[antris]

You are reading way too much into my comments. All I was saying that it's a common ecofascist talking point to say that the problem is the number of people, and used the link as a source to how wasteful our food production is.

Now you are trying to bend this into the most uncharitable interpretation you can think of. In addition you're also just completely making up what I think. Sorry but I'm not gonna start defending your strawmans.

[giantg2]

It seems a little uncharitable to say that I'm bending things to be uncharitable when you look at what was said (or not said).

If you wanted to talk about how wasteful our food production is, then why not say that and actually talk about that. Talking about land use that produces animal products and then calling it wasteful is a stretch when many people use those products, including n-order products like organic fertilizers or white sugar. It's not wasteful to fulfill the wants of the people. It could be inefficient or excessive, but those aren't the same as actual waste.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/sustainability/...

If not applying the ecofacsist comment to my comment, then what? It seems completely irrelevant if you weren't using against my comment.

If anything, it seems you were strawmaning since you never did address the preferences nor sustainably portions that were key to my statement.