I did make that point. I already pointed out that there was no grazing animal, no input of naturally ingested vitamins and material, not natural exercising of the muscle, no “life experience”. There was no animal so it is not meat. It is a synthetic simulation of meat. That is all.

It is neither of nor from the animal - there is no animal. Other commenters have agreed to as much. It’s synthetic hence it is not meat.

The point is whether it is meat at all if there is no animal. It’s synthetic by definition hence it cannot be meat by definition.

Again, the crux here is the word animal. It isn’t synthesize from an animal at all. It’s from the dna of an animal. The resulting meat is an approximation and wouldn’t remotely resemble the meat from a living, grazing animal. Literally the difference between spam and a steak.

I replied to spartan NOT the article.

No we can’t. This isn’t meat from the animal at all. Gotta love the downvotes from all the people who think this meat came from an animal!

No, no it's not.

It isn’t Hollywood that chose not to put Harrison Ford in comedies. That was his choice.

Sounds like you’re not addicted to movies at all

You mean any public school in western civilization?

Pretty sure you learned that in grade school like the rest of us

The variable is YOU. It depends on YOU.

Ask Tim burton. Until then, don’t make things up.

Says the person who has a grammar problem.

In all my years on Reddit, you are the ONLY one with spelling this bad. You’re wrong.

No, it very much isn’t at all.

No such thing as objectively, but many would agree with your point.

Wtf is ud? If you mean you’d, say it. Ud means absolutely nothing at all.