Remember me
▼ Content

Defining terms


Defining terms30-05-2024 06:28
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
My son and I had an interesting conversation over the weekend. We had always wanted to try venison steaks cooked over an open fire, and we finally got around to it. It's just good to know how to thrive if things go seriously sideways. Anyway, during the cookout, he misused the word heat, and I corrected with term thermal energy.

He correctly pointed out that there are several words in the English language that are spelled the same, pronounced the same, but have very different meanings. His basic statement was this;

"As long as I define my terms, I can use the word "heat" any way I want. Heat is any meat cut from the femur bone of a whitetail deer. This heat is delicious."

Correct or incorrect? I don't know!


PS The steaks were incredible, cooked on a marsh mellow roasting rod over dried cherry wood and seasoned with only salt and pepper.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
Attached image:

30-05-2024 09:16
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22183)
GasGuzzler wrote:
My son and I had an interesting conversation over the weekend. We had always wanted to try venison steaks cooked over an open fire, and we finally got around to it. It's just good to know how to thrive if things go seriously sideways. Anyway, during the cookout, he misused the word heat, and I corrected with term thermal energy.

He correctly pointed out that there are several words in the English language that are spelled the same, pronounced the same, but have very different meanings. His basic statement was this;

"As long as I define my terms, I can use the word "heat" any way I want. Heat is any meat cut from the femur bone of a whitetail deer. This heat is delicious."

Correct or incorrect? I don't know!

PS The steaks were incredible, cooked on a marsh mellow roasting rod over dried cherry wood and seasoned with only salt and pepper.

It is incorrect. The term 'heat' is defined by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is the flow of thermal energy, not the thermal energy itself.

Heat has no temperature. It is not a cut of meat.

Why does your friend insist on redefining this word?


It is correct to say the fire heats the meat, cooking it. Heat uses the units watts (joules per second) or BTU (a larger unit based again on joules per second). Heat is like current in a river. It is the flow, not the water itself. Heat is not energy. It is the flow of energy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 30-05-2024 09:20
30-05-2024 18:14
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
My son and I had an interesting conversation over the weekend. We had always wanted to try venison steaks cooked over an open fire, and we finally got around to it. It's just good to know how to thrive if things go seriously sideways. Anyway, during the cookout, he misused the word heat, and I corrected with term thermal energy.

He correctly pointed out that there are several words in the English language that are spelled the same, pronounced the same, but have very different meanings. His basic statement was this;

"As long as I define my terms, I can use the word "heat" any way I want. Heat is any meat cut from the femur bone of a whitetail deer. This heat is delicious."

Correct or incorrect? I don't know!

PS The steaks were incredible, cooked on a marsh mellow roasting rod over dried cherry wood and seasoned with only salt and pepper.

It is incorrect. The term 'heat' is defined by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is the flow of thermal energy, not the thermal energy itself.

Heat has no temperature. It is not a cut of meat.

Why does your friend insist on redefining this word?


It is correct to say the fire heats the meat, cooking it. Heat uses the units watts (joules per second) or BTU (a larger unit based again on joules per second). Heat is like current in a river. It is the flow, not the water itself. Heat is not energy. It is the flow of energy.


The conversation initiated with the word "heat". I know I was correct in calling him on improper use of the term, but then the conversation turned more towards a question of defining terms.

His point was that as long as he defined his terms up front, a legitimate conversation can go forward. He also argued that he could do something as ridiculous as defining a tire as a "nutritious fruit that grows on a tree in the Midwest", and a legit conversation about eating tires could go forward.
You've said it many times that a dictionary and textbooks don't define words. So what is the problem with him defining words?

So the question is not so much about heat specifically. It's about an individual defining terms for discussion. I don't even know what category this question would fit into... logic? Philosophy?


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
30-05-2024 19:56
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22183)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
My son and I had an interesting conversation over the weekend. We had always wanted to try venison steaks cooked over an open fire, and we finally got around to it. It's just good to know how to thrive if things go seriously sideways. Anyway, during the cookout, he misused the word heat, and I corrected with term thermal energy.

He correctly pointed out that there are several words in the English language that are spelled the same, pronounced the same, but have very different meanings. His basic statement was this;

"As long as I define my terms, I can use the word "heat" any way I want. Heat is any meat cut from the femur bone of a whitetail deer. This heat is delicious."

Correct or incorrect? I don't know!

PS The steaks were incredible, cooked on a marsh mellow roasting rod over dried cherry wood and seasoned with only salt and pepper.

It is incorrect. The term 'heat' is defined by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is the flow of thermal energy, not the thermal energy itself.

Heat has no temperature. It is not a cut of meat.

Why does your friend insist on redefining this word?


It is correct to say the fire heats the meat, cooking it. Heat uses the units watts (joules per second) or BTU (a larger unit based again on joules per second). Heat is like current in a river. It is the flow, not the water itself. Heat is not energy. It is the flow of energy.


The conversation initiated with the word "heat". I know I was correct in calling him on improper use of the term, but then the conversation turned more towards a question of defining terms.

His point was that as long as he defined his terms up front, a legitimate conversation can go forward. He also argued that he could do something as ridiculous as defining a tire as a "nutritious fruit that grows on a tree in the Midwest", and a legit conversation about eating tires could go forward.
You've said it many times that a dictionary and textbooks don't define words. So what is the problem with him defining words?

They are no longer the English language. This is the problem that leftists often run into when trying to redefine words (and even theories of science, and even terms in mathematics!) during their word games (which they of course blame on someone else for!).

Each word has a history. To ignore that history is to ignore the language that word is a part of.

GasGuzzler wrote:
So the question is not so much about heat specifically. It's about an individual defining terms for discussion. I don't even know what category this question would fit into... logic? [quote]
Yes.
GasGuzzler wrote:
Philosophy?

Yes.

Some words are defined using philosophy. Words like 'real', 'science', and 'religion' are defined in this way. Even the word 'mathematics' and 'logic' are defined in this way. The branch of philosophy that attempts to define the word 'real' is called phenomenology. This branch discusses arguments relating to how we perceive the world through our senses and what that means. An example of this kind of thinking was most recently brought forward in the Matrix series in the movies.

Morpheus presents the question in it's most basic form: "What IS 'real'? How do you DEFINE 'real'? He then poses the line of thinking of phenomenology. He discusses how the senses we use MUST be interpreted by ourselves into what we consider 'real'. In other words, 'real' is just our own interpretation of our own senses. That interpretation is based on how we each figure the Universe is supposed to work.

As a result, 'real' is as unique to each of us as a fingerprint. There is no absolute 'real', not even when Morpheus welcomes Neo to the 'real world'.

The term 'heat' is defined by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is also given it's direction of flow here. Indeed, the direction of time can be defined here as well. Energy always dissipates from concentrated form (a low entropy, or in other words a high potential for use of energy) across the given system until it's achieves it's final, fully random and uniform state (zero potential for the use of energy). In other words, e(t+1) >= e(t), where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. Entropy MUST always increase or stay the same in any given system.

To call anything else 'heat' is a departure from the 2nd law of thermodynamics and all of it's ramifications. This IS how 'heat' is define. To ignore that means to ignore the 2nd law of thermodynamics with it.

Words are not defined by dictionaries. They are defined by people, but that definition has a base of some sort. It's not just willy-nilly. To treat any word thus is to deny all of it's history and even the language itself.

The study of the origins of words and phrases is called 'eytomology'...a rather fascinating aspect of history.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 30-05-2024 20:01
30-05-2024 20:15
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(921)
Alternative scenario:

You and your son have already finished cooking the controversial substance and are eating it.

You are joined by someone else who asks:

"What's for dinner?"

One or both of you answers, "venison!"

"It's delicious! Do you want some?"

BIG MISTAKE!

"There is NO SUCH THING as VENISON!"

"Venison is just a meaningless buzzword!"

Who has the authority to decree whether or not "venison" means ANYTHING?

You are not allowed to consult a dictionary.

And you'll never get to talk about the food you are eating.

Not until you provide an acceptable unambiguous definition for "venison" that does not violate the revised laws of meat inspection.

Which cannot be found in any book or other citable source.

You have to rely on the omniscience of the WORD MASTER.

If the WORD MASTER says that there is no such thing as venison, then, damn it.. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS VENISON.

The infallible decree cannot be challenged.

The discussion about dinner cannot get out of the starting gate.



GasGuzzler wrote:
My son and I had an interesting conversation over the weekend. We had always wanted to try venison steaks cooked over an open fire, and we finally got around to it. It's just good to know how to thrive if things go seriously sideways. Anyway, during the cookout, he misused the word heat, and I corrected with term thermal energy.

He correctly pointed out that there are several words in the English language that are spelled the same, pronounced the same, but have very different meanings. His basic statement was this;

"As long as I define my terms, I can use the word "heat" any way I want. Heat is any meat cut from the femur bone of a whitetail deer. This heat is delicious."

Correct or incorrect? I don't know!


PS The steaks were incredible, cooked on a marsh mellow roasting rod over dried cherry wood and seasoned with only salt and pepper.
30-05-2024 20:25
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
[quote]GasGuzzler wrote:
My son and I had an interesting conversation over the weekend. We had always wanted to try venison steaks cooked over an open fire, and we finally got around to it. It's just good to know how to thrive if things go seriously sideways. Anyway, during the cookout, he misused the word heat, and I corrected with term thermal energy.

He correctly pointed out that there are several words in the English language that are spelled the same, pronounced the same, but have very different meanings. His basic statement was this;

"As long as I define my terms, I can use the word "heat" any way I want. Heat is any meat cut from the femur bone of a whitetail deer. This heat is delicious."

Correct or incorrect? I don't know!

PS The steaks were incredible, cooked on a marsh mellow roasting rod over dried cherry wood and seasoned with only salt and pepper.

It is incorrect. The term 'heat' is defined by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is the flow of thermal energy, not the thermal energy itself.

Heat has no temperature. It is not a cut of meat.

Why does your friend insist on redefining this word?


It is correct to say the fire heats the meat, cooking it. Heat uses the units watts (joules per second) or BTU (a larger unit based again on joules per second). Heat is like current in a river. It is the flow, not the water itself. Heat is not energy. It is the flow of energy.


The conversation initiated with the word "heat". I know I was correct in calling him on improper use of the term, but then the conversation turned more towards a question of defining terms.

His point was that as long as he defined his terms up front, a legitimate conversation can go forward. He also argued that he could do something as ridiculous as defining a tire as a "nutritious fruit that grows on a tree in the Midwest", and a legit conversation about eating tires could go forward.
You've said it many times that a dictionary and textbooks don't define words. So what is the problem with him defining words?

They are no longer the English language. This is the problem that leftists often run into when trying to redefine words (and even theories of science, and even terms in mathematics!) during their word games (which they of course blame on someone else for!).

Each word has a history. To ignore that history is to ignore the language that word is a part of.

GasGuzzler wrote:
So the question is not so much about heat specifically. It's about an individual defining terms for discussion. I don't even know what category this question would fit into... logic?

Yes.
GasGuzzler wrote:
Philosophy?

Yes.

Some words are defined using philosophy. Words like 'real', 'science', and 'religion' are defined in this way. Even the word 'mathematics' and 'logic' are defined in this way. The branch of philosophy that attempts to define the word 'real' is called phenomenology. This branch discusses arguments relating to how we perceive the world through our senses and what that means. An example of this kind of thinking was most recently brought forward in the Matrix series in the movies.

Morpheus presents the question in it's most basic form: "What IS 'real'? How do you DEFINE 'real'? He then poses the line of thinking of phenomenology. He discusses how the senses we use MUST be interpreted by ourselves into what we consider 'real'. In other words, 'real' is just our own interpretation of our own senses. That interpretation is based on how we each figure the Universe is supposed to work.

As a result, 'real' is as unique to each of us as a fingerprint. There is no absolute 'real', not even when Morpheus welcomes Neo to the 'real world'.

The term 'heat' is defined by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is also given it's direction of flow here. Indeed, the direction of time can be defined here as well. Energy always dissipates from concentrated form (a low entropy, or in other words a high potential for use of energy) across the given system until it's achieves it's final, fully random and uniform state (zero potential for the use of energy). In other words, e(t+1) >= e(t), where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. Entropy MUST always increase or stay the same in any given system.

To call anything else 'heat' is a departure from the 2nd law of thermodynamics and all of it's ramifications. This IS how 'heat' is define. To ignore that means to ignore the 2nd law of thermodynamics with it.

Words are not defined by dictionaries. They are defined by people, but that definition has a base of some sort. It's not just willy-nilly. To treat any word thus is to deny all of it's history and even the language itself.

The study of the origins of words and phrases is called 'eytomology'...a rather fascinating aspect of history.


Thanks for the insight... intriguing.

Now I get to play devil's advocate.

Twice you mentioned the history of the word must be considered. I went back as far in history as I could to find a blatant misuse of the word "heat".

Genesis 8:22 ESV
While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease."

Is this a translation error? I don't see this as a translation error because it is clearly talking about the opposite of cold.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
Edited on 30-05-2024 20:28
30-05-2024 21:26
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
Im a BM wrote:
You and your son have already finished cooking the controversial substance and are eating it.


What is the controversy with deer meat? I don't ever recall hearing that it's poor choice of meat to consume. Quite the opposite, it has many health benefits with zero fat, which makes it a far better choice than beef.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
30-05-2024 21:35
keepit
★★★★★
(3286)
If the SHTF the deer and elk will be harvested pretty quickly. Better to count on corn and rice and beans.
30-05-2024 21:51
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
keepit wrote:
If the SHTF the deer and elk will be harvested pretty quickly. Better to count on corn and rice and beans.


If you think I've only got one or two critters in the freezers....well...you'd be very wrong. I'm eating venison, wild turkey, pheasant, walleye and pike 4-5 days a week, and the venison is best after 1 year in the freezer. You estimate the math.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
30-05-2024 22:04
keepit
★★★★★
(3286)
Well done!
I'm just talking about the average citizens as a whole.
30-05-2024 22:12
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
keepit wrote:
Well done!
I'm just talking about the average citizens as a whole.


I think this time you are right. If shit hits the fan the typical city dweller is in big trouble.

Continue that thought with leftist ideas like "The Complete Lives System" and people over 50 are ****ed.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
31-05-2024 20:08
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(921)
What about UNdefining terms to transform them into "buzzwords"?


Alternative scenario:

You and your son have already finished cooking the controversial substance and are eating it.

You are joined by someone else who asks:

"What's for dinner?"

One or both of you answers, "venison!"

"It's delicious! Do you want some?"

BIG MISTAKE!

"There is NO SUCH THING as VENISON!"

"Venison is just a meaningless buzzword!"

Who has the authority to decree whether or not "venison" means ANYTHING?

You are not allowed to consult a dictionary.

And you'll never get to talk about the food you are eating.

Not until you provide an acceptable unambiguous definition for "venison" that does not violate the revised laws of meat inspection.

Which cannot be found in any book or other citable source.

You have to rely on the omniscience of the WORD MASTER.

If the WORD MASTER says that there is no such thing as venison, then, damn it.. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS VENISON.

The infallible decree cannot be challenged.

The discussion about dinner cannot get out of the starting gate.

And the discussion about climate change cannot go forward because this commonly used term has been UNdefined to transform it into a "buzzword"

With the infallible authority of science by decree.


GasGuzzler wrote:
My son and I had an interesting conversation over the weekend. We had always wanted to try venison steaks cooked over an open fire, and we finally got around to it. It's just good to know how to thrive if things go seriously sideways. Anyway, during the cookout, he misused the word heat, and I corrected with term thermal energy.

He correctly pointed out that there are several words in the English language that are spelled the same, pronounced the same, but have very different meanings. His basic statement was this;

"As long as I define my terms, I can use the word "heat" any way I want. Heat is any meat cut from the femur bone of a whitetail deer. This heat is delicious."

Correct or incorrect? I don't know!


PS The steaks were incredible, cooked on a marsh mellow roasting rod over dried cherry wood and seasoned with only salt and pepper.
[/quote]
01-06-2024 06:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22183)
Im a BM wrote:
Alternative scenario:

You and your son have already finished cooking the controversial substance and are eating it.
...

No, you can't blame your problem on me or anybody else.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
01-06-2024 06:18
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22183)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
[quote]GasGuzzler wrote:
My son and I had an interesting conversation over the weekend. We had always wanted to try venison steaks cooked over an open fire, and we finally got around to it. It's just good to know how to thrive if things go seriously sideways. Anyway, during the cookout, he misused the word heat, and I corrected with term thermal energy.

He correctly pointed out that there are several words in the English language that are spelled the same, pronounced the same, but have very different meanings. His basic statement was this;

"As long as I define my terms, I can use the word "heat" any way I want. Heat is any meat cut from the femur bone of a whitetail deer. This heat is delicious."

Correct or incorrect? I don't know!

PS The steaks were incredible, cooked on a marsh mellow roasting rod over dried cherry wood and seasoned with only salt and pepper.

It is incorrect. The term 'heat' is defined by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is the flow of thermal energy, not the thermal energy itself.

Heat has no temperature. It is not a cut of meat.

Why does your friend insist on redefining this word?


It is correct to say the fire heats the meat, cooking it. Heat uses the units watts (joules per second) or BTU (a larger unit based again on joules per second). Heat is like current in a river. It is the flow, not the water itself. Heat is not energy. It is the flow of energy.


The conversation initiated with the word "heat". I know I was correct in calling him on improper use of the term, but then the conversation turned more towards a question of defining terms.

His point was that as long as he defined his terms up front, a legitimate conversation can go forward. He also argued that he could do something as ridiculous as defining a tire as a "nutritious fruit that grows on a tree in the Midwest", and a legit conversation about eating tires could go forward.
You've said it many times that a dictionary and textbooks don't define words. So what is the problem with him defining words?

They are no longer the English language. This is the problem that leftists often run into when trying to redefine words (and even theories of science, and even terms in mathematics!) during their word games (which they of course blame on someone else for!).

Each word has a history. To ignore that history is to ignore the language that word is a part of.

GasGuzzler wrote:
So the question is not so much about heat specifically. It's about an individual defining terms for discussion. I don't even know what category this question would fit into... logic?

Yes.
GasGuzzler wrote:
Philosophy?

Yes.

Some words are defined using philosophy. Words like 'real', 'science', and 'religion' are defined in this way. Even the word 'mathematics' and 'logic' are defined in this way. The branch of philosophy that attempts to define the word 'real' is called phenomenology. This branch discusses arguments relating to how we perceive the world through our senses and what that means. An example of this kind of thinking was most recently brought forward in the Matrix series in the movies.

Morpheus presents the question in it's most basic form: "What IS 'real'? How do you DEFINE 'real'? He then poses the line of thinking of phenomenology. He discusses how the senses we use MUST be interpreted by ourselves into what we consider 'real'. In other words, 'real' is just our own interpretation of our own senses. That interpretation is based on how we each figure the Universe is supposed to work.

As a result, 'real' is as unique to each of us as a fingerprint. There is no absolute 'real', not even when Morpheus welcomes Neo to the 'real world'.

The term 'heat' is defined by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is also given it's direction of flow here. Indeed, the direction of time can be defined here as well. Energy always dissipates from concentrated form (a low entropy, or in other words a high potential for use of energy) across the given system until it's achieves it's final, fully random and uniform state (zero potential for the use of energy). In other words, e(t+1) >= e(t), where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. Entropy MUST always increase or stay the same in any given system.

To call anything else 'heat' is a departure from the 2nd law of thermodynamics and all of it's ramifications. This IS how 'heat' is define. To ignore that means to ignore the 2nd law of thermodynamics with it.

Words are not defined by dictionaries. They are defined by people, but that definition has a base of some sort. It's not just willy-nilly. To treat any word thus is to deny all of it's history and even the language itself.

The study of the origins of words and phrases is called 'eytomology'...a rather fascinating aspect of history.


Thanks for the insight... intriguing.

Now I get to play devil's advocate.

Twice you mentioned the history of the word must be considered. I went back as far in history as I could to find a blatant misuse of the word "heat".

Genesis 8:22 ESV
While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease."

Is this a translation error? I don't see this as a translation error because it is clearly talking about the opposite of cold.
This is a translation error.

There are several translation errors in the Bible, including the use of the word 'day', as in a 24-hour period. In Hebrew, 'yom' was mistranslated into 'day'. It is better translated as 'a period'. In Hebrew the use of 'yom' represents a day, a month, a year, or any length of time as a single period.

Despite these translation errors, the basic message of the Bible remains the same, and it's purpose remains the same: to provide evidence of a witness of God, Jesus Christ, and the Gospel.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
01-06-2024 06:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22183)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
You and your son have already finished cooking the controversial substance and are eating it.


What is the controversy with deer meat? I don't ever recall hearing that it's poor choice of meat to consume. Quite the opposite, it has many health benefits with zero fat, which makes it a far better choice than beef.

Better in your freezer than embedded in the bumper of a car.

Deer are stupid. They wander out into the road, and when they see a car coming, try to run from it, but they can't see behind them, causing them to turn their head, which causes them to turn direction, then they turn away weave the opposite way, and often wind up just jumping in front of the car...and THAT's if they run! (Sometimes they just stand there bewildered).

Deer is the deadliest wild animal there is. They have killed or maimed more people than any other wild animal.

At least they're good eating.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 01-06-2024 06:22
01-06-2024 07:05
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
You and your son have already finished cooking the controversial substance and are eating it.


What is the controversy with deer meat? I don't ever recall hearing that it's poor choice of meat to consume. Quite the opposite, it has many health benefits with zero fat, which makes it a far better choice than beef.

Better in your freezer than embedded in the bumper of a car.

I've said the same things for years but more along the lines of "looks better on my dinner plate than dead and wasted on the local highway".
Into the Night wrote:
Deer are stupid.

Yes they are, but also incredibly smart (mainly due to their keen senses). One day they can't be killed and the next day I'm asking that deer how it is possible he's still alive.

Into the Night wrote:
They wander out into the road, and when they see a car coming, try to run from it, but they can't see behind them, causing them to turn their head, which causes them to turn direction, then they turn away weave the opposite way, and often wind up just jumping in front of the car...and THAT's if they run!
(Sometimes they just stand there bewildered).

Exactly! I see it every day as I live in a river valley with great habitat. On one occasion I counted over 150 on the last 1.5 miles to home. My favorite is when they cross the road with hooves in the shoulder, then realize you are closing in and might be a threat. At this point they spin 180 and cross the entire road again back to "safety". This is how a large percentage get hit because the motorist times the "passing" of the deer thinking it will continue on into the ditch...until it doesn't.
Into the Night wrote:
Deer is the deadliest wild animal there is. They have killed or maimed more people than any other wild animal.

My son and his girlfriend are taking a vacation to Yellowstone in June. My wife is all worried about bears and mountain lions. The deer on the way there worry me more.
Into the Night wrote:
At least they're good eating.

One of God's best gifts to this man anyway. It took a couple years to transition my taste, but now I much prefer venison steak over beef steak. Still can't beat beef prime rib, but that is our once a year Christmas dinner. It's tough to eat at home and still cough up $150 to feed four! Thanks Biden!


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
01-06-2024 09:16
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14652)
GasGuzzler wrote: What is the controversy with deer meat?

The controversy stems from the frequency of improper pronouns being used.

GasGuzzler wrote: I don't ever recall hearing that it's poor choice of meat to consume.

That's no longer an issue. Sven Issen clarified this in his scientific research culminating in a scientific study that scientifically proved that deer meat is scientifically better than any other. It's scientific at this point so don't bother with all the science deniers pushing their Vegan Justice crap.

GasGuzzler wrote: Quite the opposite, it has many health benefits with zero fat,

Venison is not zero fat. It's very lean, but it still has .... oh wait, Sven Issen is giving me that look like he's going to kick my ass, ... ummm, OK, I get it ...

Yes, venison is zero fat.

GasGuzzler wrote: ... which makes it a far better choice than beef.

I don't know, it's hard to beat a nice juicy steak right off the grill, with ...

Ummm, I mean yes, venison is best, clearly.

GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Deer are stupid.
Yes they are, but also incredibly smart

No, I'm not confused.

I want my peant butter bbq'ed incredibly smart venison.
01-06-2024 10:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22183)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
You and your son have already finished cooking the controversial substance and are eating it.


What is the controversy with deer meat? I don't ever recall hearing that it's poor choice of meat to consume. Quite the opposite, it has many health benefits with zero fat, which makes it a far better choice than beef.

Better in your freezer than embedded in the bumper of a car.

I've said the same things for years but more along the lines of "looks better on my dinner plate than dead and wasted on the local highway".
Into the Night wrote:
Deer are stupid.

Yes they are, but also incredibly smart (mainly due to their keen senses). One day they can't be killed and the next day I'm asking that deer how it is possible he's still alive.

Into the Night wrote:
They wander out into the road, and when they see a car coming, try to run from it, but they can't see behind them, causing them to turn their head, which causes them to turn direction, then they turn away weave the opposite way, and often wind up just jumping in front of the car...and THAT's if they run!
(Sometimes they just stand there bewildered).

Exactly! I see it every day as I live in a river valley with great habitat. On one occasion I counted over 150 on the last 1.5 miles to home. My favorite is when they cross the road with hooves in the shoulder, then realize you are closing in and might be a threat. At this point they spin 180 and cross the entire road again back to "safety". This is how a large percentage get hit because the motorist times the "passing" of the deer thinking it will continue on into the ditch...until it doesn't.
Into the Night wrote:
Deer is the deadliest wild animal there is. They have killed or maimed more people than any other wild animal.

My son and his girlfriend are taking a vacation to Yellowstone in June. My wife is all worried about bears and mountain lions. The deer on the way there worry me more.
Into the Night wrote:
At least they're good eating.

One of God's best gifts to this man anyway. It took a couple years to transition my taste, but now I much prefer venison steak over beef steak. Still can't beat beef prime rib, but that is our once a year Christmas dinner. It's tough to eat at home and still cough up $150 to feed four! Thanks Biden!

A certain amount of fat adds flavoring to meat. Venison does tend to be an acquired taste because it has so little.

Frankly, I've found that any game meat is an acquired taste, whether it's venison or from some other critter.

The high inflation has certainly caused a lot of problems for people, even made some desperate. Most don't know how to hunt or what to do with an animal if they ever shot one.

Another factor feeding the coming war.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
02-06-2024 18:22
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
Into the Night wrote:
A certain amount of fat adds flavoring to meat. Venison does tend to be an acquired taste because it has so little.

Venison fat is nasty! All my trimmings with a little meat go into a cast iron skillet for the pooch. That way it gets consumed and he loves it.
Into the Night wrote:
Frankly, I've found that any game meat is an acquired taste, whether it's venison or from some other critter.

Biggest mistake even experienced hunters make is overcooking venison. If it gets to a brown color on the inside it's basically flavored shoe leather. What I had to learn the hard way was the medium rare color of venison is much more pink than beef. Down at the fire the other night, my son and I had enough steaks for a feast for 2. My other son showed up with a few friends and our feast for 2 turned into a snack for 10. I'm talking about college age girls that were raised on good food. Pretty cool to see their eyes light up and scarf down meat from a critter that never left my land.
This same group of kids is going to run me out of pheasants! Every time they come over they are asking for it. I do make some killer pheasant nuggets.

Into the Night wrote:
The high inflation has certainly caused a lot of problems for people, even made some desperate. Most don't know how to hunt or what to do with an animal if they ever shot one. Another factor feeding the coming war.

The desperation part is what worries me. Credit cards are starting to get maxed out and I think home invasions will be on the rise. This is not going to end well.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
02-06-2024 18:47
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: What is the controversy with deer meat?

The controversy stems from the frequency of improper pronouns being used.

Bambi was a female buck, but I refuse to eat them. They remain unharmed. How do you not know this stuff?
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: I don't ever recall hearing that it's poor choice of meat to consume.

That's no longer an issue. Sven Issen clarified this in his scientific research culminating in a scientific study that scientifically proved that deer meat is scientifically better than any other. It's scientific at this point so don't bother with all the science deniers pushing their Vegan Justice crap.


You can take your scientific illiterature and shove it. My deer herd methane footprint is near zero. Why? I feed them scientifically proven methane reduction seaweed. DUH!
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: Quite the opposite, it has many health benefits with zero fat,

Venison is not zero fat. It's very lean, but it still has .... oh wait, Sven Issen is giving me that look like he's going to kick my ass, ... ummm, OK, I get it ...

Yes, venison is zero fat.

Sven has very mean left...I mean right hook...or is it the leg sweep? All I remember is getting hit with the gamma and waking up next week.

IBdaMann wrote:
I want my peant butter bbq'ed incredibly smart venison.

Talk to Bambi. They might be able to accommodate you.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
02-06-2024 19:43
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(921)
It must give you great satisfaction to post this.

After years of trolling, this is the payoff.

Oh, it feels so good to be in the company of like-minded giants.

And after all these years, you've got a lot of cute little inside jokes to work with.

So satisfying, isn't it?

I bet you just can't wait to post some more, because this is SO AWESOME!

You can't BUY a feeling like this.

It takes years of trolling to reach these kinds of heights.


GasGuzzler wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: What is the controversy with deer meat?

The controversy stems from the frequency of improper pronouns being used.

Bambi was a female buck, but I refuse to eat them. They remain unharmed. How do you not know this stuff?
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: I don't ever recall hearing that it's poor choice of meat to consume.

That's no longer an issue. Sven Issen clarified this in his scientific research culminating in a scientific study that scientifically proved that deer meat is scientifically better than any other. It's scientific at this point so don't bother with all the science deniers pushing their Vegan Justice crap.


You can take your scientific illiterature and shove it. My deer herd methane footprint is near zero. Why? I feed them scientifically proven methane reduction seaweed. DUH!
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: Quite the opposite, it has many health benefits with zero fat,

Venison is not zero fat. It's very lean, but it still has .... oh wait, Sven Issen is giving me that look like he's going to kick my ass, ... ummm, OK, I get it ...

Yes, venison is zero fat.

Sven has very mean left...I mean right hook...or is it the leg sweep? All I remember is getting hit with the gamma and waking up next week.

IBdaMann wrote:
I want my peant butter bbq'ed incredibly smart venison.

Talk to Bambi. They might be able to accommodate you.
02-06-2024 20:33
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2999)
Im a BM wrote:
And after all these years, you've got a lot of cute little inside jokes to work with...deleted useless whining...


No insider jokes here. 97% of the peer reviewed scientific jokes are provided by you.
02-06-2024 22:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22183)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
A certain amount of fat adds flavoring to meat. Venison does tend to be an acquired taste because it has so little.

Venison fat is nasty! All my trimmings with a little meat go into a cast iron skillet for the pooch.

Most people are nicer to their dogs!

GasGuzzler wrote:
That way it gets consumed and he loves it.

I can't speak for your dog, but I've known dogs that eat their own shit.
At least your dog seems like the flavor of the fat, which was my original point!
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Frankly, I've found that any game meat is an acquired taste, whether it's venison or from some other critter.

Biggest mistake even experienced hunters make is overcooking venison. If it gets to a brown color on the inside it's basically flavored shoe leather.

So true! Venison ain't beef, and it should not be treated like beef!
GasGuzzler wrote:
What I had to learn the hard way was the medium rare color of venison is much more pink than beef. Down at the fire the other night, my son and I had enough steaks for a feast for 2. My other son showed up with a few friends and our feast for 2 turned into a snack for 10. I'm talking about college age girls that were raised on good food. Pretty cool to see their eyes light up and scarf down meat from a critter that never left my land.
This same group of kids is going to run me out of pheasants! Every time they come over they are asking for it. I do make some killer pheasant nuggets.

So your son has a harem?
Naw, I know you are talking about his classmates or such. Nice to see a group of kids appreciate good cooking, and not get squeemish about where it came from!
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
The high inflation has certainly caused a lot of problems for people, even made some desperate. Most don't know how to hunt or what to do with an animal if they ever shot one. Another factor feeding the coming war.

The desperation part is what worries me. Credit cards are starting to get maxed out and I think home invasions will be on the rise. This is not going to end well.

Home invasions are already on the rise. So are things like copper theft (sorry 'bout that, EV'rs! That charging station you were depending on was raided yesterday by homeless copper thieves!).

No, it's not. Particularly after the sham trial 'conviction', there is no going back. War and it's associated costs to society is inevitable now, perhaps as soon as THIS year, before the election. The desperate will take matters into their own hands. They will have nothing to lose. That kind of desperation is dangerous.

Never assume you beat a man that is down. He may get up.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 02-06-2024 22:25
02-06-2024 22:27
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22183)
GasGuzzler wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: What is the controversy with deer meat?

The controversy stems from the frequency of improper pronouns being used.

Bambi was a female buck, but I refuse to eat them. They remain unharmed. How do you not know this stuff?
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: I don't ever recall hearing that it's poor choice of meat to consume.

That's no longer an issue. Sven Issen clarified this in his scientific research culminating in a scientific study that scientifically proved that deer meat is scientifically better than any other. It's scientific at this point so don't bother with all the science deniers pushing their Vegan Justice crap.


You can take your scientific illiterature and shove it. My deer herd methane footprint is near zero. Why? I feed them scientifically proven methane reduction seaweed. DUH!
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: Quite the opposite, it has many health benefits with zero fat,

Venison is not zero fat. It's very lean, but it still has .... oh wait, Sven Issen is giving me that look like he's going to kick my ass, ... ummm, OK, I get it ...

Yes, venison is zero fat.

Sven has very mean left...I mean right hook...or is it the leg sweep? All I remember is getting hit with the gamma and waking up next week.

IBdaMann wrote:
I want my peant butter bbq'ed incredibly smart venison.

Talk to Bambi. They might be able to accommodate you.




The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan




Join the debate Defining terms:

Remember me

▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact