View Single Post
  #47 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 05-09-2006, 02:56 AM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
[email protected] dh@. is offline
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,652
Default "collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]"

On 2 Sep 2006 11:54:16 -0700, "pearl" wrote:

[email protected] wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 11:36:17 +0100, "pearl" wrote:

[email protected] wrote in message ...
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 10:15:56 +0100, "pearl" wrote:

[email protected] wrote in message ...
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:02:46 +0100, "pearl" wrote:

[email protected] wrote in message ...
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:13:25 +0100, brother wrote:

wrote:
__________________________________________________ __________
From: diderot
Subject: collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:21:44 EDT
Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animal s,rec.food.veg
Message-ID:


This is seven year old uncorroborated hearsay

It's first hand observation from a rice farmer.

"There is an "article" circulating on the Internet that describes how
thousands of frogs and other animals are killed in the mechanized
harvesting of grain crops. This "collateral animal deaths" story is an
elaborate hoax. The author, a "Texas organic rice farmer" is a gifted
writer, but he should use his talents elsewhere.

The author's numbers describe a plague of frogs of biblical
proportions. However, it is questionable if he has even been on a rice
farm. The major point that our author has missed is that rice fields
are harvested dry. The irrigation water is drained, and the ground is
left to dry before the harvesters go out in the field (otherwise, they'd
sink in the mud). There just aren't that many amphibians in the field.

Those who can't survive the dried environment would already
be dead,

Why would any amphibians that might be in the fields stick around
as the fields dry, and not go with or follow the water when drained?

I feel confident the main reason is also a reason why humans
get caught in floods: Because they don't know what's happening.
Also frogs who are on land and tree frogs who are on rice stalks
when the water goes out, obviously can't go with it. Even you
should have been able to figure that one out. Then there are
the creatures who are in deep parts of the water when the
draining occurs, so they are trapped in puddles and pools
afterward. And there're no doubt some who move along with the
water when it begins to recede even though they have no clue
what's going on, but get stopped by rocks, sticks, rice stalks,
mounds of mud etc so they don't go all the way with it. Those
are SOME of the reasons, and undoubtedly there are more.

That is all really absolute nonsense. Frogs are as mobile as the
next creature. Any there could easily move on as the fields dry.


How would they know what was happening? How would they
know where the water went? How far would they have to travel
in order to get to it? What would keep them from getting killed
by predators IF they hopped along trying to get there? What
would keep them from dehydrating even IF they did know where
to go, tried to get there, and didn't get killed by predators?


Hypothetical frogs are capable of anything, doncha know.


Not long ago you acted like you understood there are
frogs in rice fields, even commenting on them trying to get
people to believe that: "Any there could easily move on as the
fields dry." Back when you understood that there are frogs in
rice fields, can you remember how you thought they got there?

yes, but diderot led me to believe that most of them were
tree frogs who could survive in the stalks until the harverster came
along.

Where did all these frogs come from, after supposedly being
slaughtered year in, year out?

diderot was nice enough to exchange some emails with me,

I bet! - you're a ready sucker,


LOL! That coming from someone who believes there are
superior beings living in the center of the Earth is pretty
damn funny.


I've plenty of reason to believe that.


Like what?

You dis-believe without reason.


I have good reason. If it were true, I have good reason to believe
people in general would have learned about it because research
teams would have found the entrances, gone in, studied it, made
videos, and made money by presenting what they learned to the
public like they do with other things of interest.

and an unabashed propagandist.

and that was a question I asked him about. He said the water
they use to flood the fields comes from rivers and/or creeks
which have frogs etc living in them already. So they come from
upstream.

Why would they move from their established habitat? Some frogs
live near rivers or creeks, but they don't actually live -in- the water
of moving rivers and creeks, nor do they spawn in moving water.
Why don't you do a little research?


I'll just ask you what you asked me: where do they come from?
IF you think they don't get killed when the fields dry, but still think
they "easily move on as the fields dry", they're still GONE. So again,
where do you think they come from?


I don't think that 'they' are there!


But you did last week. Why did you think so last week but not
this week, have you any idea?

You can't answer that one. At "best" all you can do is hurl insults
and sulk away from it.


You haven't answered the question.


Which one?

And if his claims were true, a
seasonal wholesale slaughter of frogs would be well-documented.


Who would document it? Why?


Amphibian watchers, .. agricultural sites, .. ecological sites..


So you're saying there are no cds involved with any crop production,
and if there were it would be well documented and posted on
agricultural and ecological sites? Or are you trying to get us to believe
that's only true in the case of rice for some reason(s)?

If diderot exagerated, it was to make people aware of the
deaths caused by rice production.

diderot told wholesale porkies in order to try to blur the line
between deaths in crop production and in the livestock industry.

diderot told people about cds that you "aras" obviously
could not care less about, and in fact do NOT want people
to be aware of. Disgusting!!!

diderot told people lies about cds. And you swallowed it whole.


Animals are killed in rice production, and you disgustingly want
people to believe otherwise.


You claim they are, and without any evidence to substantiate those
outlandish claims, you disgustingly want people to believe it's fact.


As I said, I have seen grasshoppers etc hopping all over the
bush hog I've mowed with. If there were frogs as well they would
be doing the same. Rice harvesters being of different design
would allow for less hopping on the equipmet and make for more
going through it. I have presented pictures of frogs in rice fields:

http://tinyurl.com/z5fky
http://tinyurl.com/gkdzo
http://tinyurl.com/zxf82
http://tinyurl.com/goh3f

This animal is even called a Rice Frog:

http://tinyurl.com/jcr2v

so is this one:

http://tinyurl.com/hzl4v

and this one:

http://tinyurl.com/gh7cn

This one is called a Rice Paddy Frog:

http://tinyurl.com/h49cy

yet you absurdly, stupidly and either ignorantly or dishonestly
now claim that there are no frogs in rice production. How
could I possibly believe your insane sounding claim that there
are no cds in rice production or it would be well-documented
and presented on web sites, when ALL evidence shows that
you have amazingly somehow recently become totally ignorant
about the existence of frogs in rice fields, or more likely you
are being deliberately and contemptibly dishonest about this
whole thing?