A California-based startup called Savor has figured out a unique way to make a butter alternative that doesn’t involve livestock, plants, or even displacing land. Their butter is produced from synthetic fat made using carbon dioxide and hydrogen, and the best part is —- it tastes just like regular butter.
This fallacy is called an appeal to nature.
It is also a fact that butter is a staple food that has been used for thousands of years with a proven track record.
This fallacy is called an appeal to tradition.
Just because something is fallacy the way it was presented does not make it wrong if he facts check out :)
Your facts don’t check out, that’s what makes you wrong.
Is butter not the best product in its class? both from health ie nutrition value and taste perspective?
Not anymore. This product matches butter on both counts and puts out much less pollution and takes up much less land than factory farming. I urge you to actually read the article, many of your points are addressed within.
I am just going with ol realiable
y’all have fun testing another “product”
This is called the fallacy of being a dope.
I trust you bro
“Bro”, butter is literally just a hydrocarbon. As in carbon atoms and hydrogen atoms.
Making it in the lab produces chemically identical molecules.
As in, literally the same thing. Like actually for real no difference. Including however bad or healthy it is to eat.
Any nuances in the real thing will be from impurities that would have to be added to the lab produced stuff, should you want to.
The real difference is how it is made, not in what it produces. Meaning the synthetic option can be produced without livestock, and potentially using much less energy and land.
Don’t trust them. Read the article, use your brain, and understand why your comments are wrong.
This may be a logical fallacy known as false equivalence, when one fact is stated or implied to be conflated with another not directly related fact.
So was margarine before veganism was a widespread thing?