On 3/4/2012 9:10 PM, Rupert wrote:
> On Mar 5, 6:08 am, George > wrote:
>> On 3/4/2012 8:55 PM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 5, 5:48 am, George > wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>
>>> So when I say "You're a fool" and you say "Concession noted and
>>> accepted", I don't really believe that you appear to have lost touch
>>> with reality?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>
>>> You reckon?
>>
>> Guaranteed.
>
> How do you know?

I have lots of experience with your insincerity and time-wasting efforts.