|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 12, 2020 15:36:25 GMT
That is still no argument against eating meat, just saying. No, I don't expect you to provide one, but I will be here if you try. Any discerning reader would have seen that my initial post wasn't taking a side in the debate, but rather pointing out how you try to side-step the ground where the real battle is taking place. There's a lot of that going around.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2020 15:44:36 GMT
Pardon me going slightly off topic, but I am opposed to euthanizing humans. That is not because I doubt the technology exists, but because I doubt a good reason exists for strangers to participate in such things. If a person truly wants to commit suicide, I would rather they do not ask for my participation. You have a point, it is difficult to know how much suffering there might be. I maintain that there are people who are mindful of that and try to reduce suffering to a minimum. You realize animals die anyway eventually? Back up a step. How is anybody manufacturing meat products keeping humans alive? They are making a financial profit, and wasting the nutritional value of crops.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 12, 2020 15:52:31 GMT
Pardon me going slightly off topic, but I am opposed to euthanizing humans. That is not because I doubt the technology exists, but because I doubt a good reason exists for strangers to participate in such things. If a person truly wants to commit suicide, I would rather they do not ask for my participation. You have a point, it is difficult to know how much suffering there might be. I maintain that there are people who are mindful of that and try to reduce suffering to a minimum. You realize animals die anyway eventually? Back up a step. How is anybody manufacturing meat products keeping humans alive? They are making a profit, and wasting the nutritional value of crops. Not all people have the same dietary needs. Simply because you can survive without meat (?) does not mean all other people can maintain good health without meat (See OP). There are many people placed on diets that include meat by medical professionals. Maybe they do not need to include meat, but I would not interfere. You would?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2020 15:55:34 GMT
Back up a step. How is anybody manufacturing meat products keeping humans alive? They are making a profit, and wasting the nutritional value of crops. Not all people have the same dietary needs. Simply because you can survive without meat (?) does not mean all other people can maintain good health without meat (See OP). There are many people placed on diets that include meat by medical professionals. Maybe they do not need to include meat, but I would not interfere. You would? Yes, you can maintain perfectly good health without meat. What are these medical conditions you speak of... Lycanthropy? Vampirism?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 12, 2020 16:04:28 GMT
Not all people have the same dietary needs. Simply because you can survive without meat (?) does not mean all other people can maintain good health without meat (See OP). There are many people placed on diets that include meat by medical professionals. Maybe they do not need to include meat, but I would not interfere. You would? Yes, you can maintain perfectly good health without meat. What are these medical conditions you speak of... Lycanthropy? Vampirism? I'm sorry I cannot answer that myself. I can only point to other claims. I cannot verify those myself. You might find this interesting. I find some of those claims suspicious, but here is the deal, until I know for certain those people are wrong I will let them eat what they want. Again, you wouldn't?
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jan 12, 2020 16:17:32 GMT
I'm vegan. Meat, dairy, and eggs, is pain, suffering, and death. I am strongly morally opposed to it. Here, watch this, if you can... < video [2 hours!] > Simply because you cannot hear the screams of the little baby rice doesn't mean they don't suffer.
I understand some animals for human consumption operations are inconsiderate of the "happiness" and well being of their animals, and I am strongly and morally opposed to that. There are however well trained people keeping humans alive with food animals. When you post a 2 hour video, maybe include a brief synopsis so people can decide whether to spend their precious data on it, please and thank you. Seriously? Anthropomorphizing rice, that cannot scream because it has no central nervous system to register pain, and no lungs or vocal chords to scream with?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2020 16:17:43 GMT
Yes, you can maintain perfectly good health without meat. What are these medical conditions you speak of... Lycanthropy? Vampirism? I'm sorry I cannot answer that myself. I can only point to other claims. I cannot verify those myself. You might find this interesting. I find some of those claims suspicious, but here is the deal, until I know for certain those people are wrong I will let them eat what they want. Again, you wouldn't? I do let people eat what they want 🤷♀️ I'm happy to engage with people, to explain my moral, spiritual, and scientific reasons for choosing to live compassionately and with kindness. I find that very effective with the amount of my friends, family, and neighbours, who now make more ethical choices with what they eat, wear, etc. They ask, I tell... I'm not stopping them doing anything. I just give them facts and food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 12, 2020 16:23:57 GMT
I'm sorry I cannot answer that myself. I can only point to other claims. I cannot verify those myself. You might find this interesting. I find some of those claims suspicious, but here is the deal, until I know for certain those people are wrong I will let them eat what they want. Again, you wouldn't? I do let people eat what they want 🤷♀️ I'm happy to engage with people, to explain my moral, spiritual, and scientific reasons for choosing to live compassionately and with kindness. I find that very effective with the amount of my friends, family, and neighbours, who now make more ethical choices with what they eat, wear, etc. They ask, I tell... I'm not stopping them doing anything. I just give them facts and food for thought. I'm sorry I still doubt your ability to give comprehensive dietary advice.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 12, 2020 16:23:59 GMT
I'm sorry I cannot answer that myself. I can only point to other claims. I cannot verify those myself. You might find this interesting. I find some of those claims suspicious, but here is the deal, until I know for certain those people are wrong I will let them eat what they want. Again, you wouldn't? I do let people eat what they want 🤷♀️ I'm happy to engage with people, to explain my moral, spiritual, and scientific reasons for choosing to live compassionately and with kindness. I find that very effective with the amount of my friends, family, and neighbours, who now make more ethical choices with what they eat, wear, etc. They ask, I tell... I'm not stopping them doing anything. I just give them facts and food for thought. If the strongest argument for meat is the very few people with a genuine medical need, how would you feel about making those people an exception to the general prohibition, making meat available by prescription only? That would probably reduce production by 99.5%.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2020 16:27:14 GMT
I do let people eat what they want 🤷♀️ I'm happy to engage with people, to explain my moral, spiritual, and scientific reasons for choosing to live compassionately and with kindness. I find that very effective with the amount of my friends, family, and neighbours, who now make more ethical choices with what they eat, wear, etc. They ask, I tell... I'm not stopping them doing anything. I just give them facts and food for thought. If the strongest argument for meat is the very few people with a genuine medical need, how would you feel about making those people an exception to the general prohibition, making meat available by prescription only? That would probably reduce production by 99.5%. What genuine medical need? There is no nutritional need you cannot get from plants.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 12, 2020 16:28:25 GMT
Simply because you cannot hear the screams of the little baby rice doesn't mean they don't suffer.
I understand some animals for human consumption operations are inconsiderate of the "happiness" and well being of their animals, and I am strongly and morally opposed to that. There are however well trained people keeping humans alive with food animals. When you post a 2 hour video, maybe include a brief synopsis so people can decide whether to spend their precious data on it, please and thank you. Seriously? Anthropomorphizing rice, that cannot scream because it has no central nervous system to register pain, and no lungs or vocal chords to scream with? In case you missed it. Plus there are the carnivorous plants, image provided.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 12, 2020 16:38:18 GMT
I do let people eat what they want 🤷♀️ I'm happy to engage with people, to explain my moral, spiritual, and scientific reasons for choosing to live compassionately and with kindness. I find that very effective with the amount of my friends, family, and neighbours, who now make more ethical choices with what they eat, wear, etc. They ask, I tell... I'm not stopping them doing anything. I just give them facts and food for thought. If the strongest argument for meat is the very few people with a genuine medical need, how would you feel about making those people an exception to the general prohibition, making meat available by prescription only? That would probably reduce production by 99.5%. Before I make any argument for eating meat, I think it is essential to note that you have utterly failed to make any argument against eating meat. You have not shown that animals suffer more in the slaughterhouse than they would dying in the field. You have not shown plants suffer less (granted that would be difficult even if true). You have not shown any environmental impact. Although various medical conditions are loosely associated with some diets containing meat, it is rather the excess that is the problem, not the type. I think people depending on the force of government is terribly out of hand. They can't win the debate and turn to force. Before you do that try to prove your idea is any better.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Jan 12, 2020 16:42:02 GMT
Yes, some of them are actually carnivores!!!! Truth Be Told
|
|
senan90
Junior Member
@senan90
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 546
|
Post by senan90 on Jan 12, 2020 17:33:36 GMT
No thanks. But I'd rather watch this instead. Off topic. This thread has nothing to do with the Irish War of Independence. It is relevant. You stated that Meat, dairy, and eggs, is pain, suffering, and death, and you are strongly morally opposed to it. I’m all of the above to your unapologetic support for terrorism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2020 17:36:02 GMT
Off topic. This thread has nothing to do with the Irish War of Independence. It is relevant. You stated that Meat, dairy, and eggs, is pain, suffering, and death, and you are strongly morally opposed to it. I’m all of the above to your unapologetic support for terrorism. Not biting. You're off topic. Go fishing elsewhere.
|
|
senan90
Junior Member
@senan90
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 546
|
Post by senan90 on Jan 12, 2020 17:56:39 GMT
It is relevant. You stated that Meat, dairy, and eggs, is pain, suffering, and death, and you are strongly morally opposed to it. I’m all of the above to your unapologetic support for terrorism. Not biting. You're off topic. Go fishing elsewhere. It’s you who makes provocative statements, and gets irate when someone calls you out on it. People have no problem eating meat and dairy products et el. Why? Because it’s healthier than veganism. That’s a fact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2020 18:06:00 GMT
Not biting. You're off topic. Go fishing elsewhere. It’s you who makes provocative statements, and gets irate when someone calls you out on it. People have no problem eating meat and dairy products et el. Why? Because it’s healthier than veganism. That’s a fact. People have lots of problems eating meat, dairy, and chickens' periods... Cancer, heart disease, cognitive dissonance, etc. Are you a baby cow? No... Then you clearly don't need their mothers' milk... You are a human, and you were weaned off your mother's breast milk because you didn't need it anymore. You have no need to steal the milk of another species babies... Except that you haven't overcome a bizarre maternal attachment. You are clearly a selfish individual, devoid of compassion. Which is your loss.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 12, 2020 18:20:32 GMT
And THAT could well prove to be the most colossally idiotic statement seen on this board the entire year, and it's only January.
P.S. The only way that scientific advances have been utilized to benefit society has been when non-scientists (people in positions of power) have pointed to the work of scientists.
That is still no argument against eating meat, just saying. No, I don't expect you to provide one, but I will be here if you try. Meat and other animal products are responsible for more than half of food-related greenhouse gas emissions, despite providing only a fifth of the calories we eat and drink. Agriculture is responsible for an estimated 14 percent of the world's greenhouse gases. A significant portion of these emissions come from methane, which, in terms of its contribution to global warming, is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. The U.S. Food and Agriculture Organization says that agricultural methane output could increase by 60 percent by 2030 [Source: Times Online]. The world's 1.5 billion cows and billions of other grazing animals emit dozens of polluting gases, including lots of methane. Two-thirds of all ammonia comes from cows. Cows emit a massive amount of methane through belching, with a lesser amount through flatulence. Statistics vary regarding how much methane the average dairy cow expels. Some experts say 100 liters to 200 liters a day (or about 26 gallons to about 53 gallons), while others say it's up to 500 liters (about 132 gallons) a day. In any case, that's a lot of methane, an amount comparable to the pollution produced by a car in a day. I hope that helps. In some cases there is apparently no limit to how low someone can go. Also Arlon cannot meaningfully define 'science' or thereby a 'scientist', he has previously told us - so then how is he able to judge someone is not one?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 12, 2020 20:28:31 GMT
That is still no argument against eating meat, just saying. No, I don't expect you to provide one, but I will be here if you try. Meat and other animal products are responsible for more than half of food-related greenhouse gas emissions, despite providing only a fifth of the calories we eat and drink. Agriculture is responsible for an estimated 14 percent of the world's greenhouse gases. A significant portion of these emissions come from methane, which, in terms of its contribution to global warming, is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. The U.S. Food and Agriculture Organization says that agricultural methane output could increase by 60 percent by 2030 [Source: Times Online]. The world's 1.5 billion cows and billions of other grazing animals emit dozens of polluting gases, including lots of methane. Two-thirds of all ammonia comes from cows. Cows emit a massive amount of methane through belching, with a lesser amount through flatulence. Statistics vary regarding how much methane the average dairy cow expels. Some experts say 100 liters to 200 liters a day (or about 26 gallons to about 53 gallons), while others say it's up to 500 liters (about 132 gallons) a day. In any case, that's a lot of methane, an amount comparable to the pollution produced by a car in a day. I hope that helps. In some cases there is apparently no limit to how low someone can go. Also Arlon cannot meaningfully define 'science' or thereby a 'scientist', he has previously told us - so then how is he able to judge someone is not one? There is no realistic means to measure the temperature of the entire atmosphere of the "planet" to within 1.5 oC. If you believe there is then thank you for announcing you are not a scientist. It saves us much trouble. Statistical methods can be highly accurate on playing card, dice, and other highly artificial and limited scenarios. The planet is simply too large to expect meaningful results of such precision. Should a larger and measurable change in climate become apparent later, then I'll pay attention. I hope that helps.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 12, 2020 20:50:01 GMT
"What then might be the reason for eating only plants?"
Scarcity and cost of meat. Many people in third world nations eat almost nothing but rice and beans, meat is too expensive and takes much more land/resources to produce than plant based food. If the world population keeps increasing, that is most likely what is going to happen to meat in general (too many people demanding it, not enough land/resources to meet the demand, much cheaper to produce plant based food)
|
|