: You should be ashamed of yourself.
 
In the US, you don't have to take them to a fast food joint. The schools pretty much have it sewn up.
Processed food, sugary-sweetened milk, etc. They may serve healthy options alongside, but that doesn't mean the kids are eating them when there's pizza and nuggets and whatever else.

I'm not jumping into the fray here because my knowledge of health and nutrition isn't very broad, but is it false that a caloric deficit will cause the body to burn fat?
If not, then why is the premise of turbo's original statement incorrect? She did not after all state that it was so in absolute terms.
"for the most part" = generally
That softens her premise.

And, I just have to LOL at those on this forum who cannot successfully make their argument without resorting to personal attacks. Very mature.
 
DanWesson said:
And, I just have to LOL at those on this forum who cannot successfully make their argument without resorting to personal attacks. Very mature.
Click to expand...

LOL all you want. I assume you're referring to me since you also neg-repped me. And that's cool, you're entitled to your opinion.

But the fact is, that I was very polite until her

turbolapp said:
Suck it.
Click to expand...

comment. That's when I decided to call a spade a spade and refer to her as what she is: a fucking idiot.

So LOL away. There are people dick rolling each other left and right around this place and you want to get all "holier than thou" over someone calling an idiot an idiot? Then LOL right back atcha, church lady.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JakeStratham
Fatbat said:
39 years old, no kids, but I'm smart enough to know you don't take children 0-3 years of age to McDonalds to get them hooked on that crap. Why on earth would you do that to them?
Click to expand...
13912987.jpg
 
Beach Affiliate said:
LOL all you want. I assume you're referring to me since you also neg-repped me. And that's cool, you're entitled to your opinion.
Click to expand...
I am interested in learning. You aren't the first nor will you be the last to have valid points who got offended when questioned. The attacks only weaken the argument being made.
Beach Affiliate said:
But the fact is, that I was very polite until her



comment. That's when I decided to call a spade a spade and refer to her as what she is: a fucking idiot.

So LOL away. There are people dick rolling each other left and right around this place and you want to get all "holier than thou" over someone calling an idiot an idiot? Then LOL right back atcha, church lady.
Click to expand...
So what you're saying is her little jab got you bowed up. Internet is srs bsns. I'd take the neg away for the church lady comment. :) Most of this forum is a lot of people talking shit they have no clue about, so > 99% can be disregarded. You claimed knowledge and seem to know something contrary to the argument presented, but for some reason got offended when questioned and asked for sources. Funny, your neg says to get "my panties out of a wad," however, yours are looking a bit bunched, bro.
Any interest in answering my question?
 
DanWesson said:
So what you're saying is her little jab got you bowed up.
Click to expand...

And what you're saying is that my little jabs got you bowed up, amirite?

DanWesson said:
You claimed knowledge and seem to know something contrary to the argument presented, but for some reason got offended when questioned and asked for sources.
Click to expand...

She made the initial assertion so the burden of proof was on her. You didn't do too well in debate class huh, sport?

But even though she refused to back up that assertion with any kind of proof (other than some shitty blog), I went ahead and backed up the factual counterpoint with numerous published medical papers and several other sources that, in turn, were backed up with numerous published medical papers.

I can't see how I could present any more evidence to be any more clear.

There's just one small flaw in me posting all that:

DanWesson said:
Any interest in answering my question?
Click to expand...

^ It's that. Someone actually has to fucking read it.

That question was answered in about a dozen different ways in this post.

I mean, how much hand holding do you need?
 
Last edited:
turbolapp said:
Ug I can't believe you're making me quote myself (especially after I've said the same thing over and over and asked you to look at the orginal statement)



Pretty much every freakin word I said still applies: 1) Calories in Calories out. (seriously please don't make me clarify this one again) 2) For the most part (allowing for slight factors such with regards to WHAT you eat and how it may marginally effect your metabolism)

Additionally, if you'll notice it was in direct response to the statement above me that said:

Hence my response of why people need to stop thinking this way: What you eat (again for the most part) does not make you fat. It's the calories you consume vs the calories you burn. My statement made no reference to the possible state of her health or fitness.

The burden of proof lays on you since you are disputing a commonly held wisdom within the medical and scientific community, not to mention disputing basic math and the second law of thermodynamics.

I'll end this with an extension on what I said earlier. If we would just get the basics through people's head from the start and not bog people down with a thousand different possibilities of what they're body may or may not be doing when factors X Y and Z are presented then maybe people wouldn't feel so out of control, giving up their weight loss goals from the start. If we could get the 30% of the obese in this nation to adopt the calories in/calories out mantra to get down to a healthy weight, THEN feel free to bombard them all you want with how to fine tune and tweak their diets.


Edit: Holy crap this guy is saying everything I've been trying to get across in this thread: Calories In, Calories Out: Fact or Fiction … Redux | The Iron Samurai




TL;DR: Everything I said originally still applies. Suck it.
Click to expand...

Only quoted 'cause I love it when chicks say "suck it" or SMD or bite me...
that is all.
 
BeachAffiliate

not saying who's right or wrong because I don't really care either way.

But cmon man you are trying to provide massive amounts of scientific case studies as evidence to try and convince a woman she's wrong?

No wonder U Mad. Last time I convinced a woman she was wrong was never. Last time I convinced a woman we should do something a certain way or she should try and see things my way - daily.

Women are usually counter-intuitive emotionally-charged creatures. Mothers are ten fold that because their purpose in life (kids) are a part of the equation.


tldr: Attacking a woman's convictions even with scientific proof will cause her to shut you out in her mind and disbelieve everything you say. Instead, persuade her to at least try and understand your point of view.
 
FerrisHilton said:
BeachAffiliate

not saying who's right or wrong because I don't really care either way.

But cmon man you are trying to provide massive amounts of scientific case studies as evidence to try and convince a woman she's wrong?

No wonder U Mad. Last time I convinced a woman she was wrong was never. Last time I convinced a woman we should do something a certain way or she should try and see things my way - daily.

Women are usually counter-intuitive emotionally-charged creatures. Mothers are ten fold that because their purpose in life (kids) are a part of the equation.


tldr: Attacking a woman's convictions even with scientific proof will cause her to shut you out in her mind and disbelieve everything you say. Instead, persuade her to at least try and understand your point of view.
Click to expand...

LOL so true. Silly me for assuming that a woman that is supposedly in business (I made the assumption because she's a mod here) would respond logically to logic.

Plus rep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom