On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:29:08 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:

><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>> On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 20:47:29 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:
>>
>> ><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>> >> On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 21:59:00 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> ><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>> >> >> On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 13:19:29 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>> >> >> >> On 2 Sep 2006 11:47:30 -0700, "pearl" > wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> ><dh@.> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> .. .
>> >> >> >> >> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 10:50:33 +0100, "pearl" > wrote:
>> >> >> ><..>
>> >> >> >> >> >"Regrettably, there probably are some small animal deaths. However,
>> >> >> >> >> >the number of deaths in a mile of rice harvesting pales in comparison to
>> >> >> >> >> >the road kill on a mile of highway.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> That's an obvious lie, and anyone who's aware that animals don't
>> >> >> >> >> live on asphalt should be able to understand why.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Where's the obvious lie? Animals traverse highways, and numerous
>> >> >> >> >vehicles are constantly speeding along them.., but animals can easily
>> >> >> >> >move out of the way of slow machinery making one pass in the field.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Even if somehow, incredibly, no animals were killed by harvesters:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> http://tinyurl.com/gcpzk
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> the environment they had depended on for shelter from predators is
>> >> >> >> removed and predators kill them because they have nowhere left
>> >> >> >> to hide.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Where are all 'these' frogs coming from, dh@?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Upstream.
>> >> >
>> >> >Yeah... like in Texas flowing streams are swarming with frogs .. Rotfl!
>> >>
>> >> Some are.
>> >
>> >There may be quite a few along the banks, and in stiller, shallow water..
>>
>> They might be bumping into each other in Texas. You don't know.
>>
>> >> Here's something else you can't comprehend: there are
>> >> sometimes tadpoles too. Something else you won't be able to grasp:
>> >> there is often still water behind the flood gates where eggs are laid
>> >> and tadpoles hatch and live, and when the gate is opened the eggs
>> >> and tadpoles are swept along with the water.
>> >
>> >Sure.. there are hundreds of thousands of eggs and tadpoles -right there-.
>>
>> I'm not clinging to any number like you appear to be. A significant
>> amount is what I get from diderot's account, and I don't really care
>> what the actual estimated number are.
>
>That 'significant amount' was hundreds of thousands per hectare.
>
>> >(Describe these 'flood gates', dh@. How do they operate exactly?)
>
>No?

When closed they keep water from entering the fields. When
open they allow it to flow in.

>> >And, sadly for you, frogspawn and young tadpoles cling to plants:
>>
>> Sometimes to things that float, or get washed loose by current.
>
>Evidence?

Personal observation of things washed loose and moved by water
currents.

>> . . .
>> >> >> Since you don't believe there are a significant number of cds involved
>> >> >> with crop production, which deaths do you think you're referring to, have
>> >> >> you any idea?
>> >> >
>> >> >Of course.
>> >>
>> >> Which ones?
>> >
>> >The billions of livestock killed;
>>
>> They should all be provided with decent lives and humane deaths,
>> and then it would be okay.
>
>No. Even if that happened, it would *not* be ok.

Yes it would, and when it happens now it's okay already.

>> >the wildlife directly slaughtered as 'predators', 'competitors', and 'pests';
>>
>> They need to go anyway, livestock or not.
>
>'They' being wildlife.

'predators', 'competitors', and 'pests'

>> >the collateral deaths in 30 million hectares of feed..
>>
>> If we don't have to worry about deaths in rice fields, we sure don't
>> have to worry any about that.
>
>That's 30 million hectares (in the US) that needn't be farmed.

But according to your argument about deaths in rice fields, we
need not worry about it when it is. Good enough.