It doesn't really matter how good or bad it is, it is still a synthetic attempt at creating that meat. The comment you responded to never said from an animal. They said 'synthesize the meat of extinct animals'. You're arguing against a point that was never made.

That's why he used the word synthesize.

If its nice out you can try Good Neighbor and sit outside. Inside is fine too but it can get a little noisy.

Better than mindlessly parroting the same paragraph that doesn't even support your point over and over like an automaton. Have a nice night.

You're repeating yourself, and you're still wrong.

Try speaking in complete sentences before trying to argue with someone who knows more than you.

Again, the selection of the name and date have little to do with what the holiday is celebrating and whether it is religious. I'm afraid you've gone and got a little lost in the sauce on this one.

In what way does the origin of the name support your point? The celebration existed long before the modern name but was always to do with celebration of the birth of Christ. Good try again.

This is referring to the selection of the date and has nothing to do with the basis of the holiday. Nice try though.

From your own sources:

"Though December 25 is the day Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, the date itself and several of the customs we've come to associate with Christmas actually evolved from pagan traditions celebrating the winter solstice."

"It's a mistake to say that our modern Christmas traditions come directly from pre-Christian paganism, said Ronald Hutton, a historian at Bristol University in the United Kingdom. However, he said, you'd be equally wrong to believe that Christmas is a modern phenomenon."

"Christmas, Christian festival celebrating the birth of Jesus."

--

Like I said, certain traditions were stolen and incorporated. No one is denying that. However, Christians celebrated the birth of Christ well before those pagan traditions were incorporated into the celebrations. This is all well detailed in the wiki article I linked, chock full of academic sources. It is also fully acknowledged in all of the sources you provided, which, to be honest, I'm not sure you've actually read beyond the headline.

I am sorry that you are incapable of admitting that you are wrong, or of understanding nuance, and that you care more about your own pride than the historical accuracy of your statements, but to each their own. I'm gonna move on because like most people in these threads, I'm done reading your ignorant contrarian takes.

Totally agree man, this dude is a joker with no clue what he is talking about. Honestly hope its a troll account.

You are completely incorrect in saying that Christmas is based on pagan holidays. As I noted, I'm not denying that traditions of winter solstice (among others) were stolen or incorporated, but to say that Christmas itself is based on it is a pretty shallow and ignorant interpretation.

I find it funny that you can't even manage to read my comment or spell solstice right but you still think you know what you're talking about because you posted a couple nbc news articles. This honestly has to be a troll account.

Also, did you read your sources? They support my position better than your own, lol.

I think you should double check your history. While its true that Christmas is intertwined with the winter solstice, and, certain traditions that became Christmas traditions were taken from Pagan celebrations (among others) to say it is 'based on' a pagan holiday is egregiously incorrect.

I would recommend the entire wiki article, but the bit about concurrent celebrations is particularly relevant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas#Relation_to_concurrent_celebrations

Christmas is, quite explicitly, a celebration of the birth of Christianity's most important religious figure and not 'based on' the winter solstice just because a few traditions were stolen or incorporated to ease assimilation.