this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2026
667 points (97.2% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

40584 readers
3263 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] barnaclebutt@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

I'm 14 and this is deep bullshit. There are different levels of processed food. Nobody is against cooking your food. Countless studies demonstrate that the less processed your food is, the healthier it is for you.

[–] Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

I am not trying to invalidate you. I'm 33 and I think about how something is processed. Though, it's prudent to keep in mind that the further you think about how something is processed, you will eventually come to the realizations about the levels of processing. For example: You could make your own olive, grape and peanut oil with less processing or more depending on how you do it.

[–] adhdsergio@lemmy.world 0 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

The misunderstanding, and rightly, the confusion, comes like you said from the level of processing. Cooking is considered processing - so these words have little value in reality as they mean different things for different people

[–] Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

No there's value to what the commenter said.... but like I said there also has to be some kind of thought into how you are processing because then the varying levels of processing matter. Like you said cooking is considered processing, while I gave the example of making a food oil.

How you cook determines the amount of processing you will have to apply. How I make a food oil will determine the amount of processing I will need to apply.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Norman Borlaug developed wheat that can be grown in all kinds of climates temperatures and environments on Earth. It is by definition a genetically modified organism that helped alleviate starvation for billions of people since its creation.

Many people say that the most important person in human history is Jesus Christ, but I believe it is Norman Borlaug.

[–] ShotDonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Thank god the global South has so many white saviours.

Borlaug quite litterally paved the way for industrialized agriculture in countries like India with all the devastating social and environmental effects that come with it.

But sure there were severe famines before Borlaug came, all their own fault.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 0 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

This is a textbook example of arguing in bad faith.

I said Norman Borlaug's work helped alleviate starvation for billions of people. Somehow you turned that into "white savior," industrial agriculture, and the absurd claim that I think pre-Green Revolution famines were "all their own fault." I didn't say any of those things. You invented an argument because you couldn't address the one I actually made.

Borlaug's contribution stands on its own. His research dramatically increased crop yields and helped prevent catastrophic famine. That isn't a matter of opinion, it's one of the most well-documented humanitarian achievements of the 20th century.

You're also trying to pin every downstream consequence of industrial agriculture on one scientist, as though he personally designed decades of government policy, farming practices, and corporate incentives. That's a ridiculous standard. By that logic, every inventor is responsible for every misuse or unintended consequence of their invention forever.

If you want to discuss the environmental tradeoffs of the Green Revolution, that's a legitimate conversation. But that's not what you did. Instead, you injected race into a discussion where it wasn't relevant, built a straw man out of things I never said, and then congratulated yourself for knocking it down.

If your argument requires inventing my position before you can refute it, maybe your argument isn't as strong as you think it is.

[–] ShotDonkey@lemmy.world -1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

That's a whole mouthful from somebody who (checks notes) started off with some messianic comparisons.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 0 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

You are, once again, introducing things that were never part of the discussion and making assumptions about what I was or wasn't saying. Nothing I said was messianic in any way, shape, or form, nor did I bring anything related to that into the conversation.

Please stop.

If this is the kind of discourse you want to have, arguing against things that were never said and inventing positions for the other person to defend, there are plenty of flat Earth videos on YouTube where that style of reasoning will fit right in.

[–] ShotDonkey@lemmy.world -1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

It might be a US American thing to do this Jesus thing. Same as praising the productivist paradigm still in 2026.

Anyways. I'll leave it here and hope you might draw some inspiration of this: https://spectrejournal.com/the-enduring-fantasy-of-feeding-the-world/ My part of the conversation stops here. Regards

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

So once again, you're claiming there's some kind of Jesus angle here.

Jesus was never brought up. Neither were God, gods, Christianity, or Catholicism. You are once again injecting completely unrelated nonsense into the discussion.

None of that exists in what I said.

Yes, goodbye. You are either incapable of following the conversation or simply arguing with something you invented.

[–] Nurgus@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (4 children)

The sad thing is - we COULD produce processed foods designed for our health. We just choose not to. The more its processed, the more room there is for profit margin improving adjustments.

(Meanwhile we evolved to eat not-ultraprocessed food so obviously that's best for us.)

[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

The sad thing is - we COULD produce processed foods designed for our health. We just choose not to.

Yes.

(Meanwhile we evolved to eat not-ultraprocessed food so obviously that's best for us.)

Not how this works. Evolution cares about us procreating and spreading our genes, not living long healthy lives. Hence there being plenty animals that die after having children. "We evolved to" just means it won't kill us quickly, not that it is healthy long term.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kamen@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

In all seriousness, shortening "organically grown" to "organic" is quite stupid since all food is organic, but not all food is organically grown.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Now I'm wondering if anyone has ever labeled salt as organic.

[–] domdanial@reddthat.com 3 points 1 day ago

The one thing likely not grown, nor carbon containing.

[–] AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net 14 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Hyperprocessed foods are designed to sit on store shelves as long as possible, be addictive, and have just enough flavor to make you want more while at the same time being made of the cheapest possible ingredients, sometimes even including weird things like titanium dioxide.

Where do you get your fiber?

[–] Zamboni_Driver@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My ISP provided the fiber, they came and hooked it up and everything.

[–] glitch1985@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Does this keep you regular? I've been just as constipated as when I had cable but the lower latency and symmetrical upload are worth it.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] HrabiaVulpes@europe.pub 31 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Okay, this is a high quality shit-post.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I just found it. It's an organic shitpost.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] wabafee@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Why can't we have human kibbles if they have for cats and dogs. They keep selling it as the only healthy option.

[–] Samskara@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago

Meal replacement drinks and powders exist. They are pretty much that.

They do it's called cereal.

[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Please I need human kibble to happen for totally normal reasons

[–] tino@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago (5 children)

no processed food can beat the absolute genious design of the raspberry. easy to grab, clear information whether it's ripe or not, visually appealing, tastes wonderful.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 9 points 1 day ago

What about Cheetos?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Idk man, them food scientists been up to some strange shit out at the farm and at the food processing plant for like a century now and things have gotten out of hand a little.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Triumph@fedia.io 62 points 2 days ago (30 children)

My favorite is the people who rail against GMOs. Bitch, every food you eat has been genetically modified by humans. Either by selective breeding over a long period of time, or what they used to do in the early 20th century: bomb seeds with radiation and see what came out, toss the weird stuff, keep the neat stuff.

Everything is GMO. What's being done now is actually safer than before, because they actually know what they're trying to create, and are far more surgical in the process.

[–] Nautalax@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Yeah ancestral plants that became many crops look almost nothing like their descendants in many cases

The funniest I think are secondary crops like oats and rye. Our forebears weren’t even trying to grow a better version of those, those started off as just weeds that people were trying to get rid of in their wheatfields. In the course of purging them they accidentally selected for more wheat-like plants that people would be less likely to rip out until they became actual decent crops on their own, while also maintaining hardiness in areas that wheat couldn’t handle such that they spun off and became popular on their own rights.

[–] ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world 41 points 2 days ago (24 children)

GMOs aren't dangerous because of the genetic manipulation. They're dangerous because of everything around it. Now it's possible to create vegetables that survive a centimetre of glyphosate coating. And if the farmers reuse seeds, they're breaching copyright law. With this, plants are copyrightable, would you like all of the cancer of contemporary American IP law applied to your food?

[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 1 points 22 hours ago

The problems then aren't GMOs but it's the fact that someome can patent and copyright it, destroy the patent and copyright system not the GMOs

load more comments (23 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›