|
Posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food,alt.cooking-chat
|
|
|
What are the ethics regarding Fish Consumption?
"Dutch" > wrote in message
...
>
> "pearl" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Dutch" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "pearl" > wrote
>>> > "Dutch" > wrote
>>>
>>> [..]
>>>
>>> > To the point where you must unethically edit what your opponent
>>> > writes.
>>>
>>> I didn't edit anything,
>>
>> You snipped my sentences
>>
>>> I snipped away your irrelevant snarky comments
>>
>> You know all about snarky comments. What you sow is what you reap.
>
> I didn't change the meaning, I just removed the snarkiness. You should be
> thankful, if you're so concerned about being respectful.
>
>>> [..]
>>>
>>> >> >> The people who have wasted their time with you before have
>>> >> >> themselves
>>> >> >> to
>>> >> >> blame.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > That's right
>>
>> And you've done it again.
>
> As long as you insert snarkiness I'll remove it.
>
>>> >> I know.
>>> >
>>> > Get to it then.
>>>
>>> Give me your email address, I'll notify you when I decide I need someone
>>> to
>>> tell me how to run my life.
>>
>> What are you doing in these NGs?
>
> Like I just said, trying to get the message through that we don't need
> people like you telling us how to run our lives. If along the way the
> occasional person learns the futility of "veganism" all the better.
>
> [..]
>>>
>>>
>>> >> Not in his element, in a well-armed group. No predator attacks man or
>>> >> any
>>> >> other animal when they are well-defended.
>>> >
>>> > Ah... so 'in his element' means in a group armed to the teeth. LOL!
>>>
>>> Carrying spear, clubs, knives and operating in groups? Of course that is
>>> implied. That is the nature of hominid hunters.
>>
>> Your ''spears, clubs and knives" are not going to prevent you and your
>> mates
>> from being mauled and torn assunder. Go ahead and try it - I won't stop
>> you.
>
> Yes they would, you underestimate man. Predators don't attack groups of
> apes, especially not hominids with spears.
>
>>> > Were weapons originally developed for defensive purposes? Maybe.
>>>
>>> I am quite sure that both defensive and offensive uses were obvious
>>> right
>>> away.
>>
>> Defensive - yes; offensive - no.
>
> Don't be daft. The first hominds that used spears probably realized that
> they could use them to spear fish and and rodents.
>>
>>> [..]
>>> >> Accurate observation. You project your own self-loathing causing you
>>> >> to
>>> >> hold
>>> >> the rest of the human race in contempt.
>>> >
>>> > Rotfl! That's you, liar ditch. Still feeling good deluding yourself?
>>>
>>> You forget, I gave it up in favour of honesty.
>>
>> It is perfectly clear that you are still living in a land that reality
>> forgot.
>
> Are you daring me to post the list with the urls showing where you profess
> almost every crazy belief ever invented?
>
>>> [..]
>>>
>>> >> >> There's that "big-game" strawman again.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > You're the one claiming humans' endurance is because of hunting.
>>> >>
>>> >> Endurance is one of the qualities that aids hunting. The game does
>>> >> not
>>> >> have
>>> >> to be big.
>>> >
>>> > The non-human animal doesn't have to be big to leave you well behind.
>>>
>>> So hominids in your imaginary world were not successful hunters? You are
>>> going to rewrite human morality AND human history. Better get to work.
>>
>> I've done my work. Time for you to do yours.
>
> I did. The site I posted contained copious references.
>
>>> > Tell us which wild animals you can chase and catch, marathon man.
>>>
>>> What an idiotic comment.
>>
>> Evasion.
>
> It was an idiotic comment, I may be in a wheelchair for all you know. What
> the hell does that prove?
>
>
>>
>> [..]
>>>
>>> >> >> > Hominids were terrestrial frugivores.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Which hominids? What tribe, which period?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > ALL hominids.
>>> >>
>>> >> Good lord. Did they live in caverns under mountains? Were they
>>> >> descended
>>> >> from aliens?
>>> >
>>> > Relevance?
>>>
>>> The relevance is that you are attempting to rewrite nature, the history
>>> of
>>> man and reality itself to fit some bizarre ideal.
>>
>> Not me.
>
> Yes you. Wistfully trying to bend the past to conform to some "inspiring
> ethic" is not the way to look at history.
>
> [..]
>>>
>>> >> >> > That depended on weapons and tools; not biological adaptations.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> The ability to use weapons and tools is a biological adaptation,
>>> >> >> selection
>>> >> >> for intelligence, an adaptation you seem bent on reversing.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > 650,000 Iraqis killed since the beginning of your 'war', according
>>> >> > to a
>>> >> > new study, from your "ability to use weapons". How does that fit
>>> >> > into
>>> >> > your "biological adaptation" and "selection for intelligence"
>>> >> > scenario?
>>> >
>>> > Hello? Shall I try to answer this for you, dutch?
>>>
>>> No, war is not hunting and I have never supported the Iraq war.
>>> Vegetarians
>>> could have deadly conflicts with other humans without eating meat.
>>
>> Your claim is that devising 'better, new, improved' ways of killing
>> is a biological adaptation - selection for intelligence. So why not
>> 'advances' in the killing of other humans for whatever purpose?
>
> I answered it. War is not hunting, that's like saying that self-defense is
> the same as murder. Your preception of the world is warped.
>
> [..]
>>> > http://alh.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/17/4/818
>>>
>>> Interesting but full of misconceptions, for one thing she reveals her
>>> bias
>>> at the end, she is viewing a world though the lens of "an inspiring
>>> ethic"
>>> not through a desire for objective learning.
>>
>> Says biased dutch, who views the world through the lens of 'might makes
>> right',
>
> I never said that might makes right. Might made man safe, and successful,
> to a degree.
>
>> and ignores or spins away evidence that trashes his views as he has
>> no desire for objective learning.
>
> That's hilarious coming from you.
>
>>
>>> Also, to observe that animals
>>> who have never seen a man do not view him as a predator does not mean
>>> that
>>> there are no predators in nature for god's sake, it means that they do
>>> not
>>> see man as one. You think seals and sea birds are not predators? Do you
>>> think they are not themselves subject to predation? That's what I mean
>>> by
>>> attempting to rewrite reality to fit some ideal.
>>
>> Who is?
>
> whooooosh.........
>
> [..]
>
>>> Compare that to simply
>>> using an expletive like "for **** sakes" which does not insult anyone,
>>> which
>>> you intimated was unethical behaviour.
>>
>> The 'f' word is an obscenity.
>
> Why? While you're rewriting human morality why don't you remove harmless
> expletives.
>
> [..]
>> http://dictionary.reference.com/search?qinhuman
>>>
>>> Thanks for proving my point,
>>
>> How's that?
>
> You just demonstrated your utter disdain for the human race. Yet you
> shriek like a wounded cow at a harmless expletive.
>
>>> >> you believe you can rewrite history too.
>>> >
>>> > Who are you referring to above? When?
>>>
>>> The theme of your posting for years has been to rewrite reality to fit
>>> some
>>> strange brew of idealism and phantasy.
>>
>> Projection.
>
> Just observation.
>
>> Who were you referring to by 'hominids' in "Hominids hunted"?
>
> You want another word for them? Human ancestors.
>
> [..]
>
>>> Collecting shellfish is hunting,
>>
>> Which requires "Size, strength, endurance, hunting tactics,etc..etc..
>> all the biological adapations that made hominids successful hunters."?
>
> Not particularly, that seems obvious. Why do you ask? I may walk around
> the block with ease, that does not mean I can run a marathon, unless my
> life depended on it.
>
>>> fishing is hunting,
>
>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0223122209.htm
>
> So there is debate about early human behaviour, so what?
>
>>> scavenging is meat-eating.
>>
>> If you want to call bone marrow 'meat', and it's not *hunting*.
>
> So what?
>
>>> Large mammals are not the only kind of animal.
>>
>> Which smaller wild animals can you chase and catch, 'dutch'?
>
> I could snare an animal if my life depended on it, couldn't you?
>
>
>Enough already, you two are really boring. Go hire a hall somewhere - - -
>anywhere
|