 |
|
| Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal! |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
No need for farm animals.
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:24:22 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message >Then why did you ly, again? Lys seem to be the only things that you have to >post, eh killer? hehe, see how desparate they become when you just flood them with facts. I can just see the idiot, flustered, hammering away on his key-board so eager to send his lame comments that he doesn't even take the time to run the spell checker first. >Now, go have that nice blood-drenched dinner, hypocrite. No thanks, I leave that to you, meat-head. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:48:35 -0600, "Russ Thompson" >
wrote: >> I know, but someone did. Why don't you complain about him being >> irrational? > >*** I don't think it is helpful to complain about anyone being irrational. >When a person is being irrational it is pretty clear to all normal >reasonable people. I agree. That's why I point it out to you. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 20:09:43 GMT, Jonathan Ball
> wrote: >Jahnu wrote: >> Constitution? You forget I am from Europe. I couldn't care less about >> your constitution. > >Irrelevant, and truly a stupid, ****witted dodge. The >point is that stupid irrational "vegans" want to >overthrow the legitimate, lawful, constitutional >governments wherever they are, in order to impose their >benighted values on others. Not me. I just hate atheist meat-heads. >> Anyone who supports the mass slaughter of animals in the modern >> consumer culture must be completely devoid of any empathy towards >> other living entities. > >False. Repeating it, and using more words to do so, >will not make it true. Your claim is false. According to who? >No, you are not stating facts. You are venting your >spleen; nothing more. I am merely stating facts, that's all. And they don't become less facts by you denying it. >Yes, it is. It is a rational observation of you and >your social milieu. hahaha, says someone who grew up in a Mickey Mouse culture and elected a retard for president. Once again, just to hammer home the point: HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER The New York Times, Tuesday, June 20, 1989 The Hunger Argument Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 million. Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million Human beings in America: 243 million Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO Pounds of beef produced on an ac 165 Percentage of U.S. farmland devoted to beef production: 56 Pounds of grain and soybeans needed to produce a pound of beef: 16 The Environmental Argument Cause of global warming: greenhouse effect Primary cause of greenhouse effect: carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels needed to produce a meat-centered diet vs. a meat-free diet: 50 times more Percentage of U.S. topsoil lost to date: 75 Percentage of U.S. topsoil loss directly related to livestock raising: 85 Number of acres of U.S. forest cleared for cropland to produce meat-centered diet: 260 million Amount of meat U.S. imports annually from Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: 200 million pounds Average per capita meat consumption in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: less than eaten by average U.S. housecat. Area of tropical rainforest consumed in every 1/4 pound hamburger: 55 sq.ft. Current rate of species extinction due to destruction of tropical rainforests for meat grazing and other uses: 1.000 per year The Cancer Argument Increased risk of breast cancer for women who eat meat 4 times a week vs. less than once a week: 4 times For women who eat eggs daily vs. less than once a week: 3 times Increased risk of fatal ovarian cancer for women who eat eggs 3 or more times a week vs. less than once a week: 3 times Increased risk of fatal prostate cancer for men who eat meat daily vs. sparingly or not at all: 3.6 times The Natural Resources Argument Use of more than half of all water used for all purposes in the U.S.: livestock portion. Amount of water used in production of the average steer: sufficient to float a destroyer. Gallons to produce a pound of wheat: 25 Gallons to produce a pound of meat: 2.500 Cost of common hamburger if water used by meat industry was not subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer: 35 dollars a pound Current cost of pound of protein from beefsteak, if water was no longer subsidized: 89 dollars Years the world's known oil reserves would last if every human ate a meat-centered diet: 13 Years they would last if human beings no longer ate meat: 260 Barrels of oil imported into U.S. daily: 6.8 million Percentage of fossil fuel returned as food energy by most efficient factory farming of meat: 34.5 Percentage returned from least efficient plant food: 32.8 Percentage of raw materials consumed by U.S. to produce present meat-centered diet: 33 The Cholesterol Argument Number of U.S. medical schools: 125 Number requiring a course in nutrition: 30 Nutrition training received by average U.S. physician during four years in medical school: 25 hours Most common cause of death in U.S.: heart attack How frequently a heart attack kills in U.S.: every 45 seconds Average U.S. man's risk of death from heart attack: 50 perc. Risk for average U.S. man who avoids the meat-centered diet: 15 perc. Meat industry claims you should not be concerned about your blood cholesterol if it is: normal Your risk of dying of a disease caused by clogged arteries if your blood cholesterol is ?normal?: over 50 perc. The Antibiotic Argument Percentage of U.S. antibiotics fed to livestock: 55 Percentage of staphylococci infections resistant to penicillin in 1960: 13 Percentage resistant in 1988: 91 Response of European Economic Community to routine feeding of antibiotics to livestock: ban Response of U.S. meat and pharmaceutical industries to routine feeding of antibiotics to livestock: full and complete support The Pesticide Argument Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by grains: 1 Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by fruits: 4 Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet suppl. by dairy products: 23 Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by meat: 55 Pesticide contamination of breast milk from meat-eating mothers vs. non meat-eating: 35 times higher What USDA tells us: meat is inspected Percentage of slaughtered animals inspected for residues of toxin chemicals including dioxin and DDT: less than 0.00004 The Ethical Argument Number of animals killed for meat per hour in U.S.: 500.000 Occupation with highest turnover rate in U.S.: slaughterhouse worker Occupation with highest rate of on-the-job injury in U.S:slaughterhouse worker Cost to render animal unconscious with captive bolt pistol before slaughter.: 1 cent Reason given by meat industry for non using that pistol: too expensive The Survival Argument Athlete to win Ironman Triathlon more than twice: Dave Scott (6 time winner) Food choices of Dave Scott: Vegetarian Largest meat eater than ever lived: Tyrannosaurus Rex Last sighting of Tyrannosaurus Rex: 100.000.000 B.C. Famous pop stars - vegetarians: ------------------------------- Candice Bergen, David Bowie, Paul Mc Cartney, Darryl Hannah, Janet Jackson, k.d.lang, Sting 'I am a great eater of beef, and I believe that does harm to my wit.' --William Shakespeare "Twelfth Night," Act I, Scene 3 www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:15:31 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message >> The reason that they hang out in Vegan news groups and spew their BS >> is simply because they don't have anywhere else to vent all the anger >> and envy that come from their bad diet. >Hey loser, you too should check the headers. How many vegan groups do you >see there? As for diet, check the lists of people who live the longest, >they aren't dominated by vegans, killer. No, they are dominated by vegetarians, meat-head. "Can a vegetarian diet improve or restore health? Can it prevent certain diseases? Advocates of vegetarianism have said yes for many years, although they didin't have much support from modern science until recently. Now, medical researchers have discovered evidence of a link between meat-eating and such killers as heart disease and cancer, so they are giving vegetarianism another look. Since the 1960s, scientists have suspected that a meat based diet is somehow related to the development of arteriosclerosis and heart disease. As early as 1961, the Journal of the American Medical Association said: 'Ninety to ninety-seven percent of heart diseases can be prevented by a vegetarian diet.'1 Since that time, several well-organized studies have scientifically shown that after tobacco and alcohol, the consumption of meat is the greatest single cause pf mortality in Western Europe, The USA, Australia, and other affluent areas of the world.2 The human body is unable to deal with excessive amounts of animal fat and cholesterol.3 A poll of 214 scientists doing research on arteriosclerosis in 23 countries showed almost total agreement that there is a link between diet, serum cholesterol levels, and heart disease.4 When a person eats more cholesterol than the body needs (as he usual does with a meat-centered diet), the excess cholesterol gradually becomes a problem. It accumulates on the inner walls of the arteries, constricts the flow of blood to the heart, and can lead to high blood preassure, heart diseases, and strokes. On the other hand, scientists at the University of Milan and Maggiore Hospital have shown that vegetable protein may act to keep cholesterol levels low. In a report to the British medical journal 'The Lancet' D.C.R. Sirtori concluded that people with the type of high cholesterol associated with heart disease 'may benefit from a diet in which protein comes only from vegetables.'5 What about cancer? Research over the past twenty years strongly suggests a link between meat-eating and cancer of the colon, rectum, breast, and uterus. These types of cancer are rare among those who eat little or no meat, such as the Seventh-Day Adventists, Japanese, and Indians, but are prevalent among meat-eating populations.6 Another article in 'The Lancet' reported, 'People living in the areas with a high recorded incidence of carcinoma of the colon tend to live on diets containing large amounts of fat and animal protein; whereas those who live in areas with a low incidence live on largely vegetarian diets with little fat or animal matter.'7 Rollo Russell, in his 'Notes on the Causation of Cancer', says, 'I have found of 25 nations eating mostly flesh, 19 had a high cancer rate and only one had a low rate, and that of 35 nations eating little or no flesh, none had a high rate.'8 Why do meat-eaters seem more prone to these diseases? One reason given by biologists and nutritionists is that man's intestinal tract is simply not suited for digesting meat. Flesh-eating animals have short intestinal tracts (3 times the length of the animal's body), to quickly excrete rapidly decaying toxin-producing meat from the system. Since plant foods decay more slowly than meat, plant-eaters have intestines at least six times the length of the body. Man has the long intestinal tract of a herbivore, so if he eats meat, toxins can overload kidneys and lead to gout, arthritis, rheumatism, and even cancer. And then there are chemical added to meat. As soon as an animal is slaughtered its flesh begins to putrefy, and after several days it turns a sickly gray-green. The meat industry masks this discoloration by adding nitrites, nitrates, and other preservatives to give the meat a bright red color. But research has shown many of these preservatives to be carcinogenic.9 And what makes the problem worse is the massive amounts of chemicals fed to livestock. Gary and Steven Null, in their book, 'Poisons in your Body', show us something that ought to make anyone think twice before buying another steak or ham. 'The animals are kept alive and fattened by continuous administration of tranquilizers, hormones, antibiotics, and 2.700 other drugs. The process starts even before birth and continues long after death. Although these drugs will still be present in the meat when you eat it, the law does not require that they be listed on the package.'10 Because of findings like this, the American National Academy of Sciences reported in 1983 that, 'people may be able to prevent many common types of cancer by eating less fatty meats and more vegetables and grains.'11 But wait a minute! Weren't we human beings designed to be meat-eaters? Don't we need animal protein? The answer to both these questions is no. Although some historians and anthropologists say that man is historically omnivorous, our anatomical equipment - teeth, jaws, and digestive system - favors a fleshless diet. The American Dietetic Association notes that 'most of mankind for most of human history has lived on vegetarian or near-vegetarian diets.' And much of the world still lives that way. Even in most industrialized countries the love affair with meat is less than a hundred years old. It started with the refrigerator, car, and the 20th century consumer society. But even in the 20th century, man's body hasn't adapted to eating meat. The prominent Swedish scientist Karl von Linne states, 'Man's structure, external and internal, compared with that of the other animals, shows that fruit and succulent vegetables constitute his natural food.' (The chart I have posted several times compare the anatomy of man with that of carnivorous and herbivorous animals.) As for the protein question, Dr.Paavo Airola, a leading authority on nutrition and natural biology, has this to say: 'The official daily recommendation for protein has gone down from the 150 grams recommended twenty years ago to only 45 grams today. Why? Because reliable worldwide research has shown that we do not need so much protein, that the actual daily need is only 30 to 45 grams. Protein consumed in excess of the actual daily need is not only wasted, but actually causes serious harm to the body and is even causatively related to such killer diseases as cancer and heart diesase. In order to obtain 45 grams of protein a day from your diet, you do not have to eat meat; you can get it from a 100% vegetarian diet of a variety of grains, lentils, nuts, vegetables, and fruits.'12 Dairy products, grains, beans, and nuts are all concentrated sources of protein. Cheese, peanuts, and lentils, for instance, contain more protein per ounce than hamburger, pork, or porter-house steak. Still nutritians thought until recently that only meat, fish, eggs, and milk products had complete proteins (containing the 8 amino acids not produced in the body), and that all vegetable proteins were incomplete (lacking one or more of these amino acids). But research at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden and the Max Planck Institute in Germany has shown that most vegetables, fruits, seeds, nuts, and grains are excellent sources of complete proteins. In fact, their proteins are easier to assimilate than those of meat - and they don't bring with them any toxins. It's nearly impossible to lack protein if you eat enough natural unrefined food. Remember, the vegetable kingdom is the real source of ALL protein. Vegetarians simply eat it 'direct' instead of getting it second-hand from the vegetarian animals." References: Can be had upon request. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:43:45 -0500, "Tim" <aaa> wrote:
>FYI. A moose is not a human. Moose have a tendency to be covered in hair. But a wolf has more hair, so that would defeat your notion that you need meat to develop layers of fat to keep warm in a cold climate. >Avacados and what ever else you ate don't grow in -30c. Also you probably >lived in a heated house. Still moose aren't human. And you call my point >moronic - ha. What are we talking about now? Do you mean to say that because they can't grow vegetables in minus 30 it is alright to slaughter animals en masse where they CAN grow vegetables and where it is not necessary to eat meat to survive? Either you are confused or you are being deliberately obtrusive. >Like you point out veggies don't grow where Eskimos live. How then can they >be herbivores? Who said they were? >The fat afforded by certain veggies will not help someone >exposed to the elements. Sure it will. It's just that the vegetables are not available there. As you can see in the example with the moose they have no problem living in extreme cold climates even though they have shorter hairs than the carnivores who live under the same conditions. >Again living in a nice heated house doesn't equate >you with an Eskimo or Siberian. Is that your argument for eating meat - that eskimos do it? Where is the sense in that? www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:19:24 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: >Hey stupid, your diet hen causes far more animal deathand suffering than >almost anybody else. How do you figure that, meat head? >Do you think all that imported stuff just falls like >manna from heaven? The transportation costs alone for your food is a >massive killer. You are truely one brain dead hypocrite. As you can see from the facts below the meat industry causes infinitely more harm and waste of energy than vege-production. HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER The New York Times, Tuesday, June 20, 1989 The Hunger Argument Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 million. Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million Human beings in America: 243 million Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO Pounds of beef produced on an ac 165 Percentage of U.S. farmland devoted to beef production: 56 Pounds of grain and soybeans needed to produce a pound of beef: 16 The Environmental Argument Cause of global warming: greenhouse effect Primary cause of greenhouse effect: carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels needed to produce a meat-centered diet vs. a meat-free diet: 50 times more Percentage of U.S. topsoil lost to date: 75 Percentage of U.S. topsoil loss directly related to livestock raising: 85 Number of acres of U.S. forest cleared for cropland to produce meat-centered diet: 260 million Amount of meat U.S. imports annually from Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: 200 million pounds Average per capita meat consumption in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: less than eaten by average U.S. housecat. Area of tropical rainforest consumed in every 1/4 pound hamburger: 55 sq.ft. Current rate of species extinction due to destruction of tropical rainforests for meat grazing and other uses: 1.000 per year The Cancer Argument Increased risk of breast cancer for women who eat meat 4 times a week vs. less than once a week: 4 times For women who eat eggs daily vs. less than once a week: 3 times Increased risk of fatal ovarian cancer for women who eat eggs 3 or more times a week vs. less than once a week: 3 times Increased risk of fatal prostate cancer for men who eat meat daily vs. sparingly or not at all: 3.6 times The Natural Resources Argument Use of more than half of all water used for all purposes in the U.S.: livestock portion. Amount of water used in production of the average steer: sufficient to float a destroyer. Gallons to produce a pound of wheat: 25 Gallons to produce a pound of meat: 2.500 Cost of common hamburger if water used by meat industry was not subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer: 35 dollars a pound Current cost of pound of protein from beefsteak, if water was no longer subsidized: 89 dollars Years the world's known oil reserves would last if every human ate a meat-centered diet: 13 Years they would last if human beings no longer ate meat: 260 Barrels of oil imported into U.S. daily: 6.8 million Percentage of fossil fuel returned as food energy by most efficient factory farming of meat: 34.5 Percentage returned from least efficient plant food: 32.8 Percentage of raw materials consumed by U.S. to produce present meat-centered diet: 33 The Cholesterol Argument Number of U.S. medical schools: 125 Number requiring a course in nutrition: 30 Nutrition training received by average U.S. physician during four years in medical school: 25 hours Most common cause of death in U.S.: heart attack How frequently a heart attack kills in U.S.: every 45 seconds Average U.S. man's risk of death from heart attack: 50 perc. Risk for average U.S. man who avoids the meat-centered diet: 15 perc. Meat industry claims you should not be concerned about your blood cholesterol if it is: normal Your risk of dying of a disease caused by clogged arteries if your blood cholesterol is ?normal?: over 50 perc. The Antibiotic Argument Percentage of U.S. antibiotics fed to livestock: 55 Percentage of staphylococci infections resistant to penicillin in 1960: 13 Percentage resistant in 1988: 91 Response of European Economic Community to routine feeding of antibiotics to livestock: ban Response of U.S. meat and pharmaceutical industries to routine feeding of antibiotics to livestock: full and complete support The Pesticide Argument Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by grains: 1 Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by fruits: 4 Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet suppl. by dairy products: 23 Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by meat: 55 Pesticide contamination of breast milk from meat-eating mothers vs. non meat-eating: 35 times higher What USDA tells us: meat is inspected Percentage of slaughtered animals inspected for residues of toxin chemicals including dioxin and DDT: less than 0.00004 The Ethical Argument Number of animals killed for meat per hour in U.S.: 500.000 Occupation with highest turnover rate in U.S.: slaughterhouse worker Occupation with highest rate of on-the-job injury in U.S:slaughterhouse worker Cost to render animal unconscious with captive bolt pistol before slaughter.: 1 cent Reason given by meat industry for non using that pistol: too expensive The Survival Argument Athlete to win Ironman Triathlon more than twice: Dave Scott (6 time winner) Food choices of Dave Scott: Vegetarian Largest meat eater than ever lived: Tyrannosaurus Rex Last sighting of Tyrannosaurus Rex: 100.000.000 B.C. Famous pop stars - vegetarians: ------------------------------- Candice Bergen, David Bowie, Paul Mc Cartney, Darryl Hannah, Janet Jackson, k.d.lang, Sting 'I am a great eater of beef, and I believe that does harm to my wit.' --William Shakespeare "Twelfth Night," Act I, Scene 3 www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 17:53:58 -0600, "Russ Thompson" >
wrote: >> BTW, I don't advocate veganism. I advocate vegetarianism. Still mooses >> don't take milk products. > >What do you suppose happens to the cows who produced the milk that makes >your cheese after they are no longer productive? I live in an Indian village, where the cows are allowed to live out their full natural lifespan. Apart from that do you mean to say, that it is alright to slaughter animals in the billions every year in automated slaughter houses, because the animals are also being exploited by the dairy industry? Then you make the mistake of thinking that two wrongs make one right. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:48:35 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: >LOL Then why do you keep responding idiot? And I might add, responding nut >never addressing what is dais. Why you doing all the tap dancing and >dodging, killer? Because I love to see you squirm and make an ass out yourself, meat-head. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:22:24 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message >> HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER >================== >Something you've never done, killer. Oh, but I have, meat-head. The facts don't go away no matter how much you deny them. >> The New York Times, Tuesday, June 20, > > >snippage of 'factoids' that have no bearing on the massive amounts of death >and suffering *you* cause by you diet. Nothing causes so much suffering to highly sensitive living entities and ruins the environment as the meat production. >Are you really so stupid as to believe that a veg*n diet in the far north is >benificial to animals overall? If more people go vegetarian less animals suffer, that's just common sense. It doesn't whether they live in the far north or not. The meat production is only the second largest business in the world because there are so many meat-heads like you. > ou really need to feed those two braincells >of yours if you do, killer. > >Now, go have that nice blood-drenched dinner, hypocrite. No thanks. I know it must be hard for a die hard meat-head like you to fathom that you can live without meat, but I can assure you it is quite possible. Not only is it possible, but your quality of life will improve so much more by turning to a vegetarian diet. Just to hammer home the point once more, so that everybody can see how clueless you a HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER The New York Times, Tuesday, June 20, 1989 The Hunger Argument Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 million. Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million Human beings in America: 243 million Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO Pounds of beef produced on an ac 165 Percentage of U.S. farmland devoted to beef production: 56 Pounds of grain and soybeans needed to produce a pound of beef: 16 The Environmental Argument Cause of global warming: greenhouse effect Primary cause of greenhouse effect: carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels needed to produce a meat-centered diet vs. a meat-free diet: 50 times more Percentage of U.S. topsoil lost to date: 75 Percentage of U.S. topsoil loss directly related to livestock raising: 85 Number of acres of U.S. forest cleared for cropland to produce meat-centered diet: 260 million Amount of meat U.S. imports annually from Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: 200 million pounds Average per capita meat consumption in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: less than eaten by average U.S. housecat. Area of tropical rainforest consumed in every 1/4 pound hamburger: 55 sq.ft. Current rate of species extinction due to destruction of tropical rainforests for meat grazing and other uses: 1.000 per year The Cancer Argument Increased risk of breast cancer for women who eat meat 4 times a week vs. less than once a week: 4 times For women who eat eggs daily vs. less than once a week: 3 times Increased risk of fatal ovarian cancer for women who eat eggs 3 or more times a week vs. less than once a week: 3 times Increased risk of fatal prostate cancer for men who eat meat daily vs. sparingly or not at all: 3.6 times The Natural Resources Argument Use of more than half of all water used for all purposes in the U.S.: livestock portion. Amount of water used in production of the average steer: sufficient to float a destroyer. Gallons to produce a pound of wheat: 25 Gallons to produce a pound of meat: 2.500 Cost of common hamburger if water used by meat industry was not subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer: 35 dollars a pound Current cost of pound of protein from beefsteak, if water was no longer subsidized: 89 dollars Years the world's known oil reserves would last if every human ate a meat-centered diet: 13 Years they would last if human beings no longer ate meat: 260 Barrels of oil imported into U.S. daily: 6.8 million Percentage of fossil fuel returned as food energy by most efficient factory farming of meat: 34.5 Percentage returned from least efficient plant food: 32.8 Percentage of raw materials consumed by U.S. to produce present meat-centered diet: 33 The Cholesterol Argument Number of U.S. medical schools: 125 Number requiring a course in nutrition: 30 Nutrition training received by average U.S. physician during four years in medical school: 25 hours Most common cause of death in U.S.: heart attack How frequently a heart attack kills in U.S.: every 45 seconds Average U.S. man's risk of death from heart attack: 50 perc. Risk for average U.S. man who avoids the meat-centered diet: 15 perc. Meat industry claims you should not be concerned about your blood cholesterol if it is: normal Your risk of dying of a disease caused by clogged arteries if your blood cholesterol is ?normal?: over 50 perc. The Antibiotic Argument Percentage of U.S. antibiotics fed to livestock: 55 Percentage of staphylococci infections resistant to penicillin in 1960: 13 Percentage resistant in 1988: 91 Response of European Economic Community to routine feeding of antibiotics to livestock: ban Response of U.S. meat and pharmaceutical industries to routine feeding of antibiotics to livestock: full and complete support The Pesticide Argument Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by grains: 1 Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by fruits: 4 Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet suppl. by dairy products: 23 Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by meat: 55 Pesticide contamination of breast milk from meat-eating mothers vs. non meat-eating: 35 times higher What USDA tells us: meat is inspected Percentage of slaughtered animals inspected for residues of toxin chemicals including dioxin and DDT: less than 0.00004 The Ethical Argument Number of animals killed for meat per hour in U.S.: 500.000 Occupation with highest turnover rate in U.S.: slaughterhouse worker Occupation with highest rate of on-the-job injury in U.S:slaughterhouse worker Cost to render animal unconscious with captive bolt pistol before slaughter.: 1 cent Reason given by meat industry for non using that pistol: too expensive The Survival Argument Athlete to win Ironman Triathlon more than twice: Dave Scott (6 time winner) Food choices of Dave Scott: Vegetarian Largest meat eater than ever lived: Tyrannosaurus Rex Last sighting of Tyrannosaurus Rex: 100.000.000 B.C. Famous pop stars - vegetarians: ------------------------------- Candice Bergen, David Bowie, Paul Mc Cartney, Darryl Hannah, Janet Jackson, k.d.lang, Sting 'I am a great eater of beef, and I believe that does harm to my wit.' --William Shakespeare "Twelfth Night," Act I, Scene 3 www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
The Hunger Argument
Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 million. Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million Human beings in America: 243 million Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO *** Much to my surpise I have discovered that there are certain people who actually buy into the above. My question for those people is if you are under the impression that the above could be true what is your opinion of CRP? For those that don't know CRP is the program where the FSA pays land owners not to grow crops on their land. Normal contracts are for 10 years and the land must me planted to grass and left alone. In exchange the land owner recieves a direct payment that is usually about 150% of the local going rate for rented farm land. Currently there are millions of acres in this program in the USA. Kala Thompson Farmer Richland Center, Wi USA -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Russ Thompson" > wrote in message ... > The Hunger Argument > > Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 > million. Yet the global population will continue to rise at a significant rate. Though of course Africa is affected significantly by starvation in many countries, and of course the 2 million children a year who die from diarrhea and the ever worsening problem of AIDs will take another 3 million souls in 2004, and there are plenty of other diseases that aren't just killing people but really destroying quality of life. Perhaps we could feed more people, but what would they then die of? See http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/ > Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if > Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million A human being cannot adequately be fed on nothing but grain. Clearly this is a lie! > Human beings in America: 243 million > Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by > U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion > Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 > Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 Perhaps Americans don't wish to live on grain. Does anyone? > Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 > Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 > How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds > Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO > Or potato. Which of course are a really bugger to store so populations that become dependent on potatoes must have good harvests every year. With really good pesticides and plenty of water I guess this can be done, but would you want to bet your population on it? > > *** Much to my surpise I have discovered that there are certain people who > actually buy into the above. Of course there are, though not as many as believe in alien abductions. Still too many though. > My question for those people is if you are under the impression that > the above could be true what is your opinion of CRP? Now you're expecting them to have some grasp of economics and politics which they're unlikely to cover until they get to "big school". > For those that don't know CRP is the program where the FSA pays land > owners not to grow crops on their land. Normal contracts are for 10 years > and the land must me planted to grass and left alone. In exchange the land > owner recieves a direct payment that is usually about 150% of the local > going rate for rented farm land. Currently there are millions of acres in > this program in the USA. > > Kala Thompson > Farmer > Richland Center, Wi USA > Michael Saunby |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jahnu wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 20:09:43 GMT, Jonathan Ball > > wrote: > > >>Jahnu wrote: > > >>>Constitution? You forget I am from Europe. I couldn't care less about >>>your constitution. >> >>Irrelevant, and truly a stupid, ****witted dodge. The >>point is that stupid irrational "vegans" want to >>overthrow the legitimate, lawful, constitutional >>governments wherever they are, in order to impose their >>benighted values on others. > > > Not me. I just hate atheist meat-heads. We already knew you were all about hate. Hate is a defining characteristic of "veganism". > > >>>Anyone who supports the mass slaughter of animals in the modern >>>consumer culture must be completely devoid of any empathy towards >>>other living entities. >> >>False. Repeating it, and using more words to do so, >>will not make it true. Your claim is false. > > > According to who? According to the fact you haven't supported your claim. > > >>No, you are not stating facts. You are venting your >>spleen; nothing more. > > > I am merely stating facts, that's all. You are not stating facts; you are merely venting your spleen, letting your ugly hatred run away with you. > >>Yes, it is. It is a rational observation of you and >>your social milieu. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Grain-fed humans?
Michael Saunby wrote:
> "Russ Thompson" > wrote in message > ... > >>The Hunger Argument >> >>Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 >>million. > > > Yet the global population will continue to rise at a significant rate. > Though of course Africa is affected significantly by starvation in many > countries, and of course the 2 million children a year who die from > diarrhea and the ever worsening problem of AIDs will take another 3 million > souls in 2004, and there are plenty of other diseases that aren't just > killing people but really destroying quality of life. Perhaps we could > feed more people, but what would they then die of? > > See http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/ > > >>Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if >>Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million > > > A human being cannot adequately be fed on nothing but grain. Clearly this > is a lie! Stated as it is, it is worse than a lie; it's an entire fantasy. Whenever "vegan" fruitcakes start ranting about the eeeeeevils of feeding grain to livestock, they make the most unbelievable, simplistic assumption that the VERY SAME GRAIN could be fed to "starving" people elsewhere in the world instead of to cattle. The fatuous belief ignores two crucial points: 1. Much of the "grain" fed to livestock is not edible by humans. Corn silage, for example, includes the entire plant, chopped to bits; the stalks, cobs and husks are indigestible to humans. A lot of the true grain is of a quality that humans won't eat. 2. There are already massive, heavily subsidized surpluses of human edible foodstuffs, in both North America and Europe. That this food isn't simply being given to "starving" people in Africa and Asia ought to tell the "vegans" something. This second point is really the key one. "vegans" seem to think that if the livestock feed weren't being fed to animals, it would simply be given away to "starving" people. Exactly what is supposed to be the mechanism for this? North American and European farmers don't produce food merely to give it away; they expect to be paid for it. Livestock feed is *bought* from farmers by feedlot operators and livestock farmers; the grain farmers expect to be paid by someone if they are to grow the grain in the first place. The idiot "vegans" also ignore the fact that in many of the places in Africa where there are "starving" people, there is plenty of food available. The problems are distribution problems, not production problems. Some of the distribution problems are deliberate actions by despotic governments and local warlords, who use starvation as a war tactic against minority groups. The rest are from government destruction of market mechanisms. The problem of world hunger has NOTHING to do with Americans and Europeans feeding grain to livestock. >>Human beings in America: 243 million >>Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by >>U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion >>Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 >>Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 > > > Perhaps Americans don't wish to live on grain. Does anyone? > > >>Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 >>Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 >>How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds >>Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO >> > > > Or potato. Which of course are a really bugger to store so populations > that become dependent on potatoes must have good harvests every year. With > really good pesticides and plenty of water I guess this can be done, but > would you want to bet your population on it? > > >>*** Much to my surpise I have discovered that there are certain people >>who actually buy into the above. > > > Of course there are, though not as many as believe in alien abductions. > Still too many though. > > >> My question for those people is if you are under the impression that >>the above could be true what is your opinion of CRP? > > > Now you're expecting them to have some grasp of economics and politics > which they're unlikely to cover until they get to "big school". > > >> For those that don't know CRP is the program where the FSA pays land >>owners not to grow crops on their land. Normal contracts are for 10 years >>and the land must me planted to grass and left alone. In exchange the land >>owner recieves a direct payment that is usually about 150% of the local >>going rate for rented farm land. Currently there are millions of acres in >>this program in the USA. >> >>Kala Thompson >>Farmer >>Richland Center, Wi USA >> > > > Michael Saunby > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:33:16 GMT, Jonathan Ball
> wrote: >Jahnu wrote: >> Not me. I just hate atheist meat-heads. > >We already knew you were all about hate. Hate is a >defining characteristic of "veganism". Of course. What'd you expect? You hate the animals and ruin the environment. Why shouldn't we hate you. But as Christ said, hate not the sinner but the sin. So the sin is wanton animal slaughter. And for the umtieth time, I am not a vegan. I am vegetarian. >> According to who? > >According to the fact you haven't supported your claim. Is that your belief or do you have something to support that claim with? >You are not stating facts; you are merely venting your >spleen, letting your ugly hatred run away with you. Not running away. I am deliberately like that to make a point. I don't expect you to get it, but maybe somebody else will. -jahnu www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Strooth Jahnu, I know they brainwash folks at Krishna concentration camps,
but they've really done a number on you. Did you forget about all the peace and love, my sweet lord and all that garbage. Go back to your books instead of spouting your hate and intollerance. "Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 20:09:43 GMT, Jonathan Ball > > wrote: > > >Jahnu wrote: > > >> Constitution? You forget I am from Europe. I couldn't care less about > >> your constitution. > > > >Irrelevant, and truly a stupid, ****witted dodge. The > >point is that stupid irrational "vegans" want to > >overthrow the legitimate, lawful, constitutional > >governments wherever they are, in order to impose their > >benighted values on others. > > Not me. I just hate atheist meat-heads. > > >> Anyone who supports the mass slaughter of animals in the modern > >> consumer culture must be completely devoid of any empathy towards > >> other living entities. > > > >False. Repeating it, and using more words to do so, > >will not make it true. Your claim is false. > > According to who? > > >No, you are not stating facts. You are venting your > >spleen; nothing more. > > I am merely stating facts, that's all. And they don't become less > facts by you denying it. > > >Yes, it is. It is a rational observation of you and > >your social milieu. > > hahaha, says someone who grew up in a Mickey Mouse culture and elected > a retard for president. > > Once again, just to hammer home the point: > > > > HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER > > The New York Times, Tuesday, June 20, 1989 > > > > The Hunger Argument > > Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 > million. > > Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if > Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million > > Human beings in America: 243 million > > Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by > U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion > > Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 > > Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 > > Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 > > Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 > > How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds > > Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO > > Pounds of beef produced on an ac 165 > > Percentage of U.S. farmland devoted to beef production: 56 > > Pounds of grain and soybeans needed to produce a pound of beef: 16 > > > > The Environmental Argument > > Cause of global warming: greenhouse effect > > Primary cause of greenhouse effect: carbon dioxide emissions from > fossil fuels. > > Fossil fuels needed to produce a meat-centered diet vs. a meat-free > diet: 50 times more > > Percentage of U.S. topsoil lost to date: 75 > > Percentage of U.S. topsoil loss directly related to livestock raising: > 85 > > Number of acres of U.S. forest cleared for cropland to produce > meat-centered diet: 260 million > > Amount of meat U.S. imports annually from Costa Rica, El Salvador, > Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: 200 million pounds > > Average per capita meat consumption in Costa Rica, El Salvador, > Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: less than eaten by average U.S. > housecat. > > Area of tropical rainforest consumed in every 1/4 pound hamburger: 55 > sq.ft. > > Current rate of species extinction due to destruction of tropical > rainforests for meat grazing and other uses: 1.000 per year > > > > The Cancer Argument > > Increased risk of breast cancer for women who eat meat 4 times a week > vs. less than once a week: 4 times > > For women who eat eggs daily vs. less than once a week: 3 times > > Increased risk of fatal ovarian cancer for women who eat eggs 3 or > more times a week vs. less than once a week: 3 times > > Increased risk of fatal prostate cancer for men who eat meat daily vs. > sparingly or not at all: 3.6 times > > > > The Natural Resources Argument > > Use of more than half of all water used for all purposes in the U.S.: > livestock portion. > > Amount of water used in production of the average steer: sufficient to > float a destroyer. > > Gallons to produce a pound of wheat: 25 > > Gallons to produce a pound of meat: 2.500 > > Cost of common hamburger if water used by meat industry was not > subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer: 35 dollars a pound > > Current cost of pound of protein from beefsteak, if water was no > longer subsidized: 89 dollars > > Years the world's known oil reserves would last if every human ate a > meat-centered diet: 13 > > Years they would last if human beings no longer ate meat: 260 > > Barrels of oil imported into U.S. daily: 6.8 million > > Percentage of fossil fuel returned as food energy by most efficient > factory farming of meat: 34.5 > > Percentage returned from least efficient plant food: 32.8 > > Percentage of raw materials consumed by U.S. to produce present > meat-centered diet: 33 > > > > The Cholesterol Argument > > Number of U.S. medical schools: 125 > > Number requiring a course in nutrition: 30 > > Nutrition training received by average U.S. physician during four > years in medical school: 25 hours > > Most common cause of death in U.S.: heart attack > > How frequently a heart attack kills in U.S.: every 45 seconds > > Average U.S. man's risk of death from heart attack: 50 perc. > > Risk for average U.S. man who avoids the meat-centered diet: 15 perc. > > Meat industry claims you should not be concerned about your blood > cholesterol if it is: normal > > Your risk of dying of a disease caused by clogged arteries if your > blood cholesterol is ?normal?: over 50 perc. > > > > The Antibiotic Argument > > Percentage of U.S. antibiotics fed to livestock: 55 > > Percentage of staphylococci infections resistant to penicillin in > 1960: 13 > > Percentage resistant in 1988: 91 > > Response of European Economic Community to routine feeding of > antibiotics to livestock: ban > > Response of U.S. meat and pharmaceutical industries to routine feeding > of antibiotics to livestock: full and complete support > > > The Pesticide Argument > > Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by grains: > 1 > > Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by fruits: > 4 > > Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet suppl. by dairy > products: 23 > > Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by meat: 55 > > Pesticide contamination of breast milk from meat-eating mothers vs. > non meat-eating: 35 times higher > > What USDA tells us: meat is inspected > > Percentage of slaughtered animals inspected for residues of toxin > chemicals including dioxin and DDT: less than 0.00004 > > > > The Ethical Argument > > Number of animals killed for meat per hour in U.S.: 500.000 > > Occupation with highest turnover rate in U.S.: slaughterhouse worker > > Occupation with highest rate of on-the-job injury in > U.S:slaughterhouse worker > > Cost to render animal unconscious with captive bolt pistol before > slaughter.: 1 cent > > Reason given by meat industry for non using that pistol: too expensive > > > > The Survival Argument > > Athlete to win Ironman Triathlon more than twice: Dave Scott (6 time > winner) Food choices of Dave Scott: Vegetarian > > Largest meat eater than ever lived: Tyrannosaurus Rex > > Last sighting of Tyrannosaurus Rex: 100.000.000 B.C. > > > Famous pop stars - vegetarians: > ------------------------------- > Candice Bergen, David Bowie, Paul Mc Cartney, Darryl Hannah, Janet > Jackson, k.d.lang, Sting > > 'I am a great eater of beef, and I believe that does harm to my wit.' > --William Shakespeare "Twelfth Night," Act I, Scene 3 > > www.krishna.com > www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:55:07 -0600, "Russ Thompson" >
wrote: >The Hunger Argument > >Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 >million. >Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if >Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million >Human beings in America: 243 million >Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by >U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion >Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 >Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 >Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 >Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 >How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds >Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO > > >*** Much to my surpise I have discovered that there are certain people who >actually buy into the above. Much to my surprise I have discovered that there are certain people who actually willfully choose to live in denial of the above. > My question for those people is if you are under the impression that >the above could be true what is your opinion of CRP? It couldn't be very high, could it? > For those that don't know CRP is the program where the FSA pays land >owners not to grow crops on their land. Normal contracts are for 10 years >and the land must me planted to grass and left alone. In exchange the land >owner recieves a direct payment that is usually about 150% of the local >going rate for rented farm land. Currently there are millions of acres in >this program in the USA. Can you prove that? Or do you really want us to just take your word for it? www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jahnu wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:33:16 GMT, Jonathan Ball > > wrote: > > >>Jahnu wrote: > > >>>Not me. I just hate atheist meat-heads. >> >>We already knew you were all about hate. Hate is a >>defining characteristic of "veganism". > > > Of course. Yes, of course: you hate those who disagree with you. > What'd you expect? Exactly what you demonstrated. > You hate the animals False. > and ruin the environment. False. > Why shouldn't we hate you. But as Christ said, hate not > the sinner but the sin. So, you're a lesser person for not being able to follow that dictum. You hate meat eaters, not the meat eating. > So the sin is wanton animal slaughter. It is not a sin. You are an idiot for thinking it is. YOU cause wanton animal slaughter, too. Do you hate yourself? > And for > the umtieth time, I am not a vegan. I am vegetarian. Your "vegetarianism" is of the so-called "ethical" vegetarian variety. Philosophically, there isn't a pfennig's worth of difference between you and "vegans". You're all full of hate, and you're all the most brazen liars. > > >>>According to who? >> >>According to the fact you haven't supported your claim. > > > Is that your belief or do you have something to support that claim > with? I have the observation that you haven't supported your claim. You have made the claim, without support, and when asked to support it, you have merely restated the claim. The claim is without support. It is merely your opinion, your hate-filled opinion, and you appear to me to be ignorant, in addition to full of hate. > > >>You are not stating facts; you are merely venting your >>spleen, letting your ugly hatred run away with you. > > > Not running away. Running away. You are a coward. > I am deliberately like that to make a point. You are deliberately like that because you are a hate-filled coward. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jahnu wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:55:07 -0600, "Russ Thompson" > > wrote: > > >>The Hunger Argument >> >>Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 >>million. >>Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if >>Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million >>Human beings in America: 243 million >>Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by >>U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion >>Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 >>Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 >>Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 >>Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 >>How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds >>Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO >> >> >>*** Much to my surpise I have discovered that there are certain people who >>actually buy into the above. > > > Much to my surprise I have discovered that there are certain people > who actually willfully choose to live in denial of the above. "The above" is bullshit; unadulterated bullshit. The problem of world hunger has nothing to do with feeding grain to livestock. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Benfez wrote:
> Strooth Jahnu, I know they brainwash folks at Krishna concentration camps, > but they've really done a number on you. > Did you forget about all the peace and love, my sweet lord and all that > garbage. Go back to your books instead of spouting your hate and > intollerance. Exactly. So-called "ethical" vegetarians are ALWAYS full of this kind of irrational hatred. You ALWAYS find that when you find people like them for whom morality is based on a comparison with others, rather than just doing what is right. > > "Jahnu" > wrote in message > ... > >>On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 20:09:43 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote: >> >> >>>Jahnu wrote: >> >>>>Constitution? You forget I am from Europe. I couldn't care less about >>>>your constitution. >>> >>>Irrelevant, and truly a stupid, ****witted dodge. The >>>point is that stupid irrational "vegans" want to >>>overthrow the legitimate, lawful, constitutional >>>governments wherever they are, in order to impose their >>>benighted values on others. >> >>Not me. I just hate atheist meat-heads. >> >> >>>>Anyone who supports the mass slaughter of animals in the modern >>>>consumer culture must be completely devoid of any empathy towards >>>>other living entities. >>> >>>False. Repeating it, and using more words to do so, >>>will not make it true. Your claim is false. >> >>According to who? >> >> >>>No, you are not stating facts. You are venting your >>>spleen; nothing more. >> >>I am merely stating facts, that's all. And they don't become less >>facts by you denying it. >> >> >>>Yes, it is. It is a rational observation of you and >>>your social milieu. >> >>hahaha, says someone who grew up in a Mickey Mouse culture and elected >>a retard for president. >> >>Once again, just to hammer home the point: >> >> >> >>HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER >> >>The New York Times, Tuesday, June 20, 1989 >> >> >> >>The Hunger Argument >> >>Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60 >>million. >> >>Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if >>Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million >> >>Human beings in America: 243 million >> >>Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by >>U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion >> >>Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20 >> >>Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80 >> >>Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95 >> >>Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99 >> >>How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds >> >>Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO >> >>Pounds of beef produced on an ac 165 >> >>Percentage of U.S. farmland devoted to beef production: 56 >> >>Pounds of grain and soybeans needed to produce a pound of beef: 16 >> >> >> >>The Environmental Argument >> >>Cause of global warming: greenhouse effect >> >>Primary cause of greenhouse effect: carbon dioxide emissions from >>fossil fuels. >> >>Fossil fuels needed to produce a meat-centered diet vs. a meat-free >>diet: 50 times more >> >>Percentage of U.S. topsoil lost to date: 75 >> >>Percentage of U.S. topsoil loss directly related to livestock raising: >>85 >> >>Number of acres of U.S. forest cleared for cropland to produce >>meat-centered diet: 260 million >> >>Amount of meat U.S. imports annually from Costa Rica, El Salvador, >>Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: 200 million pounds >> >>Average per capita meat consumption in Costa Rica, El Salvador, >>Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: less than eaten by average U.S. >>housecat. >> >>Area of tropical rainforest consumed in every 1/4 pound hamburger: 55 >>sq.ft. >> >>Current rate of species extinction due to destruction of tropical >>rainforests for meat grazing and other uses: 1.000 per year >> >> >> >>The Cancer Argument >> >>Increased risk of breast cancer for women who eat meat 4 times a week >>vs. less than once a week: 4 times >> >>For women who eat eggs daily vs. less than once a week: 3 times >> >>Increased risk of fatal ovarian cancer for women who eat eggs 3 or >>more times a week vs. less than once a week: 3 times >> >>Increased risk of fatal prostate cancer for men who eat meat daily vs. >>sparingly or not at all: 3.6 times >> >> >> >>The Natural Resources Argument >> >>Use of more than half of all water used for all purposes in the U.S.: >>livestock portion. >> >>Amount of water used in production of the average steer: sufficient to >>float a destroyer. >> >>Gallons to produce a pound of wheat: 25 >> >>Gallons to produce a pound of meat: 2.500 >> >>Cost of common hamburger if water used by meat industry was not >>subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer: 35 dollars a pound >> >>Current cost of pound of protein from beefsteak, if water was no >>longer subsidized: 89 dollars >> >>Years the world's known oil reserves would last if every human ate a >>meat-centered diet: 13 >> >>Years they would last if human beings no longer ate meat: 260 >> >>Barrels of oil imported into U.S. daily: 6.8 million >> >>Percentage of fossil fuel returned as food energy by most efficient >>factory farming of meat: 34.5 >> >>Percentage returned from least efficient plant food: 32.8 >> >>Percentage of raw materials consumed by U.S. to produce present >>meat-centered diet: 33 >> >> >> >>The Cholesterol Argument >> >>Number of U.S. medical schools: 125 >> >>Number requiring a course in nutrition: 30 >> >>Nutrition training received by average U.S. physician during four >>years in medical school: 25 hours >> >>Most common cause of death in U.S.: heart attack >> >>How frequently a heart attack kills in U.S.: every 45 seconds >> >>Average U.S. man's risk of death from heart attack: 50 perc. >> >>Risk for average U.S. man who avoids the meat-centered diet: 15 perc. >> >>Meat industry claims you should not be concerned about your blood >>cholesterol if it is: normal >> >>Your risk of dying of a disease caused by clogged arteries if your >>blood cholesterol is ?normal?: over 50 perc. >> >> >> >>The Antibiotic Argument >> >>Percentage of U.S. antibiotics fed to livestock: 55 >> >>Percentage of staphylococci infections resistant to penicillin in >>1960: 13 >> >>Percentage resistant in 1988: 91 >> >>Response of European Economic Community to routine feeding of >>antibiotics to livestock: ban >> >>Response of U.S. meat and pharmaceutical industries to routine feeding >>of antibiotics to livestock: full and complete support >> >> >>The Pesticide Argument >> >>Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by grains: >>1 >> >>Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by fruits: >>4 >> >>Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet suppl. by dairy >>products: 23 >> >>Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by meat: 55 >> >>Pesticide contamination of breast milk from meat-eating mothers vs. >>non meat-eating: 35 times higher >> >>What USDA tells us: meat is inspected >> >>Percentage of slaughtered animals inspected for residues of toxin >>chemicals including dioxin and DDT: less than 0.00004 >> >> >> >>The Ethical Argument >> >>Number of animals killed for meat per hour in U.S.: 500.000 >> >>Occupation with highest turnover rate in U.S.: slaughterhouse worker >> >>Occupation with highest rate of on-the-job injury in >>U.S:slaughterhouse worker >> >>Cost to render animal unconscious with captive bolt pistol before >>slaughter.: 1 cent >> >>Reason given by meat industry for non using that pistol: too expensive >> >> >> >>The Survival Argument >> >>Athlete to win Ironman Triathlon more than twice: Dave Scott (6 time >>winner) Food choices of Dave Scott: Vegetarian >> >>Largest meat eater than ever lived: Tyrannosaurus Rex >> >>Last sighting of Tyrannosaurus Rex: 100.000.000 B.C. >> >> >>Famous pop stars - vegetarians: >>------------------------------- >>Candice Bergen, David Bowie, Paul Mc Cartney, Darryl Hannah, Janet >>Jackson, k.d.lang, Sting >> >>'I am a great eater of beef, and I believe that does harm to my wit.' >>--William Shakespeare "Twelfth Night," Act I, Scene 3 >> >>www.krishna.com >>www.iskcon.org > > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:03:45 GMT, Jonathan Ball
> wrote: >Jahnu wrote: > >> On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:33:16 GMT, Jonathan Ball >> > wrote: >> >> >>>Jahnu wrote: >> >> >>>>Not me. I just hate atheist meat-heads. >>> >>>We already knew you were all about hate. Hate is a >>>defining characteristic of "veganism". >> >> >> Of course. > >Yes, of course: you hate those who disagree with you. Not at all. I hate those who don't care about other living entities and ruin nature for profit and sense gratification. >So, you're a lesser person for not being able to follow >that dictum. You hate meat eaters, not the meat eating. I hate meat eaters because they see highly sensitive living entities as meat racks and keep them for slaughter. I hate them because of their lack of empathy and focus on economy and profit instead of what is right and sensible and merciful towards others. >It is not a sin. You are an idiot for thinking it is. It is completely sinful to slaughter animals like it is done in the modern coca cola culture, and everyone is going to suffer the horrible consequences. >YOU cause wanton animal slaughter, too. Do you hate >yourself? How do I cause wanton animal slaughter? Would you like to explain yourself? >Your "vegetarianism" is of the so-called "ethical" >vegetarian variety. Philosophically, there isn't a >pfennig's worth of difference between you and "vegans". > You're all full of hate, and you're all the most >brazen liars. I think it is quite clear who is full of hate and venom and who hates the truth here. You are completely shameless in your ignorance. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:43:45 -0000, "Benfez"
> wrote: >Strooth Jahnu, I know they brainwash folks at Krishna concentration camps, >but they've really done a number on you. >Did you forget about all the peace and love, my sweet lord and all that >garbage. Go back to your books instead of spouting your hate and >intollerance. YOU are spouting hate and intolerance and countless cruelties towards other living entities. I am speaking the truth and anyone who is truthful will accept it. I have presented arguments and scientific facts in favor of my position. You have presented nothing except being cantankerous and obnoxiously and blindly denying all the facts. Admit defeat or go jump in a lake, moron. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:04:39 GMT, Jonathan Ball
> wrote: >"The above" is bullshit; unadulterated bullshit. The >problem of world hunger has nothing to do with feeding >grain to livestock. Of course it has. Keeping animals for slaughter is grossly sinful. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
> Or potato. Which of course are a really bugger to store so populations
> that become dependent on potatoes must have good harvests every year. With > really good pesticides and plenty of water I guess this can be done, but > would you want to bet your population on it? *** Not to mention that land that can grow good crops of grain is not suitable for growing potatos. Kala -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
> Much to my surprise I have discovered that there are certain people
> who actually willfully choose to live in denial of the above. *** I feel sorry for you. People must take advantage of you all the time. > It couldn't be very high, could it? *** It could be. > > For those that don't know CRP is the program where the FSA pays land > >owners not to grow crops on their land. Normal contracts are for 10 years > >and the land must me planted to grass and left alone. In exchange the land > >owner recieves a direct payment that is usually about 150% of the local > >going rate for rented farm land. Currently there are millions of acres in > >this program in the USA. > > Can you prove that? Or do you really want us to just take your word > for it? *** Yes I can prove it. However I have better things to do that look up info on government programs that you could easily find everything you wanted to know with a simple web search. Do you doubt that the US government actually has the CRP? Kala -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
> I agree. That's why I point it out to you.
> www.krishna.com > www.iskcon.org Why are you so mean? Kala -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
> Of course it has. Keeping animals for slaughter is grossly sinful.
> www.krishna.com > www.iskcon.org *** "sinful"? According to who? Some religion or cult? According to the bald people who beg at the airport? Kala -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jahnu wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:03:45 GMT, Jonathan Ball > > wrote: > >>Jahnu wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:33:16 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote: >>> >>>>Jahnu wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>Not me. I just hate atheist meat-heads. >>>> >>>>We already knew you were all about hate. Hate is a >>>>defining characteristic of "veganism". >>> >>> >>>Of course. >> >>Yes, of course: you hate those who disagree with you. > > > Not at all. Yes, you do. > I hate those who don't care about other living entities > and ruin nature for profit and sense gratification. No, you hate those who disagree with you, who don't acknowledge what you wrongly consider to be your "enlightenment". > > >>So, you're a lesser person for not being able to follow >>that dictum. You hate meat eaters, not the meat eating. > > > I hate meat eaters That's all we need to leave: you hate meat eaters. You are full of hate, period. > >>It is not a sin. You are an idiot for thinking it is. > > > It is completely sinful to slaughter animals like it is done in the > modern coca cola culture, No, it isn't. You're just a hysterical person. It isn't anything to do with the humaneness or lack of it that bothers you; it's purely aesthetic. > and everyone is going to suffer the horrible > consequences. Nope. There aren't any. > > >>YOU cause wanton animal slaughter, too. Do you hate >>yourself? > > > How do I cause wanton animal slaughter? Would you like to explain > yourself? Animals are wantonly killed in the course of producing, storing and distributing your vegetables, the ones you stupidly think are righteous because they don't contain animal parts. How much rice do you eat? > > >>Your "vegetarianism" is of the so-called "ethical" >>vegetarian variety. Philosophically, there isn't a >>pfennig's worth of difference between you and "vegans". >> You're all full of hate, and you're all the most >>brazen liars. > > > I think it is quite clear who is full of hate and venom and who hates > the truth here. Yes: you. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jahnu wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:04:39 GMT, Jonathan Ball > > wrote: > > >>"The above" is bullshit; unadulterated bullshit. The >>problem of world hunger has nothing to do with feeding >>grain to livestock. > > > Of course it has. Nope; nothing to do with it at all. > Keeping animals for slaughter is grossly sinful. No, it isn't. You, however, ARE grossly hateful. You are a very small person. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:10:05 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > >yep, that's all you have.... What's the matter loser, can't speak for yourself? Can't address what was said to you in these hreads? Typical loony that has nothing if it isn't already cut-n-pasted for him. Your one remaining brain cell must really be haveing a hard time keeping up with your ignorance, eh killer? snippage of, well nothing, as usual. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:11:38 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > > > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message > > >snippage of more from a cut-n-paste bozo that has nothing to say of his own, > >mainly because his veagn diet has diminished his one remaining braincell to > >mush... > > At least I have something to cut and paste to support my position. > What have you posted to support your position, except whine and bicker > over the irrefutable facts that I keep sending? ===================================== No, you don't. The first pile of crap you posted was just that, crap. No one starves in this world because not enough food isn't produced. Production is not the problem, tyanical maniacs like you, now that's another story... > > But keep squirming meat-head. I am going to flood you with facts until > you finally shut up and crawl back under the stone where you came > from. Here is some mo ==================== You wouldn't know 'facts' if they bit you in the butt, killer. > snippage of typical crappola alarmist windbag sites.... |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:12:59 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > >That's all he has, cut-n-paste. Never has anything to actually refute what > >he doens't like said, and can never really defend his own position. > > > > HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER -------------- ROTFLMAO You've still lost, killer. snippage of crappola, again... |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:15:31 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > > > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message > > >> The reason that they hang out in Vegan news groups and spew their BS > >> is simply because they don't have anywhere else to vent all the anger > >> and envy that come from their bad diet. > > >Hey loser, you too should check the headers. How many vegan groups do you > >see there? As for diet, check the lists of people who live the longest, > >they aren't dominated by vegans, killer. > > No, they are dominated by vegetarians, meat-head. ================== You lose again, stupid... snippage of more drivel quack-crap... |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:19:24 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > >Hey stupid, your diet hen causes far more animal deathand suffering than > >almost anybody else. > > How do you figure that, meat head? ==================== Why do you dishonestly snip out parts of posts without annotating those snips, killer. Trying to hide you ignorance? Now, to you ignorance. You do not grow what you eat in northern latitudes if you are a veg*n. You must import them from places around the world. Why don't you check out how much energy it takes to ship all your foodstuffs up there. Care to even think about it? Like most veg*n loons, all you care about is the death and suffering you think somebody else is causeing, conveninetly ignoring your own bloody footprints. Now, replace some of your blood drenched veggies with that one moose. That moose will provide you with 100s of 1000s of calories. All for the death of one animal, and very minimal environmental damage. How many animals died to produce, process, store and shipp those same 100s of 1000s of veggie calories up to you. Even if you manage to grow a feww crops there, their production still causes more death and suffering than that one moose. Like most veg*n loons, you are either 1>deliberately dishonest about your own impact, or 2>terminally ignorant about you own impact. You choose, killer. > > >Do you think all that imported stuff just falls like > >manna from heaven? The transportation costs alone for your food is a > >massive killer. You are truely one brain dead hypocrite. > > As you can see from the facts below the meat industry causes > infinitely more harm and waste of energy than vege-production. > ============================ No, it does not. Your typical scree about one monolithic meat industry is just plain lys. Tell us how that one moose you just talked about, and that could feed you many, many meals, causes environmental worldwide damage and waste of energy that even comes close to those that your veggies do. care to even try? I won't hold my breath for your enlightenment though, killer. > > > HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER -------------------- you've still lost, killer. snippage of crappola... |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:43:45 -0500, "Tim" <aaa> wrote: > > >FYI. A moose is not a human. Moose have a tendency to be covered in hair. > > But a wolf has more hair, so that would defeat your notion that you > need meat to develop layers of fat to keep warm in a cold climate. > > >Avacados and what ever else you ate don't grow in -30c. Also you probably > >lived in a heated house. Still moose aren't human. And you call my point > >moronic - ha. > > What are we talking about now? Do you mean to say that because they > can't grow vegetables in minus 30 it is alright to slaughter animals > en masse where they CAN grow vegetables and where it is not necessary > to eat meat to survive? Either you are confused or you are being > deliberately obtrusive. > > >Like you point out veggies don't grow where Eskimos live. How then can they > >be herbivores? > > Who said they were? > > >The fat afforded by certain veggies will not help someone > >exposed to the elements. > > Sure it will. It's just that the vegetables are not available there. > As you can see in the example with the moose they have no problem > living in extreme cold climates even though they have shorter hairs > than the carnivores who live under the same conditions. > > >Again living in a nice heated house doesn't equate > >you with an Eskimo or Siberian. > > Is that your argument for eating meat - that eskimos do it? Where is > the sense in that? > > Life is not an argument. Humans are omnivores. Bye Bye. > www.krishna.com > www.iskcon.org > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:43:45 -0500, "Tim" <aaa> wrote: > > >FYI. A moose is not a human. Moose have a tendency to be covered in hair. > > But a wolf has more hair, so that would defeat your notion that you > need meat to develop layers of fat to keep warm in a cold climate. > > >Avacados and what ever else you ate don't grow in -30c. Also you probably > >lived in a heated house. Still moose aren't human. And you call my point > >moronic - ha. > > What are we talking about now? Do you mean to say that because they > can't grow vegetables in minus 30 it is alright to slaughter animals > en masse where they CAN grow vegetables and where it is not necessary > to eat meat to survive? Either you are confused or you are being > deliberately obtrusive. ====================== No, you are being deliberatly ignorant. The production, processing, storage, and transportation of *your* veggies is what is being called into question, stupid. If you claim that people shouldn't raise meat where veggies can grow, then *you* should be eating meat instead of wasteing all the resources and energy it takes to get veggies to where you are. > > >Like you point out veggies don't grow where Eskimos live. How then can they > >be herbivores? > > Who said they were? > > >The fat afforded by certain veggies will not help someone > >exposed to the elements. > > Sure it will. It's just that the vegetables are not available there. ================= No they aren't, and not only do you have the death and suffering attributed to their production, but now you've added massive amounts of transportation to them. All causeing far more animals to die and suffer than if you just ate that moose that is available to you. > As you can see in the example with the moose they have no problem > living in extreme cold climates even though they have shorter hairs > than the carnivores who live under the same conditions. > > >Again living in a nice heated house doesn't equate > >you with an Eskimo or Siberian. > > Is that your argument for eating meat - that eskimos do it? Where is > the sense in that? ================== Where is your sense in killing animals just to transport your veggies to you? I can see that your one remaining braincell has given up hope on you and has now fully gone delusional... > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:48:35 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > >LOL Then why do you keep responding idiot? And I might add, responding nut > >never addressing what is dais. Why you doing all the tap dancing and > >dodging, killer? > > Because I love to see you squirm and make an ass out yourself, > meat-head. =============== ROTFLMAO You've yet to come close, killer. But, it is fun laughing at your stupidity. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:22:24 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > > > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message > > >> HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER > >================== > >Something you've never done, killer. > > Oh, but I have, meat-head. The facts don't go away no matter how much > you deny them. ===================== They don't mean anything to the meat argument, killer. All you've done is again proven your ignorance on the subject. Do keep it up though, the laughter is healing... > > >> The New York Times, Tuesday, June 20, > > > > > >snippage of 'factoids' that have no bearing on the massive amounts of death > >and suffering *you* cause by you diet. > > Nothing causes so much suffering to highly sensitive living entities > and ruins the environment as the meat production. ================== Another ly. Is that all you have? Tell us how that moose you could eat causes all that massive envirornmental damage. care to start, killer? > > >Are you really so stupid as to believe that a veg*n diet in the far north is > >benificial to animals overall? > > If more people go vegetarian less animals suffer, ====================== No, stupid, all you do is change the types of bodies, and then leave the ones you kill to just rot where they fall. that's just common > sense. It doesn't whether they live in the far north or not. ==================== It makes a big difference stupid. That you can't see that says alot about your deliberate ignorance. The meat > production is only the second largest business in the world because > there are so many meat-heads like you. ================= No, because it tastes good, provides a healthy diet, and is economaical. > > > ou really need to feed those two braincells > >of yours if you do, killer. > > > >Now, go have that nice blood-drenched dinner, hypocrite. > > No thanks. I know it must be hard for a die hard meat-head like you to > fathom that you can live without meat, but I can assure you it is > quite possible. Not only is it possible, but your quality of life will > improve so much more by turning to a vegetarian diet. ================== No, it won't. You can't get all the nutrients you need from plants. > > Just to hammer home the point once more, so that everybody can see how > clueless you a ================== No, you already the clueless king of usenet comedy, killer.... > > > > HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER > ============= You've lost, yet again, hypocrite. snippage of crappola... |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 17:53:58 -0600, "Russ Thompson" > > wrote: > > >> BTW, I don't advocate veganism. I advocate vegetarianism. Still mooses > >> don't take milk products. > > > >What do you suppose happens to the cows who produced the milk that makes > >your cheese after they are no longer productive? > > I live in an Indian village, where the cows are allowed to live out > their full natural lifespan. > > Apart from that do you mean to say, that it is alright to slaughter > animals in the billions every year in automated slaughter houses, ================== At least they die a humane death, unlike the ones that suffer and die at the hands of your crop production. Those mammals, birds, reptiles, fish, and amphibians die gruesome, horrible deaths all for your cheap, convenient veggies. Why is it ok to slice, dice, shred, dis-member, and poison these animals, hypocrite? Oh yeah, because they are the animals *YOU* cause to die, and you only focus on what you think others are doing, eh killer? > because the animals are also being exploited by the dairy industry? > > Then you make the mistake of thinking that two wrongs make one right. ================= You're mistake is thinking that your lys make anything 'right'. Too bad they don't, killer. > > > www.krishna.com > www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:04:39 GMT, Jonathan Ball > > wrote: > > >"The above" is bullshit; unadulterated bullshit. The > >problem of world hunger has nothing to do with feeding > >grain to livestock. > > Of course it has. Keeping animals for slaughter is grossly sinful. ================= Killing animals for your selfishness and entertainment is more a sin, killer. Why do you continue that death and suffering? > > > www.krishna.com > www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Russ Thompson" > wrote in message ... > > Of course it has. Keeping animals for slaughter is grossly sinful. > > www.krishna.com > > www.iskcon.org > > *** "sinful"? According to who? Some religion or cult? According to the bald > people who beg at the airport? ================= Veganism is a religion. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Lab-Grown Meat May Save a Lot More than Farm Animals’ Lives | General Cooking | |||
| How producing “ethical, zero-harm” plant food for vegans and vegetarians kills more animals than, well, actually killing animals for the purpose of eating them. | General Cooking | |||
| "Consideration for the lives of farm animals" - meaningless tripe | Vegan | |||
| Non-existent - but NOT imaginary - farm animals | Vegan | |||
| A day on the farm | General Cooking | |||
Linear Mode
