Don't even bother man. He won't listen. Every reason you listed is backed up by actual science and THOUSANDS of studies. I'm now putting militant vegans on the same of level anti gun zealots.

The level of cognitive bias in some people is just astounding. His claims - no sources - "they're backed by THOUSANDS of studies!" My response - numerous sources including reports from the United Nations and Environmental Protection Agency - "militant vegan". But if you can provide just a handful of these "thousands" of studies demonstrating whatever claim you're making (you didn't really specify) I'm all ears. [url=http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Confirmation_bias.html]Here's one that applies to you right now.[/url]

LOLDIDNTREAD

I'm always amazed at how foolish people make themselves look when they try to save face, when they could simply admit they were wrong and keep their dignity. I gave a civilised response addressing all of your points, with plenty of evidence and sources to back them up, yet you are too juvenile to return the most basic courtesy. As a result, your argument imploded. Can't say I didn't try.

But you're wrong, and none of your studies have been accepted by the scientific community. You're just bias and filled with cherry picked lies. My argument didn't implode because I didn't argue, and sorry for the late response. I don't have mobile or live on the computer. Give me a legitimate study.

You clearly didn't even review the sources yourself, then. There are reports from the United Nations and Environmental Protection Agency, an article from the Atkins website itself, alongside basic nutritional information -- with their own references in the annotation. Of course, one can simply choose to think that any evidence they don't like "isn't accepted by the scientific community" and any evidence that reaffirms their beliefs is. http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Confirmation_bias.html I also agreed with you about The China Study, which should tell you that I'm not interested in simply peddling any study that backs me up. I'm interested with what's true. If veganism weren't backed by rock solid logic and evidence, I wouldn't be one. Please, stop wasting my time. Address my points and each of my sources. If the "scientific community" doesn't accept them, you should have no problem providing your own sources in contrast. The sole reason your argument imploded is [i]because[/i] you didn't argue my response. Like most people here, you came in thinking you knew more than you did. Maybe you were armed with a quick google search result. You wanted nothing but to reinforce your beliefs and diminish the OP's. Then, when your post was quickly cut down to size, you backed off. Read through this thread, and you will see others take the same undignified route that you did. It's a shame, because I was completely ready to have a respectful, open-minded discussion with you. And then you do that. Now you're trying to redeem yourself while still shirking a proper response. I'm not having it. Stop playing games and address my points -- or you can make excuses again, and let this discussion end more unfavorably for you than it already is.

Citing the EPA is not evidence

Good response yet again. We're done here.

Just becuase it isn't a long response pretending to know what it's talking about doesn't mean it isn't valid.

You covered that with your original post.