View Single Post
  #41 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,alt.food.vegan,alt.food.vegan.science
George Plimpton George Plimpton is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,258
Default The 'vegan' shuffle

On 3/4/2012 8:27 PM, Rupert wrote:
> On Mar 5, 4:40 am, George > wrote:
>> On 3/4/2012 12:10 PM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 4 Mrz., 18:05, George > wrote:
>>>> On 3/4/2012 4:29 AM, Rupert wrote:

>>
>>>>> On 3 Mrz., 19:18, George > wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/3/2012 4:00 AM, Rupert wrote:

>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 3, 6:37 am, George > wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/2/2012 8:25 PM, Rupert wrote:

>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 2, 8:06 pm, George > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/2/2012 10:38 AM, Rupert wrote:

>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2 Mrz., 19:33, George > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/2/2012 9:35 AM, Rupert wrote:

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2 Mrz., 16:43, George > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/2/2012 3:43 AM, Rupert wrote:

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1 Mrz., 23:46, dh@. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 10:36:50 -0800, Goo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "veganism" is not a reliable means

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> · Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What they try to avoid are products which provide life
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to avoid the following items containing animal by-products
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in order to be successful:

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tires, paper, upholstery, floor waxes, glass, water
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> filters, rubber, fertilizer, antifreeze, ceramics, insecticides,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> insulation, linoleum, plastic, textiles, blood factors, collagen,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heparin, insulin, solvents, biodegradable detergents, herbicides,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gelatin capsules, adhesive tape, laminated wood products,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plywood, paneling, wallpaper and wallpaper paste, cellophane
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrap and tape, abrasives, steel ball bearings

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The meat industry provides life for the animals that it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as animals do in other habitats. They also depend on it for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animal products from animals they think are raised in decent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future. People who want to contribute to decent lives for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> livestock with their lifestyle must do it by being conscientious
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consumers of animal products, because they can not do it by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being vegan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> derived from grass raised animals.

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You keep on making this claim over and over again, just as you have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for at least six years, but when challenged to provide actual evidence
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for it you are unable to provide any.

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ****wit doesn't have any evidence, of course, but for certain there is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strong logical case to be made. What do you think the number of deaths
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> caused raising one grass-fed steer might be? How many deaths can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plausibly be attributed to the farming of one hectare of rice in a wet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paddy?

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't have any idea about the answers to either of those questions,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I was talking about soya-based products, not rice.

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But you certainly ought to be able to think in terms of what's plausible
>>>>>>>>>>>> and seems to make sense, can't you? Oh, wait - maybe not.

>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't really have any feel for what's "plausible" or "seems to make
>>>>>>>>>>> sense" in this area.

>>
>>>>>>>>>> That's obviously a lie, but even telling it shows that you don't care to
>>>>>>>>>> know.

>>
>>>>>>>>> I would be interested in knowing if I thought that it was feasible to
>>>>>>>>> find out.

>>
>>>>>>>> You don't care about the feasibility of finding out. You don't care
>>>>>>>> about knowing the answer, period.

>>
>>>>>>> False.

>>
>>>>>> Nope - true.

>>
>>>>>>>> You don't care to know *which*
>>>>>>>> "vegan" diet is the least-harm diet, so that you might really validly
>>>>>>>> claim to be "minimizing". You don't care about any of it. You just
>>>>>>>> want to pat yourself on the back and act superior.

>>
>>>>>>> You're a fool.

>>
>>>>>> Concession noted and accepted.

>>
>>>>> You appear to have lost touch with reality.

>>
>>>> Not in the least, and you don't believe that anyway. It's just the
>>>> sort of childish whining to which you've been reduced.

>>
>>> I see.

>>
>> We all see it.
>>

>
> You have all sorts of very interesting insights


These aren't exceptionally interesting, but they're still accurate.


>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you have some idea, then why don't you tell me how you arrived at
>>>>>>>>>>> this idea.

>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have done. I have elaborated that the production of any vegetable
>>>>>>>>>> crop plausibly causes many animal CDs, and the production of one 100%
>>>>>>>>>> grass-fed steer plausibly causes no CDs.

>>
>>>>>>>>> So how does that help me to arrive at a conclusion about the matter?

>>
>>>>>>>> Easily: if you want to follow a positively lower CD diet than
>>>>>>>> "veganism", eat grass fed beef plus some fruits and vegetables you pick
>>>>>>>> from wild plants or cultivate yourself in your home garden.

>>
>>>>>>> It does not follow from what you said above that this diet would
>>>>>>> involve less suffering and premature death.

>>
>>>>>> It does.

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now I get the pleasure once again of telling you what you do and don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe, because I know: you do not believe that the rice causes fewer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CDs than the beef.

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, I don't. I lack a belief one way or the other, because I have no
>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence one way or the other.

>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No, that's false. You do not lack any belief one way or another. We
>>>>>>>>>>>> know this because you have already said you know that vegetable
>>>>>>>>>>>> agriculture kills animals. You have *some* sense as to what might be a
>>>>>>>>>>>> plausible number of animals killed for different types of agriculture.

>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Not enough to know how to compare calorically equivalent servings of
>>>>>>>>>>> rice and grass-fed beef.

>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bullshit. As previously established, a 100 gram serving of rice - or
>>>>>>>>>> soybeans or whatever - carries the weight of many animal CDs,

>>
>>>>>>>>> How many? Give me a range.

>>
>>>>>>>> According to diderot, many thousands.

>>
>>>>>>> So many tens of CDs per gram of rice?

>>
>>>>>>>>>> versus
>>>>>>>>>> *no* CDs for a 100 gram serving of 100% grass-fed beef. You can do the
>>>>>>>>>> comparison.

>>
>>>>>>>>> No I can't, I have no ranges of numbers on the basis of which to make
>>>>>>>>> the comparison.

>>
>>>>>>>> You *know* that plausibly, the steer causes no CDs, and the vegetable
>>>>>>>> products cause many.

>>
>>>>>>> "Many" doesn't mean anything. Specify a number range.

>>
>>>>>> All you need to know is that it exceeds the expected value of CDs for a
>>>>>> nutritionally equivalent amount of grass-fed beef or wild-caught fish.

>>
>>>>> And how exactly do I know that?

>>
>>>> Cut it out, woopee. Just cut the shit, now.

>>
>>> It would appear that you do not wish to answer my question.

>>
>> It's an insincere and time-wasting question.

>
> So you appear to believe.


Because it is.