Similar Posts

Subscribe
Notify of
33 Answers
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pomophilus
2 years ago

Hello,

I think the person is clearly identifiable even if I don’t know the name. After all, here on GF your question feels like that at least every second day. Honestly, does she perhaps call her disciples to ask this question again and again? I don’t know, because I don’t intend to increase their click numbers even further and I will continue to watch none of their videos. Every time your question was asked here before, both sides, their fans and their opponents were in agreement, these are their methods.

Apparently, she speaks to people in the city, including children, very aggressively, throws them things to their head, which could also be called vaccinations, doesn’t let them get word on their questions, but starts the next Tirade.

No matter how to stand for the concern she represents or pretends to represent, one will not persuade a single person of anything. It may be that some, especially children, can be confused with such methods, but beliefs never arise from such a thing. In the long term, only hatred and rejection. In this respect, she provides a bear service to the matter.

But- it seems to be a successful business model. And I do not want to support this any more.

paradox1899
2 years ago

Nowadays, every spider can really run a Youtube channel and find any followers.

Just as this person leads discussions, she makes her name all honor.

MaierTV
2 years ago

I don’t think of her. She can’t convince.

I dislike every video of her.

nobodyathome
2 years ago

I don’t think anything about militants

Altay6162
2 years ago

Comes to the top 10 dumbest influencer list for this year, which is fact

BinNichtMelina
2 years ago

Feels a bsian as these religious people who want to convince all of their world view because they think it is the only right one.

But jo my opinion has fed too much lawn you can say differently

Parthenoz
2 years ago

They all find them well, without exception.

This resulted in a survey among animals in mass animal husbandry.

wickedsick05
2 years ago
Reply to  Parthenoz

0% they find well that resulted in a survey among field buns, fieldhamsters, moles, rainworms, fish, birds and billions of other animals in free nature, which are frightened by vegan farming on the field.

Parthenoz
2 years ago
Reply to  wickedsick05

Wrong, the tackling is primarily used for meat production. What do you think a pig eats in grain? And where does this grain come from?

Simple rule of thumb – on 1 KG meat 10 KG cereals are fed.

Bodhgaya
2 years ago

The soil quality decreases as it is predatory.

If that were the case, there could be no organic farmers. It’s just a system that hasn’t established yet.

Auno one tells you what one sees that a reference to your postings comes here when you googelt “Veganism Raubbau”.

The yield is up to 80% lower than oil and natural gas fertilizers.

Where does this number come from? And in this number is the use of plant ash taken into account.

Apart from the fact that the ammonia, the methane and the nitrate in the animal fertilizer also massively destroys the environment.

wickedsick05
2 years ago

I know why there are not many vegan farmers. The soil quality decreases as it is predatory. The yield is up to 80% lower than oil and natural gas fertilizers.

And who is talking about fertilizers from oil & natural gas?

95% of plants are cultivated for human consumption. The yield is the highest.

Bodhgaya
2 years ago

There are only 5 vegan farmers as it is not worth.

Watch the video. There it is explained why there are not so many BioVegane farmers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj5Cn-H3g9Y

05:16-:08:41

Bodhgaya
2 years ago

There are only 5 vegan farmers because it is not worth it.

Many farmers the vegan fertilizers think it will be more rewarding with the years. Animal fertilizer ensures that the soil stores less water.

And where is this number with the “five” vegan farmers?

The yield compared to oil and natural gas fertilizer is up to 80% lower.

And who is talking about fertilizers from oil & natural gas? Apart from the fact that you do not have any evidence for this number, at most your bachelor thesis is excluded.

No, he’s imported…

Many have also claimed that if you don’t sell meat, you import it. However, in Germany, less and less animals are slaughtered.

And even if that were the case, then at least the animals do not suffer here in Germany. I doubt that we breed more animals for the export of manure abroad.

wickedsick05
2 years ago

There are only 5 vegan farmers because it is not worth it. The yield compared to oil and natural gas fertilizer is up to 80% lower. With organic fertilizer only around approx. 30% lower.

If I buy less animal products, the dung goes back.

No, he’s imported… we’re not living in 1940 anymore. There is now globalisation.

Apart from that, even if most farmers feed farm animals with soy, it is not an argument that it is also different.

wickedsick05
2 years ago

The plant cultivation – at least in relation to soya – is 80% for meat users so that the animals are eaten.

No one is obligated to eat soya eat meat.

But what can exist is a solution in which as few as possible damage occurs.

Right and that’s a mixed food that puts on pastures and wild animals as it needs to be operated less arable farming than with vegans

Bodhgaya
2 years ago

This with these “5 vegan farmers” always comes from you. I never said it was only five since I never counted them.

Apart from that, even if most farmers with animal husbandry order their fields, it is not an argument that it is also different. If I buy less animal products, the dung goes back.

And don’t come with “it’s double-moral”. Veganism cannot currently be lived 100%. Nobody said that. Only the fact that a company’s mixed-cooked employees buy meat from their wages with vegan products makes it almost impossible. It is about “to reduce as far as possible & practically feasible”.

Parthenoz
2 years ago

The plant cultivation – at least in relation to soya – is 80% for meat users so that the animals are eaten.

This means that a meat consumer kills indirectly animals in operation and at the same time also indirectly animals in the field, in the rainforest etc.

There will never be a solution where no one ever gets hurt. But what can exist is a solution in which as few as possible to damage. And this is more the case with veganism, whether in terms of animals, the environment or health.

wickedsick05
2 years ago

Mass murder is definitely with meat because meat always a the death of the animal.

An animal is not a mass. In vegan plant cultivation, masses die of animals.

wickedsick05
2 years ago

You have claimed with the currently 5 vegan farmers that there are in Germany you can feed all of Germany without giving proof

Bodhgaya
2 years ago

I talked to him more often and he thinks that we can feed all of Germany with pasture meat. Apparently, this is the opinion that this is not true of the world. On this thesis, he has been riding around for months, if not for years, without proof.

Parthenoz
2 years ago

Mass murder is definitely in meat because meat always results in a dead animal. 60 million Pigs die in Dtl every year – and I don’t even talk about other animals.

Is 60 million for you not a mass murder?

You’re ignorant like a child. And your arguments are empty. No sources, just claims that keep you alive in your dream bubble…

wickedsick05
2 years ago

There are alternatives for this. With vegan it is always mass murder.

Parthenoz
2 years ago

And then why do you eat meat when everything is cleared and you want to save the rabbits and “mother animals”? Is that schizophrenia?

The largest part of the globally cultivated soybean, about 80 percent, lands in the stomachs of cows, pigs and chickens.

wickedsick05
2 years ago

Your excuses for the vegan mass grave arable farming are interested in field buns, fieldhamster, mole, rainworms, fish, birds and billions of other animals in free nature, who are not eagerly on the field frightened by vegan farming, these animals have given up in the survey.

Parthenoz
2 years ago

You found a beautiful and false excuse to justify the cravings of meat users.

Even these 100% of the plants are not even nutritionally comparable to the area of cereals used for meat production.

In addition, the manure, the climate damage, the contamination of the soil – quite apart from the health aspects of unconscious meat consumption.

wickedsick05
2 years ago

Nee right, 100% of the vegan plants are produced by arable farming. They don’t grow in the supermarket shed…

IstDasOkay
2 years ago

She actually speaks the truth in a fancy way. But you can’t reach people, rather on the contrary…I think that it works more against the vegan movement than with it.

mandela666
2 years ago

If she didn’t try to “turn” I have no problem with her.

Bodhgaya
2 years ago

Nothing, but even more idiotic are the people who throw all vegans into a pot because of her.

KETOKYO
2 years ago

distance.

sccangel09
2 years ago

She has no wrong with what she says, but the way she wants to convey it to people is disturbed.

I also generally do not think of interfering in the lifestyle of foreign people.

wickedsick05
2 years ago

A pitiful victim of the vegan industry. Does not give rational reason for veganism therefore it must offend others

Iohanes
2 years ago

Nothing! Every extremism is evil!