To: sittnick
That is called begging the question. No it isn't. My point is that nutritional content, cooking properties and everything else you bring in is irrelevent to this discussion. Peanuts share a botanical form and function with other legumes, not with nuts. Sorry.
176 posted on
09/21/2006 8:17:34 AM PDT by
Alter Kaker
("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
To: Alter Kaker
None of us know all of the creatures that were around three or four or thirty thousand years ago. We certainly don't know what similar looking specimens could mate with others and produce fertile offspring. (If an archeologist in the year 20000 AD came upon a poodle and rottweiler skeleton, not knowing of the existence of either because they died out, he would likely conclude they were different species) Heck, we STILL don't know all the species that are in the world right now. A good scientist doesn't just throw out raw assertions as facts. There is so much we don't know, and a large number of things we THOUGHT we know that have since been disproven or brought into question. ---- No it isn't. My point is that nutritional content, cooking properties and everything else you bring in is irrelevent to this discussion.
It is absolutely relevant. Peanuts are different from legumes in all sorts of ways. Just because a botanist happens to classify them based on how they grow does not mean that peanuts come from some other legume. It is just a handy way to categorize, nothing more. I am glad to see that you no longer pretend that the grocer is "wrong" to put the peanuts in with the other nuts in the supermarket.
182 posted on
09/21/2006 9:19:31 AM PDT by
sittnick
(There is no salvation in politics.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson