There are a few heirloom plants that bear fruit with more intense flavor than industrial crops, which is a pretty well known fact if you are into food as a business/ home cook/ attend farmers market etc
Like this is common knowledge, it’s specifically selected for flavor and grown in different ways. Not sure why you think one plant is going to be the same as another variety of the plant.
The point of my comment was to call out the comment poster because it’s obvious they were using their own conjecture and just saying “I did a study.” Very common in this community because people just trust what other people say on face value. The fact they never followed up with anything at all means it was a bot or a dumbass just spouting off at the mouth about some bullshit. I appreciate you taking the time to find similar studies though, thank you.
I was not arguing anything except, “please show me where you read that” because I don’t know about this subject. But if you make a claim about a subject, you should be able to back it up or you’re lying.
I find it hard to buy that Mexican tortilla companies somehow buy only heirloom corn and American companies don’t. We know exactly why the tortillas suck in the US and it’s not cornmeal degradation ffs.
Like - can you imagine the idea that the tortillas he’s talking about are not factory made? Like maybe locally grown produce is used for hand made stuff?
You should know their are regional differences in how foods are produced.
People aren’t going to hold your hand so you can what’s common knowledge. But
I absolutely reject the notion of food science being common knowledge. If you can’t back up what you say with anything when asked, you are simply lying, full of shit, or haven’t actually proved what you claimed.
Yes I know there are regional differences in how food is made that is my whole point. I’m saying there is difference in quality between the two countries, but that has no link to degradation of cornmeal which is what the op claimed, said “I did a study” and everyone just believed them when they quite literally cannot backup what they said.
How hard is it to keep your conjecture to yourself or just simply backup what you claimed?
That’s not how it works tho. If you make a claim, the responsibilities of evidence are on the person who made the claim.
Can’t back it up? Then it’s bullshit.
This is day 1 scientific method stuff, bud, it’s not about holding hands, it’s about whether you actually have any repeatable data to backup your claims. If you don’t, you probably shouldn’t be saying it as fact.
Well no to be more accurate, the op was full of shit and couldn’t back it up when asked, thus what they said can be ignored. Like if we were in my lab, I would make you do laps for even bringing it up.
It’s a good thing you aren’t in charge, with brain-dead takes like “I’m going to need primary sources on food quality in correlates positively to food quality out”
There are a few heirloom plants that bear fruit with more intense flavor than industrial crops, which is a pretty well known fact if you are into food as a business/ home cook/ attend farmers market etc
Tomatoes here https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-heirloom-tomatoes-taste-so-good/
Farmer brags about corn http://masienda.com/blogs/learn/about-heirloom-corn#%3A~%3Atext=In+this+case%2C+heirloom+corn%2Con+to+the+next+generation.
Mentions of the distinct taste https://www.reddit.com/r/farming/comments/15a83zu/why_the_nostalgic_flavor_of_this_heirloom_corn_is/
https://tinybutmightyfoods.com/why-heirloom/
Like this is common knowledge, it’s specifically selected for flavor and grown in different ways. Not sure why you think one plant is going to be the same as another variety of the plant.
The point of my comment was to call out the comment poster because it’s obvious they were using their own conjecture and just saying “I did a study.” Very common in this community because people just trust what other people say on face value. The fact they never followed up with anything at all means it was a bot or a dumbass just spouting off at the mouth about some bullshit. I appreciate you taking the time to find similar studies though, thank you.
I was not arguing anything except, “please show me where you read that” because I don’t know about this subject. But if you make a claim about a subject, you should be able to back it up or you’re lying.
I find it hard to buy that Mexican tortilla companies somehow buy only heirloom corn and American companies don’t. We know exactly why the tortillas suck in the US and it’s not cornmeal degradation ffs.
Dude you are just super ignorant about food.
Like - can you imagine the idea that the tortillas he’s talking about are not factory made? Like maybe locally grown produce is used for hand made stuff?
You should know their are regional differences in how foods are produced.
People aren’t going to hold your hand so you can what’s common knowledge. But
I absolutely reject the notion of food science being common knowledge. If you can’t back up what you say with anything when asked, you are simply lying, full of shit, or haven’t actually proved what you claimed.
Yes I know there are regional differences in how food is made that is my whole point. I’m saying there is difference in quality between the two countries, but that has no link to degradation of cornmeal which is what the op claimed, said “I did a study” and everyone just believed them when they quite literally cannot backup what they said.
How hard is it to keep your conjecture to yourself or just simply backup what you claimed?
People aren’t going to hold your hand. If you don’t believe it, go look it up and refute it.
That’s not how it works tho. If you make a claim, the responsibilities of evidence are on the person who made the claim.
Can’t back it up? Then it’s bullshit.
This is day 1 scientific method stuff, bud, it’s not about holding hands, it’s about whether you actually have any repeatable data to backup your claims. If you don’t, you probably shouldn’t be saying it as fact.
It is when your position is this
This is ignorant about how food works ( not food science, food in general), on top of the rest of your comment being condescending.
You aren’t going to get a response from that dude, so it is working like that. Be responsible for yourself.
Well no to be more accurate, the op was full of shit and couldn’t back it up when asked, thus what they said can be ignored. Like if we were in my lab, I would make you do laps for even bringing it up.
It’s a good thing you aren’t in charge, with brain-dead takes like “I’m going to need primary sources on food quality in correlates positively to food quality out”