On 05/03/2012 20:45, George Plimpton wrote:
> On 3/5/2012 11:16 AM, Glen wrote:
>> On 05/03/2012 17:49, George Plimpton wrote:
>>> On 3/5/2012 9:36 AM, Glen wrote:
>>>> On 05/03/2012 15:42, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>>> On 3/4/2012 9:43 PM, Rupert wrote:
>>>> snip
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't believe that I have any way of knowing how the number of
>>>>>> premature deaths caused per calorically equivalent serving of tofu
>>>>>> compares with that for grass-fed beef or wild-caught fish.
>>>>>
>>>>> You know, intuitively and based on plausibility, that raising the
>>>>> vegetable crops you would have to substitute in order to get equivalent
>>>>> nutrition causes multiple CDs,and that 100% grass-fed beef or
>>>>> wild-caught fish causes none.
>>>>
>>>> Eating meat causes the death of animals.
>>>
>>> Cultivating, harvesting and distributing vegetables and fruits causes
>>> the deaths of animals, too.
>>
>> That isn't true.
>
> It *is* true.

No it isn't. Not in every case. It's a plausible effect but it isn't a
certain fact that vegetarian food causes animal deaths. You want
to make it a fact to make your guilt go away.

>> It /may/ cause some deaths
>
> It does.

No it doesn't. Evidence please.

>> but it isn't a fact that it *WILL* cause them.
>
> It is a fact.

It's *your* fact. A /fact/ that needs evidence to support it.

>Of course, you have made *no* effort to verify.

It's your claim and you haven't supported it with evidence.
Do your own work and don't blame anyone but yourself when
you come back empty handed.
>
>> Eating meat *WILL* cause them.
>
> As many?

Numbers are irrelevant. Kill one man and you're a murderer.
Kill a whole battalion and you're a hero. Kill every man and
you're a god.

>You haven't attempted to verify that, either.

I have no need to verify your irrelevancies. You do.

>>>> There's no getting away
>>>> from that fact until you stop eating meat and go vegan.
>>>
>>> "Going 'vegan'" doesn't mean causing no deaths of animals.
>>
>> It will mean causing no deaths to farm animals. That's a fact.
>
> So, it's ethical for the food you eat to cause countless deaths of small
> field animals, but not ethical to slaughter meat animals? How could
> that be?

Intent. Look it up.

>>>> There's only a small chance that animals were killed to produce my food.
>>>
>>> There is a 100% certainty that animals were harmed, including being
>>> killed, in order to produce your food.
>>
>> No. I don't believe you.
>
> You just don't *want* to believe it.

I know as a fact that no animals were killed or harmed in
order to produce the vegetarian meal I ate this evening. I
also know as a fact that at least one animal was harmed and
killed mercilessly to produce the rotting corpse you ate today.


Pretty interesting - Woopert has
> been arguing for years that "vegans" are fully aware that animals are
> slaughtered in the course of producing vegetables, as a matter of
> course, and here you are to prove him wrong.
>
I don't deny that some animals are occasionally killed to produce
vegetables and fruit. What I reject is your claim that all vegetable
production causes it. I don't deny that some people are occasionally
killed in road incidents. What I would reject would be the claim that
all road trips kill people.
>
>> You're only saying that because you
>> want me to feel as guilty as you obviously do about the cruelty
>> and death on your plate.
>
> No, I don't want you to feel guilty about that at all. What I want is
> for you to abandon the disgusting pretense that you pursue a "cruelty
> free 'lifestyle'."

But it *IS* cruelty free on my part. If any animals are killed they
aren't killed because of my cruelty. You can't say the same.


"veganism is all about sanctimonious
> self-congratulation, and that alone makes it loathsome and immoral.

I do congratulate myself for having the strength to stand by my
convictions if that's what you mean. Yes. Meat eating is all about
greed and not having the strength to admit it, and that alone makes
it loathsome and immoral.

>
>>>> You don't want to acknowledge the huge difference between fact
>>>
>>> You have presented no "fact" that warrants any examination.
>>
>> It's a fact that eating meat causes the death of animals. It's not
>> a fact that eating vegetables and fruit causes the death of animals.
>
> It *is* a fact that farming vegetables and fruit causes the death of
> animals.

Then it should be easy for you to present your evidence to support
this /fact/ shouldn't it. I'm not just going to take your word on it. I
want facts supported by evidence.

> By the way, "eating" meat doesn't cause any deaths of animals - the meat
> is already dead.

You killed it. You want to pretend you didn't because your guilt
would suffocating you if you admitted it. You live in a delusion.

>>>> and plausibility because you want to make vegans feel as guilty
>>>> as you do for all the pain, misery and death on your plate.
>>>
>>> No
>>
>> Yes. I've seen this argument before from corpse eaters trying to
>> defend their cruelty by saying, "We're all killers, so leave me alone."
>
> I'm not trying to defend anything, although I can. What I'm doing is
> showing that your position is repulsive because it is a lie.

No but yours is. You don't believe you're responsible for the deaths
you cause and yet you want vegans to believe they're responsible
for the deaths they don't cause. Your position is repulsive because
it's a lie.

>> The deaths you cause are a necessary fact and unavoidable. The
>> deaths I /might/ cause are, by your own word, only "plausible" and
>> not a fact at all.
>
> No, the deaths you cause are a fact.

Evidence. You need evidence to support a fact. If you don't produce
evidence to support it I cannot accept it as fact.

>When I have written of
> plausibility, I have meant that it is plausible that a carefully chosen
> meat-including diet causes fewer deaths than the typical, and perhaps
> even *every*, "vegan" diet.

I know what you wrote, and that wasn't it.

>> If driving my car always caused misery and death I wouldn't
>> drive.
>
> Driving your car *does* always cause misery and death, but you keep
> right on driving. Or, does the carbon emitted from *your* car somehow
> not contribute to global warming, which is killing polar bears this very
> minute?

I don't believe that. You obviously do. So how does it feel to be
a murderer George? Why are you still emitting carbon while under
the understanding that it kills animals and no doubt people?

>
>> If driving my car held only the plausible chance of misery
>> and death, like it does, I would still drive.
>
> Driving your car causes misery and death. You simply close your eyes to
> it. You're a filthy hypocrite.

You're a murderer. Admit that you're a murderer. Denounce human
rights from the highest rooftop, you filthy hypocrite.