Larry Fruity wrote:

> "Dutch" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>His main objection to Davis's study is the way he compares deaths per ha,
>>rather than deaths per pound of food. He makes a lot of hay on this point,
>>the rest of the discussion is mostly window dressing. Well, pounds of food
>>is not an accurate comparison, ...
>
> True, however an accurate and honest metric of CD's resulting from any
> agricultural system would be to compare the TOTAL animal biomass killed or
> displaced from the same area of virgin ecosystem through its transformation
> into "food" production.

No. You've said this repeatedly, and it simply isn't
so. In fact, it's idiotic and absurd.

The issue of whether or not it's wrong cause CDs has
nothing to do with "biomass", a term you don't even
understand. The issue of whether or not it's wrong to
cause CDs has to do with LIVES, irrespective of the
"biomass" (scoff) of the animals represented in those
lives.

If someone thinks it's wrong to kill animals, then
killing 10 prairie dogs is worse than killing one elk,
even though the elk has hundreds of times the "biomass"
of the 10 prairie dogs.

You're an idiot.