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 Search this Thread Display Modes
  #81 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?


"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "rick" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> > nk.net...
>> >>
>> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
>> >> >> oups.com...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > rick wrote:
>> >> > <..>
>> >> >> >> Not really. The resources used to keep a cow alive is
>> >> >> >> quite
>> >> >> >> combatible with wild animals in the same habitat.
>> >> >
>> >> > 'Animal Enemies
>> >> ===========================
>> >> mono-culture crop fields, fool...
>> >
>> > Grain for feed, hay and silage...

>> ======================
>> Food for fools....

>
> Feed for animals for fat for fools like you.

===================
Hardly killer. The beef I eat isn't fed any feeds. Too bad for
you, eh loser?


>
> Um... no refutation of anything below, etter? Time you left,
> troll.

======================
Nothing to it troll... You post your typical spew...


[i]
>
>> >> How many mono-culture crop
>> >> fields do you suppose it takes to feed the same elk, sheep,
>> >> and
>> >> deer? Where do you think that they are allowed to eat
>> >> those
>> >> crops, dave? It's still a bogus example. grazing cattle
>> >> don't
>> >> require the millions and millions of acres of destroyed
>> >> habitat
>> >> that your crops do.
>> >
>> > 302 million hectares of destroyed habitat, ricky. 272
>> > million hectares
>> > in pasture and about 30 million hectares for cultivated feed
>> > grains.
>> >
>> > 'Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic,
>> > detrimental changes
>> > in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions
>> > throughout most
>> > of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock
>> > grazing as
>> > the biggest single perpetrator of these changes,
>> > particularly considering
>> > that it was the only significant land use over most of the
>> > West.
>> > One of the most useful and informative descriptions of the
>> > early West
>> > was that of Meriweather Lewis and William Clark on their
>> > famous
>> > expedition across the northern Midwest, Rockies, and Pacific
>> > Northwest from 1804 to 1806 (Thwaites 1959). Their
>> > descriptions of
>> > the unconquered West are of a world we can scarcely imagine:
>> > landscapes filled with wildlife; great diversities of lush
>> > vegetation; highly
>> > productive, free-flowing rivers, creeks, and springs;
>> > abundant, dark,
>> > fertile soil; unaltered, unimpeded fire and other natural
>> > processes. Of
>> > the Montana plains, one excerpt from Clark reads, "we
>> > observe in
>> > every direction Buffalow, Elk Antelopes & Mule Deer
>> > inumerable and
>> > so jintle that we could approach them near with great ease."
>> > Another
>> > states, We saw a great number of buffaloe, Elk, common and
>> > Black
>> > tailed deer, goats [pronghorn] beaver and wolves. ..
>> >
>> > In the West today only ungrazed Yellowstone National Park
>> > supports
>> > nearly this variety and density of large wild animals. ..
>> >
>> > Lewis and Clark's and other historic journals attest that
>> > buffalo, elk,
>> > deer, bighorns, pronghorn, mountain goats, moose, horses,
>> > grizzly
>> > and black bears, wolves, foxes, cougars, bobcats, beaver,
>> > muskrats,
>> > river otters, fish, porcupines, wild turkeys and other
>> > "game" birds,
>> > waterfowl, snakes, prairie dogs and other rodents, most
>> > insects, and
>> > the vast majority of wild animals were all many times more
>> > abundant
>> > then than now. So too were native plants; the journals
>> > describe a
>> > great abundance and diversity of grasses and herbaceous
>> > vegetation,
>> > willows and deciduous trees, cattails, rushes, sedges, wild
>> > grapes,
>> > chokecherries, currants, wild cherries and plums,
>> > gooseberries,
>> > "red" and "yellow" berries, service berries, flax, dock,
>> > wild garlic and
>> > onions, sunflowers, wild roses, tansy, honeysuckle, mints,
>> > and more,
>> > a large number being edible. Most of these plants have been
>> > depleted
>> > through the many effects of livestock grazing for 100 years
>> > and are
>> > today comparatively scarce.
>> > .......'
>> > Livestock Grazing: Enviro. Effects
>> > http://www.wasteofthewest.com/Chapter3.html
>> >
>> > Global Perspective
>> > http://www.wasteofthewest.com/Chapter6.html
>> >
>> >> > 'n the eyes of graziers, basically there are 3
>> >> > requirements
>> >> > for an acceptable environment -- grass, water, and
>> >> > livestock
>> >> > to eat and drink them. All else is questionable, if not
>> >> > expendable, a possible hindrance to profit and power.
>> >> >
>> >> > The ranching establishment's assault on the environment,
>> >> > therefore, includes campaigns against a huge number and
>> >> > wide variety of animals. Most of the score or so native
>> >> > large
>> >> > mammal species in the West have been decimated by
>> >> > ranching,
>> >> > both intentionally through slaughtering efforts and
>> >> > indirectly
>> >> > through the harmful effects of livestock grazing and
>> >> > ranching
>> >> > developments. Indeed, most larger and a great many
>> >> > smaller
>> >> > animal species are in some way assailed as enemies. The
>> >> > mass carnage carried out for the sake of privately owned
>> >> > livestock continues today throughout the grazed 70% of
>> >> > the
>> >> > West, including public lands, and even in adjacent
>> >> > ungrazed
>> >> > areas.
>> >> >
>> >> > Though definitions given by ranching advocates vary, most
>> >> > animal enemies fall into 4 main subdivisions: Carnivores
>> >> > and
>> >> > omnivores are (1) predators if able to kill a sheep,
>> >> > calf, or
>> >> > goat. Herbivores are (2) competitors if they eat enough
>> >> > forage
>> >> > or browse to decrease the amount available to livestock.
>> >> > Many smaller animal species are (3) pests if they occur
>> >> > in
>> >> > large enough numbers to affect production in some manner.
>> >> > And a huge number of animals are considered (4) no-
>> >> > goods,
>> >> > inherently "no good" because they are perceived as
>> >> > possessing
>> >> > some offensive characteristic.
>> >> > http://www.wasteofthewest/chapter4/page7.html
>> >> > Next page-
>> >> > http://www.wasteofthewest/chapter4/page8.html
>> >> >
>> >> >> > It was a terrible example on my part. Here's a better
>> >> >> > one,
>> >> >> > courtesy of Pearl:
>> >> >> > 'Wyoming state biologists have estimated that one cow
>> >> >> > eats
>> >> >> > enough forage to support 6.9 bighorn sheep, 10.8
>> >> >> > antelope,
>> >> >> > 7.8 deer or 2.1 elk.'
>> >> >> > http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/cattle_grazing.cfm
>> >> >> =========================
>> >> >> Right. No biases there, eh dave? How many mono-culture
>> >> >> crop
>> >> >> fields do you suppose it takes to feed the same elk,
>> >> >> sheep,
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> deer? Where do you think that they are allowed to eat
>> >> >> those
>> >> >> crops, dave? It's still a bogus example. grazing
>> >> >> cattle
>> >> >> don't
>> >> >> require the millions and millions of acres of destroyed
>> >> >> habitat that your crops do.
>> >> >
>> >> > 'The 7 billion livestock animals in the United States
>> >> > consume
>> >> > five times as much grain as is consumed directly by the
>> >> > entire
>> >> > American population.
>> >> ======================
>> >> I see you cannot answer the question, killer...
>> >
>> > "Where .."? Try on the 302 million hectares now used for
>> > livestock.
>> >
>> > And aren't you forgetting something, 'mr. field-mouse
>> > genius'?
>> > Doesn't cropland provide habitat for the animals you're
>> > forever
>> > on about.. according to you, those thousands that live and
>> > die?
>> >
>> >> > ..
>> >> > About 26 million tons of the livestock feed comes from
>> >> > grains and 15 million tons from forage crops.
>> >> > ..
>> >> > More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to
>> >> > producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about
>> >> > 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million
>> >> > hectares
>> >> > for cultivated feed grains.
>> >> =============================
>> >> And, there is NO requirement to feed cattle any grains...
>> >
>> > WHERE are you going to find the grazing needed to replace
>> > it?
>> >
>> >> > ..
>> >> > http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases...stock.hrs.html
>> >> >
>> >> > Land used for vegetables 3,264,343
>> >> > acres
>> >> > (=
>> >> > 1,321,080 hectares)
>> >> > http://ca.water.usgs.gov/pnsp/circ1131/
>> >> >
>> >> > Orchards, vineyards, and nursery 4,462,591 acres
>> >> > (=
>> >> > 1,806,010 hectares)
>> >> > http://ca.water.usgs.gov/pnsp/circ1131/table6.html
>> >> =======================
>> >> ROTFLAMO you really think these are the only crops grown
>> >> for
>> >> people? You really are this delusional, aren't you fool?
>> >
>> > Those figures sufficed to show how delusional you really
>> > are, fool.
>> >
>> > See other post.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >

>>
>>

>
>



  #82 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?


"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "rick" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> > .net...
>> >>
>> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >> snippage...
>> >
>> > snip and run, as usual

>> ====================
>> Ignorance, as usual...
>>
>> snip more ignorance...

>
> Snip and run, as expected.
>
>> >> > ..
>> >> > More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to
>> >> > producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about
>> >> > 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million
>> >> > hectares
>> >> > for cultivated feed grains.
>> >> > ..
>> >> > http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases...stock.hrs.html
>> >> ======================
>> >> Let's verify the validity of the sites you promote, killer.
>> >> According to this one it takes 12000 gals of water for
>> >> every
>> >> pound of beef.(100,000 liters/kilogram.
>> >>
>> >> Now:
>> >> According to the USGS there is a total of 408,000 Mgal/day
>> >> of
>> >> water withdrawals from all sources, fresh and salt, 35% of
>> >> which
>> >> is used for irrigation and livestock production. Task one,
>> >> figure total water used for all uses per year.
>> >> http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/totpie95.html
>> >>
>> >> In 2002, there was 27,000,000,000 pounds of beef produced.
>> >> http://www.ers.usda.gov/news/BSECoverage.htm
>> >>
>> >> At 12,000 gallons of water per pound... task two, what's
>> >> the
>> >> total.
>> >>
>> >> Task three, where's all that water come from? manna from
>> >> heaven...
>> >
>> > Us Earthlings call it "rain".

>> =========================
>> LOL Thanks for proving you have nothing fool! The claim is
>> water usage, with the implication that the rest of us are
>> going
>> thirsty bvecause of cows. Your spew has been shown to be full
>> of
>> s**t as usual, killer...

>
> Go and try to comprehend what you've snipped.
>
>> Now, answer the questions...

>
> Done.

===================
No, it wasn't. rain isn't included in water usage tables, unless
it came later from a pond, lake, stream...
All those uses are counted and tracked. Your ignorant spews are
off the scale of any reasonable thinking person.
But then, that sure leaves you out, eh troll?



Go read what you've snipped.
>
>> >> As usual, you have posted crap...
>> >
>> > As usual, I have posted info' from an authoratitive source.

>> ============
>> no, you have posted pro[aganda spew that you think backs you
>> up.
>> It's still your ignorance, hypocrite...

>
> The 'propaganda spew' is all yours, rick.

======================
ROTFLMAO My data was from the USGS fool. Too bad for you you
can't refute it with your typical propaganda spew...


>
>
>
>
>



  #83 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 692
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?

"rick" > wrote in message ink.net...
>
> "pearl" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "rick" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >>
> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> > nk.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> oups.com...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > rick wrote:
> >> >> > <..>
> >> >> >> >> Not really. The resources used to keep a cow alive is
> >> >> >> >> quite
> >> >> >> >> combatible with wild animals in the same habitat.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 'Animal Enemies
> >> >> ===========================
> >> >> mono-culture crop fields, fool...
> >> >
> >> > Grain for feed, hay and silage...
> >> ======================
> >> Food for fools....

> >
> > Feed for animals for fat for fools like you.

> ===================
> Hardly killer. The beef I eat isn't fed any feeds. Too bad for
> you, eh loser?


You are lying. Even if 'grass fed', the animals are given
hay or silage during winter months.

> > Um... no refutation of anything below, etter? Time you left, troll.

> ======================
> Nothing to it troll... You post your typical spew...


Address it then.
[i]
> >> How many mono-culture crop
> >> fields do you suppose it takes to feed the same elk, sheep,
> >> and
> >> deer? Where do you think that they are allowed to eat those
> >> crops, dave? It's still a bogus example. grazing cattle
> >> don't
> >> require the millions and millions of acres of destroyed
> >> habitat
> >> that your crops do.

> >
> > 302 million hectares of destroyed habitat, ricky. 272 million hectares
> > in pasture and about 30 million hectares for cultivated feed grains.
> >
> > 'Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic, detrimental changes
> > in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions throughout most
> > of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock grazing as
> > the biggest single perpetrator of these changes, particularly considering
> > that it was the only significant land use over most of the West.
> > One of the most useful and informative descriptions of the early West
> > was that of Meriweather Lewis and William Clark on their famous
> > expedition across the northern Midwest, Rockies, and Pacific
> > Northwest from 1804 to 1806 (Thwaites 1959). Their descriptions of
> > the unconquered West are of a world we can scarcely imagine:
> > landscapes filled with wildlife; great diversities of lush vegetation; highly
> > productive, free-flowing rivers, creeks, and springs; abundant, dark,
> > fertile soil; unaltered, unimpeded fire and other natural processes. Of
> > the Montana plains, one excerpt from Clark reads, "we observe in
> > every direction Buffalow, Elk Antelopes & Mule Deer inumerable and
> > so jintle that we could approach them near with great ease." Another
> > states, We saw a great number of buffaloe, Elk, common and Black
> > tailed deer, goats [pronghorn] beaver and wolves. ..
> >
> > In the West today only ungrazed Yellowstone National Park supports
> > nearly this variety and density of large wild animals. ..
> >
> > Lewis and Clark's and other historic journals attest that buffalo, elk,
> > deer, bighorns, pronghorn, mountain goats, moose, horses, grizzly
> > and black bears, wolves, foxes, cougars, bobcats, beaver, muskrats,
> > river otters, fish, porcupines, wild turkeys and other "game" birds,
> > waterfowl, snakes, prairie dogs and other rodents, most insects, and
> > the vast majority of wild animals were all many times more abundant
> > then than now. So too were native plants; the journals describe a
> > great abundance and diversity of grasses and herbaceous vegetation,
> > willows and deciduous trees, cattails, rushes, sedges, wild grapes,
> > chokecherries, currants, wild cherries and plums, gooseberries,
> > "red" and "yellow" berries, service berries, flax, dock, wild garlic and
> > onions, sunflowers, wild roses, tansy, honeysuckle, mints, and more,
> > a large number being edible. Most of these plants have been depleted
> > through the many effects of livestock grazing for 100 years and are
> > today comparatively scarce.
> > .......'
> > Livestock Grazing: Enviro. Effects
> > http://www.wasteofthewest.com/Chapter3.html
> >
> > Global Perspective
> > http://www.wasteofthewest.com/Chapter6.html
> >
> >> > 'n the eyes of graziers, basically there are 3 requirements
> >> > for an acceptable environment -- grass, water, and livestock
> >> > to eat and drink them. All else is questionable, if not
> >> > expendable, a possible hindrance to profit and power.
> >> >
> >> > The ranching establishment's assault on the environment,
> >> > therefore, includes campaigns against a huge number and
> >> > wide variety of animals. Most of the score or so native large
> >> > mammal species in the West have been decimated by ranching,
> >> > both intentionally through slaughtering efforts and indirectly
> >> > through the harmful effects of livestock grazing and ranching
> >> > developments. Indeed, most larger and a great many smaller
> >> > animal species are in some way assailed as enemies. The
> >> > mass carnage carried out for the sake of privately owned
> >> > livestock continues today throughout the grazed 70% of the
> >> > West, including public lands, and even in adjacent ungrazed
> >> > areas.
> >> >
> >> > Though definitions given by ranching advocates vary, most
> >> > animal enemies fall into 4 main subdivisions: Carnivores and
> >> > omnivores are (1) predators if able to kill a sheep, calf, or
> >> > goat. Herbivores are (2) competitors if they eat enough forage
> >> > or browse to decrease the amount available to livestock.
> >> > Many smaller animal species are (3) pests if they occur in
> >> > large enough numbers to affect production in some manner.
> >> > And a huge number of animals are considered (4) no- goods,
> >> > inherently "no good" because they are perceived as possessing
> >> > some offensive characteristic.
> >> > http://www.wasteofthewest/chapter4/page7.html
> >> > Next page-
> >> > http://www.wasteofthewest/chapter4/page8.html
> >> >
> >> >> > It was a terrible example on my part. Here's a better one,
> >> >> > courtesy of Pearl:
> >> >> > 'Wyoming state biologists have estimated that one cow eats
> >> >> > enough forage to support 6.9 bighorn sheep, 10.8 antelope,
> >> >> > 7.8 deer or 2.1 elk.'
> >> >> > http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/cattle_grazing.cfm
> >> >> =========================
> >> >> Right. No biases there, eh dave? How many mono-culture
> >> >> crop
> >> >> fields do you suppose it takes to feed the same elk, sheep,
> >> >> and
> >> >> deer? Where do you think that they are allowed to eat
> >> >> those
> >> >> crops, dave? It's still a bogus example. grazing cattle
> >> >> don't
> >> >> require the millions and millions of acres of destroyed
> >> >> habitat that your crops do.
> >> >
> >> > 'The 7 billion livestock animals in the United States consume
> >> > five times as much grain as is consumed directly by the entire
> >> > American population.
> >> ======================
> >> I see you cannot answer the question, killer...

> >
> > "Where .."? Try on the 302 million hectares now used for livestock.
> >
> > And aren't you forgetting something, 'mr. field-mouse genius'?
> > Doesn't cropland provide habitat for the animals you're forever
> > on about.. according to you, those thousands that live and die?
> >
> >> > ..
> >> > About 26 million tons of the livestock feed comes from
> >> > grains and 15 million tons from forage crops.
> >> > ..
> >> > More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to
> >> > producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about
> >> > 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million hectares
> >> > for cultivated feed grains.
> >> =============================
> >> And, there is NO requirement to feed cattle any grains...

> >
> > WHERE are you going to find the grazing needed to replace it?
> >
> >> > ..
> >> > http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases...stock.hrs.html
> >> >
> >> > Land used for vegetables 3,264,343 acres
> >> > (= 1,321,080 hectares)
> >> > http://ca.water.usgs.gov/pnsp/circ1131/
> >> >
> >> > Orchards, vineyards, and nursery 4,462,591 acres
> >> > (= 1,806,010 hectares)
> >> > http://ca.water.usgs.gov/pnsp/circ1131/table6.html
> >> =======================
> >> ROTFLAMO you really think these are the only crops grown for
> >> people? You really are this delusional, aren't you fool?

> >
> > Those figures sufficed to show how delusional you really are, fool.
> >
> > See other post.
> >
> >
> >
> >

>
>




  #84 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 692
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?

"rick" > wrote in message ink.net...
>
> "pearl" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "rick" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >>
> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> > .net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> snippage...
> >> >
> >> > snip and run, as usual
> >> ====================
> >> Ignorance, as usual...
> >>
> >> snip more ignorance...

> >
> > Snip and run, as expected.
> >
> >> >> > ..
> >> >> > More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to
> >> >> > producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about
> >> >> > 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million
> >> >> > hectares
> >> >> > for cultivated feed grains.
> >> >> > ..
> >> >> > http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases...stock.hrs.html
> >> >> ======================
> >> >> Let's verify the validity of the sites you promote, killer.
> >> >> According to this one it takes 12000 gals of water for
> >> >> every
> >> >> pound of beef.(100,000 liters/kilogram.
> >> >>
> >> >> Now:
> >> >> According to the USGS there is a total of 408,000 Mgal/day
> >> >> of
> >> >> water withdrawals from all sources, fresh and salt, 35% of
> >> >> which
> >> >> is used for irrigation and livestock production. Task one,
> >> >> figure total water used for all uses per year.
> >> >> http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/totpie95.html
> >> >>
> >> >> In 2002, there was 27,000,000,000 pounds of beef produced.
> >> >> http://www.ers.usda.gov/news/BSECoverage.htm
> >> >>
> >> >> At 12,000 gallons of water per pound... task two, what's
> >> >> the
> >> >> total.
> >> >>
> >> >> Task three, where's all that water come from? manna from
> >> >> heaven...
> >> >
> >> > Us Earthlings call it "rain".
> >> =========================
> >> LOL Thanks for proving you have nothing fool! The claim is
> >> water usage, with the implication that the rest of us are
> >> going
> >> thirsty bvecause of cows. Your spew has been shown to be full
> >> of
> >> s**t as usual, killer...

> >
> > Go and try to comprehend what you've snipped.
> >
> >> Now, answer the questions...

> >
> > Done.

> ===================
> No, it wasn't. rain isn't included in water usage tables, unless
> it came later from a pond, lake, stream...


You were trying to discredit the source I cited. You failed.

> All those uses are counted and tracked.


Water used for Thermoelectric power (48%) is not "consumed".

Look again.

> Your ignorant spews are
> off the scale of any reasonable thinking person.
> But then, that sure leaves you out, eh troll?


Projection.

> Go read what you've snipped.
> >
> >> >> As usual, you have posted crap...
> >> >
> >> > As usual, I have posted info' from an authoratitive source.
> >> ============
> >> no, you have posted pro[aganda spew that you think backs you
> >> up.
> >> It's still your ignorance, hypocrite...

> >
> > The 'propaganda spew' is all yours, rick.

> ======================
> ROTFLMAO My data was from the USGS fool. Too bad for you you
> can't refute it with your typical propaganda spew...


You don't even understand what you yourself posted, fool.


  #85 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?


"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "rick" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> > ink.net...
>> >>
>> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> > nk.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> oups.com...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > rick wrote:
>> >> >> > <..>
>> >> >> >> >> Not really. The resources used to keep a cow alive
>> >> >> >> >> is
>> >> >> >> >> quite
>> >> >> >> >> combatible with wild animals in the same habitat.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 'Animal Enemies
>> >> >> ===========================
>> >> >> mono-culture crop fields, fool...
>> >> >
>> >> > Grain for feed, hay and silage...
>> >> ======================
>> >> Food for fools....
>> >
>> > Feed for animals for fat for fools like you.

>> ===================
>> Hardly killer. The beef I eat isn't fed any feeds. Too bad
>> for
>> you, eh loser?

>
> You are lying. Even if 'grass fed', the animals are given
> hay or silage during winter months.

========================
Really? I suggest you know nothing about all parts of the world,
killer...



>
>> > Um... no refutation of anything below, etter? Time you
>> > left, troll.

>> ======================
>> Nothing to it troll... You post your typical spew...

>
> Address it then.

======================
It's lys and delusions. that's all one needs to know...

[i]
>
>> >> How many mono-culture crop
>> >> fields do you suppose it takes to feed the same elk, sheep,
>> >> and
>> >> deer? Where do you think that they are allowed to eat
>> >> those
>> >> crops, dave? It's still a bogus example. grazing cattle
>> >> don't
>> >> require the millions and millions of acres of destroyed
>> >> habitat
>> >> that your crops do.
>> >
>> > 302 million hectares of destroyed habitat, ricky. 272
>> > million hectares
>> > in pasture and about 30 million hectares for cultivated feed
>> > grains.
>> >
>> > 'Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic,
>> > detrimental changes
>> > in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions
>> > throughout most
>> > of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock
>> > grazing as
>> > the biggest single perpetrator of these changes,
>> > particularly considering
>> > that it was the only significant land use over most of the
>> > West.
>> > One of the most useful and informative descriptions of the
>> > early West
>> > was that of Meriweather Lewis and William Clark on their
>> > famous
>> > expedition across the northern Midwest, Rockies, and Pacific
>> > Northwest from 1804 to 1806 (Thwaites 1959). Their
>> > descriptions of
>> > the unconquered West are of a world we can scarcely imagine:
>> > landscapes filled with wildlife; great diversities of lush
>> > vegetation; highly
>> > productive, free-flowing rivers, creeks, and springs;
>> > abundant, dark,
>> > fertile soil; unaltered, unimpeded fire and other natural
>> > processes. Of
>> > the Montana plains, one excerpt from Clark reads, "we
>> > observe in
>> > every direction Buffalow, Elk Antelopes & Mule Deer
>> > inumerable and
>> > so jintle that we could approach them near with great ease."
>> > Another
>> > states, We saw a great number of buffaloe, Elk, common and
>> > Black
>> > tailed deer, goats [pronghorn] beaver and wolves. ..
>> >
>> > In the West today only ungrazed Yellowstone National Park
>> > supports
>> > nearly this variety and density of large wild animals. ..
>> >
>> > Lewis and Clark's and other historic journals attest that
>> > buffalo, elk,
>> > deer, bighorns, pronghorn, mountain goats, moose, horses,
>> > grizzly
>> > and black bears, wolves, foxes, cougars, bobcats, beaver,
>> > muskrats,
>> > river otters, fish, porcupines, wild turkeys and other
>> > "game" birds,
>> > waterfowl, snakes, prairie dogs and other rodents, most
>> > insects, and
>> > the vast majority of wild animals were all many times more
>> > abundant
>> > then than now. So too were native plants; the journals
>> > describe a
>> > great abundance and diversity of grasses and herbaceous
>> > vegetation,
>> > willows and deciduous trees, cattails, rushes, sedges, wild
>> > grapes,
>> > chokecherries, currants, wild cherries and plums,
>> > gooseberries,
>> > "red" and "yellow" berries, service berries, flax, dock,
>> > wild garlic and
>> > onions, sunflowers, wild roses, tansy, honeysuckle, mints,
>> > and more,
>> > a large number being edible. Most of these plants have been
>> > depleted
>> > through the many effects of livestock grazing for 100 years
>> > and are
>> > today comparatively scarce.
>> > .......'
>> > Livestock Grazing: Enviro. Effects
>> > http://www.wasteofthewest.com/Chapter3.html
>> >
>> > Global Perspective
>> > http://www.wasteofthewest.com/Chapter6.html
>> >
>> >> > 'n the eyes of graziers, basically there are 3
>> >> > requirements
>> >> > for an acceptable environment -- grass, water, and
>> >> > livestock
>> >> > to eat and drink them. All else is questionable, if not
>> >> > expendable, a possible hindrance to profit and power.
>> >> >
>> >> > The ranching establishment's assault on the environment,
>> >> > therefore, includes campaigns against a huge number and
>> >> > wide variety of animals. Most of the score or so native
>> >> > large
>> >> > mammal species in the West have been decimated by
>> >> > ranching,
>> >> > both intentionally through slaughtering efforts and
>> >> > indirectly
>> >> > through the harmful effects of livestock grazing and
>> >> > ranching
>> >> > developments. Indeed, most larger and a great many
>> >> > smaller
>> >> > animal species are in some way assailed as enemies. The
>> >> > mass carnage carried out for the sake of privately owned
>> >> > livestock continues today throughout the grazed 70% of
>> >> > the
>> >> > West, including public lands, and even in adjacent
>> >> > ungrazed
>> >> > areas.
>> >> >
>> >> > Though definitions given by ranching advocates vary, most
>> >> > animal enemies fall into 4 main subdivisions: Carnivores
>> >> > and
>> >> > omnivores are (1) predators if able to kill a sheep,
>> >> > calf, or
>> >> > goat. Herbivores are (2) competitors if they eat enough
>> >> > forage
>> >> > or browse to decrease the amount available to livestock.
>> >> > Many smaller animal species are (3) pests if they occur
>> >> > in
>> >> > large enough numbers to affect production in some manner.
>> >> > And a huge number of animals are considered (4) no-
>> >> > goods,
>> >> > inherently "no good" because they are perceived as
>> >> > possessing
>> >> > some offensive characteristic.
>> >> > http://www.wasteofthewest/chapter4/page7.html
>> >> > Next page-
>> >> > http://www.wasteofthewest/chapter4/page8.html
>> >> >
>> >> >> > It was a terrible example on my part. Here's a better
>> >> >> > one,
>> >> >> > courtesy of Pearl:
>> >> >> > 'Wyoming state biologists have estimated that one cow
>> >> >> > eats
>> >> >> > enough forage to support 6.9 bighorn sheep, 10.8
>> >> >> > antelope,
>> >> >> > 7.8 deer or 2.1 elk.'
>> >> >> > http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/cattle_grazing.cfm
>> >> >> =========================
>> >> >> Right. No biases there, eh dave? How many mono-culture
>> >> >> crop
>> >> >> fields do you suppose it takes to feed the same elk,
>> >> >> sheep,
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> deer? Where do you think that they are allowed to eat
>> >> >> those
>> >> >> crops, dave? It's still a bogus example. grazing
>> >> >> cattle
>> >> >> don't
>> >> >> require the millions and millions of acres of destroyed
>> >> >> habitat that your crops do.
>> >> >
>> >> > 'The 7 billion livestock animals in the United States
>> >> > consume
>> >> > five times as much grain as is consumed directly by the
>> >> > entire
>> >> > American population.
>> >> ======================
>> >> I see you cannot answer the question, killer...
>> >
>> > "Where .."? Try on the 302 million hectares now used for
>> > livestock.
>> >
>> > And aren't you forgetting something, 'mr. field-mouse
>> > genius'?
>> > Doesn't cropland provide habitat for the animals you're
>> > forever
>> > on about.. according to you, those thousands that live and
>> > die?
>> >
>> >> > ..
>> >> > About 26 million tons of the livestock feed comes from
>> >> > grains and 15 million tons from forage crops.
>> >> > ..
>> >> > More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to
>> >> > producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about
>> >> > 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million
>> >> > hectares
>> >> > for cultivated feed grains.
>> >> =============================
>> >> And, there is NO requirement to feed cattle any grains...
>> >
>> > WHERE are you going to find the grazing needed to replace
>> > it?
>> >
>> >> > ..
>> >> > http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases...stock.hrs.html
>> >> >
>> >> > Land used for vegetables 3,264,343
>> >> > acres
>> >> > (=
>> >> > 1,321,080 hectares)
>> >> > http://ca.water.usgs.gov/pnsp/circ1131/
>> >> >
>> >> > Orchards, vineyards, and nursery 4,462,591 acres
>> >> > (=
>> >> > 1,806,010 hectares)
>> >> > http://ca.water.usgs.gov/pnsp/circ1131/table6.html
>> >> =======================
>> >> ROTFLAMO you really think these are the only crops grown
>> >> for
>> >> people? You really are this delusional, aren't you fool?
>> >
>> > Those figures sufficed to show how delusional you really
>> > are, fool.
>> >
>> > See other post.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >

>>
>>

>
>
>





  #86 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?


"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "rick" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> > ink.net...
>> >>
>> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> > .net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> snippage...
>> >> >
>> >> > snip and run, as usual
>> >> ====================
>> >> Ignorance, as usual...
>> >>
>> >> snip more ignorance...
>> >
>> > Snip and run, as expected.
>> >
>> >> >> > ..
>> >> >> > More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to
>> >> >> > producing feed for the U.S. livestock population --
>> >> >> > about
>> >> >> > 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million
>> >> >> > hectares
>> >> >> > for cultivated feed grains.
>> >> >> > ..
>> >> >> > http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases...stock.hrs.html
>> >> >> ======================
>> >> >> Let's verify the validity of the sites you promote,
>> >> >> killer.
>> >> >> According to this one it takes 12000 gals of water for
>> >> >> every
>> >> >> pound of beef.(100,000 liters/kilogram.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Now:
>> >> >> According to the USGS there is a total of 408,000
>> >> >> Mgal/day
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> water withdrawals from all sources, fresh and salt, 35%
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> which
>> >> >> is used for irrigation and livestock production. Task
>> >> >> one,
>> >> >> figure total water used for all uses per year.
>> >> >> http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/totpie95.html
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In 2002, there was 27,000,000,000 pounds of beef
>> >> >> produced.
>> >> >> http://www.ers.usda.gov/news/BSECoverage.htm
>> >> >>
>> >> >> At 12,000 gallons of water per pound... task two,
>> >> >> what's
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> total.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Task three, where's all that water come from? manna
>> >> >> from
>> >> >> heaven...
>> >> >
>> >> > Us Earthlings call it "rain".
>> >> =========================
>> >> LOL Thanks for proving you have nothing fool! The claim
>> >> is
>> >> water usage, with the implication that the rest of us are
>> >> going
>> >> thirsty bvecause of cows. Your spew has been shown to be
>> >> full
>> >> of
>> >> s**t as usual, killer...
>> >
>> > Go and try to comprehend what you've snipped.
>> >
>> >> Now, answer the questions...
>> >
>> > Done.

>> ===================
>> No, it wasn't. rain isn't included in water usage tables,
>> unless
>> it came later from a pond, lake, stream...

>
> You were trying to discredit the source I cited. You failed.

====================
The failure is all yours, as usual, killer.


>
>> All those uses are counted and tracked.

>
> Water used for Thermoelectric power (48%) is not "consumed".
>
> Look again.

==================
Yes, do. And then give us the answers, fool.


>
>> Your ignorant spews are
>> off the scale of any reasonable thinking person.
>> But then, that sure leaves you out, eh troll?

>
> Projection.

==================
No, truth. Try it some time, troll...

>
>> Go read what you've snipped.
>> >
>> >> >> As usual, you have posted crap...
>> >> >
>> >> > As usual, I have posted info' from an authoratitive
>> >> > source.
>> >> ============
>> >> no, you have posted pro[aganda spew that you think backs
>> >> you
>> >> up.
>> >> It's still your ignorance, hypocrite...
>> >
>> > The 'propaganda spew' is all yours, rick.

>> ======================
>> ROTFLMAO My data was from the USGS fool. Too bad for you you
>> can't refute it with your typical propaganda spew...

>
> You don't even understand what you yourself posted, fool.

========================
LOL Better than your spew full of lys, distortions and
delusions, killer...


>
>



  #87 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 692
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?

"rick" > wrote in message ink.net...
>
> "pearl" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "rick" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >>
> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> > ink.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> > nk.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> oups.com...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > rick wrote:
> >> >> >> > <..>
> >> >> >> >> >> Not really. The resources used to keep a cow alive
> >> >> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> >> >> quite
> >> >> >> >> >> combatible with wild animals in the same habitat.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > 'Animal Enemies
> >> >> >> ===========================
> >> >> >> mono-culture crop fields, fool...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Grain for feed, hay and silage...
> >> >> ======================
> >> >> Food for fools....
> >> >
> >> > Feed for animals for fat for fools like you.
> >> ===================
> >> Hardly killer. The beef I eat isn't fed any feeds. Too bad
> >> for
> >> you, eh loser?

> >
> > You are lying. Even if 'grass fed', the animals are given
> > hay or silage during winter months.

> ========================
> Really? I suggest you know nothing about all parts of the world,
> killer...


You live in Canada, don't you?

Canada - Eat Wild
Our cattle are moved to fresh, quality grass daily throughout the grazing season
and in winter are fed a supplementary ration of hay or silage. ...
www.eatwild.com/products/canada.html - 79k - Cached - Similar pages

Massachusetts - Eat Wild
Cows get grass silage and hay in winter, otherwise pasture. ... The Grassfed
Gourmet Cookbook—the first cookbook devoted to grass-fed ...
www.eatwild.com/products/massachusetts.html - 43k - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from www.eatwild.com ]

Springwillow Farms-Grass Fed Beef
Grass fed beef are not fed grain, but graze on pasture during the summer and are
fed a high quality hay or silage during the winter. ...
www.springwillowfarms.com/grassfedbreeds.htm - 7k - Cached - Similar pages

About Bob and Moira Kerr of Back to Nature Beef
Bob and Moira Kerr selling grass fed beef at market ... in the growing season
and when winter comes we serve them a forage diet of stored hay and silage. ...
www.backtonaturebeef.com/About.htm - 19k - Cached - Similar pages
....
http://www.google.ie/search?hs=C97&h...G=Search&meta=

You're one dumbass ignorant liar, etter.

> >> > Um... no refutation of anything below, etter? Time you
> >> > left, troll.
> >> ======================
> >> Nothing to it troll... You post your typical spew...

> >
> > Address it then.

> ======================
> It's lys and delusions. that's all one needs to know...


That's all you could ever know.

~ Etter's Ode ~

Confined within a closed mind
Apparitions roam vicious in intent
Making me believe, holding me captive
Lys are my truths
MY ignorance is taught
I don't know the truth
I'm not allowed
Confined within this narrow mind

My world is dark and cold
It's always black as night
The only light that I see is that which trickles
threw the fog of black Cloud

I sit on a tree stump and look out into the mist
Watching it crate shapes of abominable horrors that
Only appear in the darkest reaches of my mind
Dead trees surround me
Their branches reach for the sky and at me
As if seeking salvation from there mere existence
~

<..>


  #88 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 692
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?

"rick" > wrote in message link.net...
>
> "pearl" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "rick" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >>
> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> > ink.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> > .net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> snippage...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > snip and run, as usual
> >> >> ====================
> >> >> Ignorance, as usual...
> >> >>
> >> >> snip more ignorance...
> >> >
> >> > Snip and run, as expected.
> >> >
> >> >> >> > ..
> >> >> >> > More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to
> >> >> >> > producing feed for the U.S. livestock population --
> >> >> >> > about
> >> >> >> > 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million
> >> >> >> > hectares
> >> >> >> > for cultivated feed grains.
> >> >> >> > ..
> >> >> >> > http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases...stock.hrs.html
> >> >> >> ======================
> >> >> >> Let's verify the validity of the sites you promote,
> >> >> >> killer.
> >> >> >> According to this one it takes 12000 gals of water for
> >> >> >> every
> >> >> >> pound of beef.(100,000 liters/kilogram.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Now:
> >> >> >> According to the USGS there is a total of 408,000
> >> >> >> Mgal/day
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> water withdrawals from all sources, fresh and salt, 35%
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> which
> >> >> >> is used for irrigation and livestock production. Task
> >> >> >> one,
> >> >> >> figure total water used for all uses per year.
> >> >> >> http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/totpie95.html
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In 2002, there was 27,000,000,000 pounds of beef
> >> >> >> produced.
> >> >> >> http://www.ers.usda.gov/news/BSECoverage.htm
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> At 12,000 gallons of water per pound... task two,
> >> >> >> what's
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> total.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Task three, where's all that water come from? manna
> >> >> >> from
> >> >> >> heaven...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Us Earthlings call it "rain".
> >> >> =========================
> >> >> LOL Thanks for proving you have nothing fool! The claim
> >> >> is
> >> >> water usage, with the implication that the rest of us are
> >> >> going
> >> >> thirsty bvecause of cows. Your spew has been shown to be
> >> >> full
> >> >> of
> >> >> s**t as usual, killer...
> >> >
> >> > Go and try to comprehend what you've snipped.
> >> >
> >> >> Now, answer the questions...
> >> >
> >> > Done.
> >> ===================
> >> No, it wasn't. rain isn't included in water usage tables,
> >> unless
> >> it came later from a pond, lake, stream...

> >
> > You were trying to discredit the source I cited. You failed.

> ====================
> The failure is all yours, as usual, killer.


Projection.

> >> All those uses are counted and tracked.

> >
> > Water used for Thermoelectric power (48%) is not "consumed".
> >
> > Look again.

> ==================
> Yes, do. And then give us the answers, fool.


Yes, do.

> >> Your ignorant spews are
> >> off the scale of any reasonable thinking person.
> >> But then, that sure leaves you out, eh troll?

> >
> > Projection.

> ==================
> No, truth. Try it some time, troll...


You're off your rocker, ricky.

> >> Go read what you've snipped.
> >> >
> >> >> >> As usual, you have posted crap...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > As usual, I have posted info' from an authoratitive
> >> >> > source.
> >> >> ============
> >> >> no, you have posted pro[aganda spew that you think backs
> >> >> you
> >> >> up.
> >> >> It's still your ignorance, hypocrite...
> >> >
> >> > The 'propaganda spew' is all yours, rick.
> >> ======================
> >> ROTFLMAO My data was from the USGS fool. Too bad for you you
> >> can't refute it with your typical propaganda spew...

> >
> > You don't even understand what you yourself posted, fool.

> ========================
> LOL Better than your spew full of lys, distortions and
> delusions, killer...


Projection.



  #89 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?


"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "rick" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> > ink.net...
>> >>
>> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> > nk.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> oups.com...
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > rick wrote:
>> >> >> >> > <..>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Not really. The resources used to keep a cow
>> >> >> >> >> >> alive
>> >> >> >> >> >> is
>> >> >> >> >> >> quite
>> >> >> >> >> >> combatible with wild animals in the same
>> >> >> >> >> >> habitat.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > 'Animal Enemies
>> >> >> >> ===========================
>> >> >> >> mono-culture crop fields, fool...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Grain for feed, hay and silage...
>> >> >> ======================
>> >> >> Food for fools....
>> >> >
>> >> > Feed for animals for fat for fools like you.
>> >> ===================
>> >> Hardly killer. The beef I eat isn't fed any feeds. Too
>> >> bad
>> >> for
>> >> you, eh loser?
>> >
>> > You are lying. Even if 'grass fed', the animals are given
>> > hay or silage during winter months.

>> ========================
>> Really? I suggest you know nothing about all parts of the
>> world,
>> killer...

>
> You live in Canada, don't you?

===================
LOL No, I do not...


>
> Canada - Eat Wild
> Our cattle are moved to fresh, quality grass daily throughout
> the grazing season
> and in winter are fed a supplementary ration of hay or silage.
> ...
> www.eatwild.com/products/canada.html - 79k - Cached - Similar
> pages
>
> Massachusetts - Eat Wild
> Cows get grass silage and hay in winter, otherwise pasture. ...
> The Grassfed
> Gourmet Cookbook—the first cookbook devoted to grass-fed ...
> www.eatwild.com/products/massachusetts.html - 43k - Cached -
> Similar pages
> [ More results from www.eatwild.com ]
>
> Springwillow Farms-Grass Fed Beef
> Grass fed beef are not fed grain, but graze on pasture during
> the summer and are
> fed a high quality hay or silage during the winter. ...
> www.springwillowfarms.com/grassfedbreeds.htm - 7k - Cached -
> Similar pages
>
> About Bob and Moira Kerr of Back to Nature Beef
> Bob and Moira Kerr selling grass fed beef at market ... in the
> growing season
> and when winter comes we serve them a forage diet of stored hay
> and silage. ...
> www.backtonaturebeef.com/About.htm - 19k - Cached - Similar
> pages
> ...
> http://www.google.ie/search?hs=C97&h...G=Search&meta=
>
> You're one dumbass ignorant liar, etter.

=====================
Nope. You're just too stupid to understand the size of North
America and the vast differences in clamate.


>
>> >> > Um... no refutation of anything below, etter? Time you
>> >> > left, troll.
>> >> ======================
>> >> Nothing to it troll... You post your typical spew...
>> >
>> > Address it then.

>> ======================
>> It's lys and delusions. that's all one needs to know...

>
> That's all you could ever know.

====================
It's all you post, and that I know...

>
> ~ Etter's Ode ~
>
> Confined within a closed mind
> Apparitions roam vicious in intent
> Making me believe, holding me captive
> Lys are my truths
> MY ignorance is taught
> I don't know the truth
> I'm not allowed
> Confined within this narrow mind
>
> My world is dark and cold
> It's always black as night
> The only light that I see is that which trickles
> threw the fog of black Cloud
>
> I sit on a tree stump and look out into the mist
> Watching it crate shapes of abominable horrors that
> Only appear in the darkest reaches of my mind
> Dead trees surround me
> Their branches reach for the sky and at me
> As if seeking salvation from there mere existence
> ~
>
> <..>
>
>



  #90 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 692
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?

"rick" > wrote in message nk.net...
>
> "pearl" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "rick" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >>
> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> > ink.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> > nk.net...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> oups.com...
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > rick wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > <..>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Not really. The resources used to keep a cow
> >> >> >> >> >> >> alive
> >> >> >> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> >> >> >> quite
> >> >> >> >> >> >> combatible with wild animals in the same
> >> >> >> >> >> >> habitat.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > 'Animal Enemies
> >> >> >> >> ===========================
> >> >> >> >> mono-culture crop fields, fool...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Grain for feed, hay and silage...
> >> >> >> ======================
> >> >> >> Food for fools....
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Feed for animals for fat for fools like you.
> >> >> ===================
> >> >> Hardly killer. The beef I eat isn't fed any feeds. Too
> >> >> bad
> >> >> for
> >> >> you, eh loser?
> >> >
> >> > You are lying. Even if 'grass fed', the animals are given
> >> > hay or silage during winter months.
> >> ========================
> >> Really? I suggest you know nothing about all parts of the
> >> world,
> >> killer...

> >
> > You live in Canada, don't you?

> ===================
> LOL No, I do not...


I gathered that from the website you used to have.
http://web.archive.org/web/200307082...t.net/~retter/

I now see that you in fact live in Ohio.
http://www.angelfire.com/bc/rbp/dir/ricke.html

In October, 'temperatures drop into the low 40s F/ 4-6 C
at night. Winters can be cold (17 to 43 F/-8 to 6 C), ...

2002 Average Mean (30 years)
January 31.2 25.4
February 35.2 28.4
March 39.4 39.2
April 52.9 49.6
May 56.9 59.9
June 71.5 68.6
July 75.9 72.5
August 74.2 70.7
September 68.3 64.2
October 52.0 52.7
November 40.4 42.0
December 31.1 31.0

http://www.discoverohio.com/visitors/climate.asp

Grass stops growing < 8 C/46 F, so what is done in Ohio?.

'Acreage harvested for silage is estimated at 190,000 acres..
http://www.nass.usda.gov/oh/SM0105.txt

'Acreage (hay) to be harvested in Ohio is expected to
increase three percent, to 1.44 million acres.
http://www.agry.purdue.edu/ext/forag...0Marketing.htm

> > Canada - Eat Wild
> > Our cattle are moved to fresh, quality grass daily throughout
> > the grazing season
> > and in winter are fed a supplementary ration of hay or silage.
> > ...
> > www.eatwild.com/products/canada.html - 79k - Cached - Similar
> > pages
> >
> > Massachusetts - Eat Wild
> > Cows get grass silage and hay in winter, otherwise pasture. ...
> > The Grassfed
> > Gourmet Cookbook—the first cookbook devoted to grass-fed ...
> > www.eatwild.com/products/massachusetts.html - 43k - Cached -
> > Similar pages
> > [ More results from www.eatwild.com ]
> >
> > Springwillow Farms-Grass Fed Beef
> > Grass fed beef are not fed grain, but graze on pasture during
> > the summer and are
> > fed a high quality hay or silage during the winter. ...
> > www.springwillowfarms.com/grassfedbreeds.htm - 7k - Cached -
> > Similar pages
> >
> > About Bob and Moira Kerr of Back to Nature Beef
> > Bob and Moira Kerr selling grass fed beef at market ... in the
> > growing season
> > and when winter comes we serve them a forage diet of stored hay
> > and silage. ...
> > www.backtonaturebeef.com/About.htm - 19k - Cached - Similar
> > pages
> > ...
> >

http://www.google.ie/search?hs=C97&h...G=Search&meta=
> >
> > You're one dumbass ignorant liar, etter.

> =====================
> Nope. You're just too stupid to understand the size of North
> America and the vast differences in clamate.


*You* live in Ohio. See above, stupid lying troll.

> >> >> > Um... no refutation of anything below, etter? Time you
> >> >> > left, troll.
> >> >> ======================
> >> >> Nothing to it troll... You post your typical spew...
> >> >
> >> > Address it then.
> >> ======================
> >> It's lys and delusions. that's all one needs to know...

> >
> > That's all you could ever know.

> ====================
> It's all you post, and that I know...
>
> >
> > ~ Etter's Ode ~
> >
> > Confined within a closed mind
> > Apparitions roam vicious in intent
> > Making me believe, holding me captive
> > Lys are my truths
> > MY ignorance is taught
> > I don't know the truth
> > I'm not allowed
> > Confined within this narrow mind
> >
> > My world is dark and cold
> > It's always black as night
> > The only light that I see is that which trickles
> > threw the fog of black Cloud
> >
> > I sit on a tree stump and look out into the mist
> > Watching it crate shapes of abominable horrors that
> > Only appear in the darkest reaches of my mind
> > Dead trees surround me
> > Their branches reach for the sky and at me
> > As if seeking salvation from there mere existence
> > ~
> >
> > <..>
> >
> >

>
>





  #91 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?


"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "rick" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
>>
>> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> > ink.net...
>> >>
>> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> > nk.net...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> > ink.net...
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >> >> oups.com...
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > rick wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> > <..>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Not really. The resources used to keep a cow
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> alive
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> is
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> quite
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> combatible with wild animals in the same
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> habitat.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > 'Animal Enemies
>> >> >> >> >> ===========================
>> >> >> >> >> mono-culture crop fields, fool...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Grain for feed, hay and silage...
>> >> >> >> ======================
>> >> >> >> Food for fools....
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Feed for animals for fat for fools like you.
>> >> >> ===================
>> >> >> Hardly killer. The beef I eat isn't fed any feeds. Too
>> >> >> bad
>> >> >> for
>> >> >> you, eh loser?
>> >> >
>> >> > You are lying. Even if 'grass fed', the animals are
>> >> > given
>> >> > hay or silage during winter months.
>> >> ========================
>> >> Really? I suggest you know nothing about all parts of the
>> >> world,
>> >> killer...
>> >
>> > You live in Canada, don't you?

>> ===================
>> LOL No, I do not...

>
> I gathered that from the website you used to have.
> http://web.archive.org/web/200307082...t.net/~retter/
>
> I now see that you in fact live in Ohio.
> http://www.angelfire.com/bc/rbp/dir/ricke.html

===================
Face it, you have no idea now. You reference data years old,
just like usual...



>
> In October, 'temperatures drop into the low 40s F/ 4-6 C
> at night. Winters can be cold (17 to 43 F/-8 to 6 C), ...
>
> 2002 Average Mean (30 years)
> January 31.2 25.4
> February 35.2 28.4
> March 39.4 39.2
> April 52.9 49.6
> May 56.9 59.9
> June 71.5 68.6
> July 75.9 72.5
> August 74.2 70.7
> September 68.3 64.2
> October 52.0 52.7
> November 40.4 42.0
> December 31.1 31.0
>
> http://www.discoverohio.com/visitors/climate.asp
>
> Grass stops growing < 8 C/46 F, so what is done in Ohio?.
>
> 'Acreage harvested for silage is estimated at 190,000 acres..
> http://www.nass.usda.gov/oh/SM0105.txt
>
> 'Acreage (hay) to be harvested in Ohio is expected to
> increase three percent, to 1.44 million acres.
> http://www.agry.purdue.edu/ext/forag...0Marketing.htm

=========================
I'm looking out my window right now seeing green grasses. I just
got off a roof doing some shingles on a barn addition.
Anyway you slice it fool, places that use hay cause less cds than
your mono-culture crop production. You still lose. especially
since you have to import much of the foods you eat, killer.


>
>> > Canada - Eat Wild
>> > Our cattle are moved to fresh, quality grass daily
>> > throughout
>> > the grazing season
>> > and in winter are fed a supplementary ration of hay or
>> > silage.
>> > ...
>> > www.eatwild.com/products/canada.html - 79k - Cached -
>> > Similar
>> > pages
>> >
>> > Massachusetts - Eat Wild
>> > Cows get grass silage and hay in winter, otherwise pasture.
>> > ...
>> > The Grassfed
>> > Gourmet Cookbook—the first cookbook devoted to grass-fed ...
>> > www.eatwild.com/products/massachusetts.html - 43k - Cached -
>> > Similar pages
>> > [ More results from www.eatwild.com ]
>> >
>> > Springwillow Farms-Grass Fed Beef
>> > Grass fed beef are not fed grain, but graze on pasture
>> > during
>> > the summer and are
>> > fed a high quality hay or silage during the winter. ...
>> > www.springwillowfarms.com/grassfedbreeds.htm - 7k - Cached -
>> > Similar pages
>> >
>> > About Bob and Moira Kerr of Back to Nature Beef
>> > Bob and Moira Kerr selling grass fed beef at market ... in
>> > the
>> > growing season
>> > and when winter comes we serve them a forage diet of stored
>> > hay
>> > and silage. ...
>> > www.backtonaturebeef.com/About.htm - 19k - Cached - Similar
>> > pages
>> > ...
>> >

> http://www.google.ie/search?hs=C97&h...G=Search&meta=
>> >
>> > You're one dumbass ignorant liar, etter.

>> =====================
>> Nope. You're just too stupid to understand the size of North
>> America and the vast differences in clamate.

>
> *You* live in Ohio. See above, stupid lying troll.
>
>> >> >> > Um... no refutation of anything below, etter? Time
>> >> >> > you
>> >> >> > left, troll.
>> >> >> ======================
>> >> >> Nothing to it troll... You post your typical spew...
>> >> >
>> >> > Address it then.
>> >> ======================
>> >> It's lys and delusions. that's all one needs to know...
>> >
>> > That's all you could ever know.

>> ====================
>> It's all you post, and that I know...
>>
>> >
>> > ~ Etter's Ode ~
>> >
>> > Confined within a closed mind
>> > Apparitions roam vicious in intent
>> > Making me believe, holding me captive
>> > Lys are my truths
>> > MY ignorance is taught
>> > I don't know the truth
>> > I'm not allowed
>> > Confined within this narrow mind
>> >
>> > My world is dark and cold
>> > It's always black as night
>> > The only light that I see is that which trickles
>> > threw the fog of black Cloud
>> >
>> > I sit on a tree stump and look out into the mist
>> > Watching it crate shapes of abominable horrors that
>> > Only appear in the darkest reaches of my mind
>> > Dead trees surround me
>> > Their branches reach for the sky and at me
>> > As if seeking salvation from there mere existence
>> > ~
>> >
>> > <..>
>> >
>> >

>>
>>

>
>



  #92 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 163
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?


dh@. wrote:
> On 2 Feb 2006 16:52:14 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
>
> >
> >dh@. wrote:
> >> On 1 Feb 2006 19:00:39 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >dh@. wrote:
> >> >> On 25 Jan 2006 19:51:41 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >d@. wrote:
> >> >> >> On 23 Jan 2006 20:01:01 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >dh@. wrote:
> >> >> >> >> On 18 Jan 2006 10:11:17 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >dh@. wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> On 17 Jan 2006 09:28:38 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >Why should it matter exactly which wildlife get to experience
> >> >> >> >> >> >life
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Because it would be necessary in order to consider whether
> >> >> >> >> >> or not it would be worth doing away with livestock so they can
> >> >> >> >> >> exist.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >Suppose we let nature decide which animals get to experience life.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> My question is: Why should we let ONLY nature decide?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >No reason why we should
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Agreed.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > but that is not the point.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It's a very significant point when we consider human influence on
> >> >> >> animals.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >How is it significant?
> >> >>
> >> >> Because we have to consider it in order to be sure that we should
> >> >> try to eliminate human influence, which is what "ar" pretends to want.
> >> >
> >> >I am not defending AR. I am opposing your reasons for promoting
> >> >livestock farming.
> >>
> >> Not yet. You have to suggest something better, but you haven't
> >> done it. None of you have done it.

> >
> >But you aren't advocating livestock farming on the grounds that no one
> >has suggested anything better. You are advocating livestock farming
> >because it causes some of the animals that get to experience life
> >to experience being farmed.

>
> No. I'm just saying that we need to take it into consideration if
> we consider whether or not it's cruel to the animals to be raised
> for food.


Why is the fact that some of the animals who get to experience
life in the future will also experience being farmed relevant
to the question of whether livestock farming is cruel to the animals?

> Other people want to attach a lot of absurd ideas to it
> in their attempts to prevent us from giving the animals' lives as
> much or more consideration than their deaths.


In as much as a sitaution where more happy animals are in
existence is a good thing, I agree with the premise. You
seem very concerned about how many animals experience being
farmed but much less concerned about how many experience
life.

> >> >> >> >You are
> >> >> >> >promoting animal products on the grounds that they allow certain
> >> >> >> >animals to experience life. I am presenting a vegan alternative
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Why?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >For the sake of comparison. Can you show that your alternative to
> >> >> >veganism is superior from the point of view of animals as a whole?
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm not worried about whether or not it would be. I only consider
> >> >> the animals that it has influence on, not those it doesn't.
> >> >
> >> >Compared with veganism, "compassionate" livestock farming has
> >> >just as much influence on wild animal populations as it does on
> >> >livestock. You are dodging.
> >>
> >> No. I'm trying to find out why we should promote wildlife only,
> >> instead of wildlife and livestock, but no one can explain why. I'm
> >> also trying to find out which particular wildlife we should promote
> >> life for instead of livestock, but no one can explain which. So you
> >> *should* be able to understand that you provide nothing to even
> >> consider, much less have to dodge.

> >
> >I am not arguing for eliminating livestock and I am not attempting
> >to determine precisely what sort of wild animals the planet should
> >support in the future.

>
> Then there's no reason to consider wildlife unless you can come
> up with some specific animals you want to promote life for. Some
> people do deliberately do things to support wildlife,


And do those people feel they need to know exactly which wildlife
they are supporting in order to justify their actions?

> and some of
> those things are done by farmers to support particular wildlife,
> and some of those farmers are even livestock farmers.
>
> >I am merely challenging you to justify your
> >position that we should continue raising livestock for food just
> >so that some of the animals who will get to experience life in
> >the future will also get to experience being farmed.

>
> LOL! That's not my position. My position is that we don't need
> to STOP doing it, unless you/"aras" can explain why no animals
> should be farmed.


Then I have no problem with the position you have now retreated to.
>
> >> >> >> >that also allowes animals to experience life.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> My question is: Why would we let ONLY nature decide?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Since you are so insistent that we consider how animals can
> >> >> >benefit from being farmed I thought you might like to explain
> >> >> >why you consider your diet superior to vegansim from the point
> >> >> >of view of animals as a whole.
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't care about animals as a whole.
> >> >
> >> >Then why present your alternative to veganism as if it
> >> >is superior from the point of view of animals?
> >>
> >> Because sometimes animal products are better for some animals
> >> than veggie products.

> >
> >And sometimes veggie products are better for some animals than
> >animal products so why present your alternative to veganism is
> >if you are doing it to benefit animals?

>
> The better question is: why do you believe/insist we should avoid
> considering some aspects, and please make a list of the aspects
> you feel we should avoid taking into consideration.


I believe we should only take into consideration aspects that are
morally
relevant. The fact that the animals who exist in a vegan utopia will
be different animals to the animals who exist in the real world is only
relevant where selective breeding has gone too far and produced animals
whose welfare is compromized as a consequence.
>
> >> >> Neither do you. I care
> >> >> somewhat about the animals that are influenced by the things
> >> >> that I buy, even though I know that my particular purchases
> >> >> don't directly influence any animals.
> >> >
> >> >Good for you.
> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "aras"
> >> >> >> >> don't do it either of course, but it's your/"their" fantasy. I'm just trying
> >> >> >> >> to get you/"them" to provide some details.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >and why does it make any difference to the arguments I
> >> >> >> >> >> >am presenting?
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Because since you can't explain it there's no reason at all to
> >> >> >> >> >> consider your supposed "arguments". We have no reason at all.
> >> >> >> >> >> It's entirely up to you to try to change that.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >Essentially the argument is that the fact we have some control over
> >> >> >> >> >which animals get to experience life does not give us the right to
> >> >> >> >> >treat those animals that do any differently from if we left such
> >> >> >> >> >decisions entirely in the hands of nature.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> We are much better able to ensure that livestock have decent
> >> >> >> >> lives and humane deaths, ie decent AW, ie lives of positive value,
> >> >> >> >> than we are for wildlife.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >In theory we have more control over the quality of life of farm
> >> >> >> >animals than we do for wild animals. In practise I'm not sure
> >> >> >> >how the animals you eat had benefited from being farmed.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Could you or anyone else possibly care if they did? If so, why don't
> >> >> >> you try?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >If you wish to present the case that the animals you eat were better
> >> >> >off
> >> >> >than comparable unfarmed animals I am ready to consider your argument.
> >> >>
> >> >> You need to provide more info. What unfarmed animal(s) would
> >> >> you consider comparable to:
> >> >>
> >> >> cage free egg producers
> >> >> battery cage egg producers
> >> >> turkeys
> >> >> broiler chickens
> >> >
> >> >wild chickens or turkeys.
> >>
> >> I will never consider them comparable.

> >
> >Why not? They are the same species.
> >
> >> >> beef cattle
> >> >> dairy cattle
> >> >
> >> >wild cattle.
> >>
> >> I will never consider them comparable.

> >
> >Why not? They are the same species.

>
> Because their lives are nothing similar. You can't figure that out?


How is the quality of life (quantity * quality) better for farmed
chicken
or cattle than it is for wild chicken or cattle? If you wish to argue
that animals benefit from being farmed then this is the question
you need to answer.

  #93 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?


rick wrote:
> "pearl" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "rick" > wrote in message
> > nk.net...
> >>
> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> > ink.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> > nk.net...
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "pearl" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >> >> > "rick" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> > ink.net...
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> >> oups.com...
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > rick wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> > <..>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Not really. The resources used to keep a cow
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> alive
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> quite
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> combatible with wild animals in the same
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> habitat.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > 'Animal Enemies
> >> >> >> >> >> ===========================
> >> >> >> >> >> mono-culture crop fields, fool...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Grain for feed, hay and silage...
> >> >> >> >> ======================
> >> >> >> >> Food for fools....
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Feed for animals for fat for fools like you.
> >> >> >> ===================
> >> >> >> Hardly killer. The beef I eat isn't fed any feeds. Too
> >> >> >> bad
> >> >> >> for
> >> >> >> you, eh loser?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You are lying. Even if 'grass fed', the animals are
> >> >> > given
> >> >> > hay or silage during winter months.
> >> >> ========================
> >> >> Really? I suggest you know nothing about all parts of the
> >> >> world,
> >> >> killer...
> >> >
> >> > You live in Canada, don't you?
> >> ===================
> >> LOL No, I do not...

> >
> > I gathered that from the website you used to have.
> > http://web.archive.org/web/200307082...t.net/~retter/
> >
> > I now see that you in fact live in Ohio.
> > http://www.angelfire.com/bc/rbp/dir/ricke.html

> ===================
> Face it, you have no idea now. You reference data years old,
> just like usual...
>
>
>
> >
> > In October, 'temperatures drop into the low 40s F/ 4-6 C
> > at night. Winters can be cold (17 to 43 F/-8 to 6 C), ...
> >
> > 2002 Average Mean (30 years)
> > January 31.2 25.4
> > February 35.2 28.4
> > March 39.4 39.2
> > April 52.9 49.6
> > May 56.9 59.9
> > June 71.5 68.6
> > July 75.9 72.5
> > August 74.2 70.7
> > September 68.3 64.2
> > October 52.0 52.7
> > November 40.4 42.0
> > December 31.1 31.0
> >
> > http://www.discoverohio.com/visitors/climate.asp
> >
> > Grass stops growing < 8 C/46 F, so what is done in Ohio?.
> >
> > 'Acreage harvested for silage is estimated at 190,000 acres..
> > http://www.nass.usda.gov/oh/SM0105.txt
> >
> > 'Acreage (hay) to be harvested in Ohio is expected to
> > increase three percent, to 1.44 million acres.
> > http://www.agry.purdue.edu/ext/forag...0Marketing.htm

> =========================
> I'm looking out my window right now seeing green grasses. I just
> got off a roof doing some shingles on a barn addition.
> Anyway you slice it fool, places that use hay cause less cds than
> your mono-culture crop production. You still lose. especially
> since you have to import much of the foods you eat, killer.
>




"Places that use hay"..............what the hell does *that* mean?







>
> >
> >> > Canada - Eat Wild
> >> > Our cattle are moved to fresh, quality grass daily
> >> > throughout
> >> > the grazing season
> >> > and in winter are fed a supplementary ration of hay or
> >> > silage.
> >> > ...
> >> > www.eatwild.com/products/canada.html - 79k - Cached -
> >> > Similar
> >> > pages
> >> >
> >> > Massachusetts - Eat Wild
> >> > Cows get grass silage and hay in winter, otherwise pasture.
> >> > ...
> >> > The Grassfed
> >> > Gourmet Cookbook-the first cookbook devoted to grass-fed ...
> >> > www.eatwild.com/products/massachusetts.html - 43k - Cached -
> >> > Similar pages
> >> > [ More results from www.eatwild.com ]
> >> >
> >> > Springwillow Farms-Grass Fed Beef
> >> > Grass fed beef are not fed grain, but graze on pasture
> >> > during
> >> > the summer and are
> >> > fed a high quality hay or silage during the winter. ...
> >> > www.springwillowfarms.com/grassfedbreeds.htm - 7k - Cached -
> >> > Similar pages
> >> >
> >> > About Bob and Moira Kerr of Back to Nature Beef
> >> > Bob and Moira Kerr selling grass fed beef at market ... in
> >> > the
> >> > growing season
> >> > and when winter comes we serve them a forage diet of stored
> >> > hay
> >> > and silage. ...
> >> > www.backtonaturebeef.com/About.htm - 19k - Cached - Similar
> >> > pages
> >> > ...
> >> >

> > http://www.google.ie/search?hs=C97&h...G=Search&meta=
> >> >
> >> > You're one dumbass ignorant liar, etter.
> >> =====================
> >> Nope. You're just too stupid to understand the size of North
> >> America and the vast differences in clamate.

> >
> > *You* live in Ohio. See above, stupid lying troll.
> >
> >> >> >> > Um... no refutation of anything below, etter? Time
> >> >> >> > you
> >> >> >> > left, troll.
> >> >> >> ======================
> >> >> >> Nothing to it troll... You post your typical spew...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Address it then.
> >> >> ======================
> >> >> It's lys and delusions. that's all one needs to know...
> >> >
> >> > That's all you could ever know.
> >> ====================
> >> It's all you post, and that I know...
> >>
> >> >
> >> > ~ Etter's Ode ~
> >> >
> >> > Confined within a closed mind
> >> > Apparitions roam vicious in intent
> >> > Making me believe, holding me captive
> >> > Lys are my truths
> >> > MY ignorance is taught
> >> > I don't know the truth
> >> > I'm not allowed
> >> > Confined within this narrow mind
> >> >
> >> > My world is dark and cold
> >> > It's always black as night
> >> > The only light that I see is that which trickles
> >> > threw the fog of black Cloud
> >> >
> >> > I sit on a tree stump and look out into the mist
> >> > Watching it crate shapes of abominable horrors that
> >> > Only appear in the darkest reaches of my mind
> >> > Dead trees surround me
> >> > Their branches reach for the sky and at me
> >> > As if seeking salvation from there mere existence
> >> > ~
> >> >
> >> > <..>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>

> >
> >


  #94 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 692
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?

"rick" > wrote in message ink.net...
>
> "pearl" > wrote in message

<..>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Dave" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> >> oups.com...
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > rick wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> > <..>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Not really. The resources used to keep a cow
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> alive
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> quite
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> combatible with wild animals in the same
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> habitat.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > 'Animal Enemies
> >> >> >> >> >> ===========================
> >> >> >> >> >> mono-culture crop fields, fool...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Grain for feed, hay and silage...
> >> >> >> >> ======================
> >> >> >> >> Food for fools....
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Feed for animals for fat for fools like you.
> >> >> >> ===================
> >> >> >> Hardly killer. The beef I eat isn't fed any feeds. Too
> >> >> >> bad
> >> >> >> for
> >> >> >> you, eh loser?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You are lying. Even if 'grass fed', the animals are
> >> >> > given
> >> >> > hay or silage during winter months.
> >> >> ========================
> >> >> Really? I suggest you know nothing about all parts of the
> >> >> world,
> >> >> killer...
> >> >
> >> > You live in Canada, don't you?
> >> ===================
> >> LOL No, I do not...

> >
> > I gathered that from the website you used to have.
> > http://web.archive.org/web/200307082...t.net/~retter/
> >
> > I now see that you in fact live in Ohio.
> > http://www.angelfire.com/bc/rbp/dir/ricke.html

> ===================
> Face it, you have no idea now. You reference data years old,
> just like usual...


You were claiming the same thing back in 2001..

Oct 13 2001
Nope, I get mine right down the road, and it was only
~$1.30 per pound. Including the steaks, roasts, ribs.
Grass-fed, no anti-biotics, or hormones.
http://tinyurl.com/dotod

Apr 18 2002
The cows I eat live right down the road, grazing
their entire life. "
http://tinyurl.com/854ou

May 1 2002
The meat I eat is grass-fed, chemical/hormone free,
and is raised right down the road.
http://tinyurl.com/adf2v

etc..

So why should we believe what you're claiming now?

Your IP address indicates that you may be in Florida,
but even there, grazing is not fully year-round.

'The Southern Coastal Plain region has an environment
conducive to developing a system of nearly year-round
grazing, utilizing both tropical and temperate forage
plant species.

Forage production in the region is based on warm
season perennial grass species; e.g., bahiagrass or
bermudagrass. While these grasses support livestock
throughout the major portion of the year, forage
production declines during the fall. Hay is often fed
when perennial pastures turn dormant. Winter grazing
of small grains, ryegrass, and cool season clovers are
a common practice during the late fall to early spring.
The significant challenge with forage production
throughout the Southern Coastal Plain is the distribution
of forage production over the course of the year. During
summer months forage production is often excessive,
while it drops off significantly during the fall months.
When a winter forage is seeded, grazing generally
becomes available mid to late December. However, it
is dependent on time of planting and weather conditions,
particulary adequate soil moisture. Deferred grazing,
hay, feed concentrates, and other supplements are often
needed to support livestock throughout the winter
months or until winter grazing is established.
...
Grasslands in Florida are estimated at 11.5 million acres
(Florida Agricultural Statistics, 1999). Pastureland accounts
for 6.5 million of those acres, and is comprised of 3 million
acres of native rangeland, and 3.5 million acres of improved
pasture. There are an estimated 5 million acres of grazed
forest land in the state. Florida Agricultural Statistics from
1997 reported that 5 million acres of Florida's grasslands
are planted in bahiagrass. Hay, silage and alternative forage
are produced on 1 million acres of permanent pasture.
...
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AA265

<..>
> Anyway you slice it fool, places that use hay cause less cds than
> your mono-culture crop production.


Why don't you explain how you worked that out.

Remember that Davis wrote that 7.5 animals die per
hectare of pasture, or 3 animals for every acre.

11,500,000 acres * 3 = 34,5000,000 cds in pasture.

+ cds in 1,000,000 acres harvested forage.

+ all the livestock slaughtered in Florida p/a.

Show how cds in horticulture come anywhere near.

As a guidline..

Florida 2001
Vegetables 196,300 acres
http://www.njha.org/pdfs/studman/18.pdf

> You still lose.


I rarely if ever 'lose', and certainly not to the likes of you.

> especially
> since you have to import much of the foods you eat, killer.


That is acceptable; as a variety of foods, including some
which are imported, is necessary to maintain good health.

<..>


  #95 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?

On 6 Feb 2006 15:56:11 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:

>
>dh@. wrote:
>> On 2 Feb 2006 16:52:14 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >dh@. wrote:
>> >> On 1 Feb 2006 19:00:39 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >dh@. wrote:
>> >> >> On 25 Jan 2006 19:51:41 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >d@. wrote:
>> >> >> >> On 23 Jan 2006 20:01:01 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >dh@. wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> On 18 Jan 2006 10:11:17 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >dh@. wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> On 17 Jan 2006 09:28:38 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Why should it matter exactly which wildlife get to experience
>> >> >> >> >> >> >life
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Because it would be necessary in order to consider whether
>> >> >> >> >> >> or not it would be worth doing away with livestock so they can
>> >> >> >> >> >> exist.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >Suppose we let nature decide which animals get to experience life.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> My question is: Why should we let ONLY nature decide?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >No reason why we should
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Agreed.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > but that is not the point.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> It's a very significant point when we consider human influence on
>> >> >> >> animals.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >How is it significant?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Because we have to consider it in order to be sure that we should
>> >> >> try to eliminate human influence, which is what "ar" pretends to want.
>> >> >
>> >> >I am not defending AR. I am opposing your reasons for promoting
>> >> >livestock farming.
>> >>
>> >> Not yet. You have to suggest something better, but you haven't
>> >> done it. None of you have done it.
>> >
>> >But you aren't advocating livestock farming on the grounds that no one
>> >has suggested anything better. You are advocating livestock farming
>> >because it causes some of the animals that get to experience life
>> >to experience being farmed.

>>
>> No. I'm just saying that we need to take it into consideration if
>> we consider whether or not it's cruel to the animals to be raised
>> for food.

>
>Why is the fact that some of the animals who get to experience
>life in the future will also experience being farmed relevant
>to the question of whether livestock farming is cruel to the animals?


Because we're questioning whether or not it's cruel to animals when
we farm them.

>> Other people want to attach a lot of absurd ideas to it
>> in their attempts to prevent us from giving the animals' lives as
>> much or more consideration than their deaths.

>
>In as much as a sitaution where more happy animals are in
>existence is a good thing, I agree with the premise. You
>seem very concerned about how many animals experience being
>farmed but much less concerned about how many experience
>life.


As yet we have been given no reason to consider wildlife only, to
be superior to wildlife and livestock both.

>> >> >> >> >You are
>> >> >> >> >promoting animal products on the grounds that they allow certain
>> >> >> >> >animals to experience life. I am presenting a vegan alternative
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Why?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >For the sake of comparison. Can you show that your alternative to
>> >> >> >veganism is superior from the point of view of animals as a whole?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm not worried about whether or not it would be. I only consider
>> >> >> the animals that it has influence on, not those it doesn't.
>> >> >
>> >> >Compared with veganism, "compassionate" livestock farming has
>> >> >just as much influence on wild animal populations as it does on
>> >> >livestock. You are dodging.
>> >>
>> >> No. I'm trying to find out why we should promote wildlife only,
>> >> instead of wildlife and livestock, but no one can explain why. I'm
>> >> also trying to find out which particular wildlife we should promote
>> >> life for instead of livestock, but no one can explain which. So you
>> >> *should* be able to understand that you provide nothing to even
>> >> consider, much less have to dodge.
>> >
>> >I am not arguing for eliminating livestock and I am not attempting
>> >to determine precisely what sort of wild animals the planet should
>> >support in the future.

>>
>> Then there's no reason to consider wildlife unless you can come
>> up with some specific animals you want to promote life for. Some
>> people do deliberately do things to support wildlife,

>
>And do those people feel they need to know exactly which wildlife
>they are supporting in order to justify their actions?


If they don't perform the proper actions, their actions will not promote
life for the wildlife they want to promote life for. So the answer is yes.

>> and some of
>> those things are done by farmers to support particular wildlife,
>> and some of those farmers are even livestock farmers.
>>
>> >I am merely challenging you to justify your
>> >position that we should continue raising livestock for food just
>> >so that some of the animals who will get to experience life in
>> >the future will also get to experience being farmed.

>>
>> LOL! That's not my position. My position is that we don't need
>> to STOP doing it, unless you/"aras" can explain why no animals
>> should be farmed.

>
>Then I have no problem with the position you have now retreated to.


That's always been my position.

>> >> >> >> >that also allowes animals to experience life.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> My question is: Why would we let ONLY nature decide?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Since you are so insistent that we consider how animals can
>> >> >> >benefit from being farmed I thought you might like to explain
>> >> >> >why you consider your diet superior to vegansim from the point
>> >> >> >of view of animals as a whole.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I don't care about animals as a whole.
>> >> >
>> >> >Then why present your alternative to veganism as if it
>> >> >is superior from the point of view of animals?
>> >>
>> >> Because sometimes animal products are better for some animals
>> >> than veggie products.
>> >
>> >And sometimes veggie products are better for some animals than
>> >animal products so why present your alternative to veganism is
>> >if you are doing it to benefit animals?

>>
>> The better question is: why do you believe/insist we should avoid
>> considering some aspects, and please make a list of the aspects
>> you feel we should avoid taking into consideration.

>
>I believe we should only take into consideration aspects that are
>morally
>relevant.


Their lives are morally relevant imo.

>The fact that the animals who exist in a vegan utopia will
>be different animals


It remains a mystery which animals those would be, and why we
should promote life for them over them and livestock both.

>to the animals who exist in the real world is only
>relevant where selective breeding has gone too far and produced animals
>whose welfare is compromized as a consequence.
>>
>> >> >> Neither do you. I care
>> >> >> somewhat about the animals that are influenced by the things
>> >> >> that I buy, even though I know that my particular purchases
>> >> >> don't directly influence any animals.
>> >> >
>> >> >Good for you.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "aras"
>> >> >> >> >> don't do it either of course, but it's your/"their" fantasy. I'm just trying
>> >> >> >> >> to get you/"them" to provide some details.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >and why does it make any difference to the arguments I
>> >> >> >> >> >> >am presenting?
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Because since you can't explain it there's no reason at all to
>> >> >> >> >> >> consider your supposed "arguments". We have no reason at all.
>> >> >> >> >> >> It's entirely up to you to try to change that.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >Essentially the argument is that the fact we have some control over
>> >> >> >> >> >which animals get to experience life does not give us the right to
>> >> >> >> >> >treat those animals that do any differently from if we left such
>> >> >> >> >> >decisions entirely in the hands of nature.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> We are much better able to ensure that livestock have decent
>> >> >> >> >> lives and humane deaths, ie decent AW, ie lives of positive value,
>> >> >> >> >> than we are for wildlife.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >In theory we have more control over the quality of life of farm
>> >> >> >> >animals than we do for wild animals. In practise I'm not sure
>> >> >> >> >how the animals you eat had benefited from being farmed.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Could you or anyone else possibly care if they did? If so, why don't
>> >> >> >> you try?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >If you wish to present the case that the animals you eat were better
>> >> >> >off
>> >> >> >than comparable unfarmed animals I am ready to consider your argument.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You need to provide more info. What unfarmed animal(s) would
>> >> >> you consider comparable to:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> cage free egg producers
>> >> >> battery cage egg producers
>> >> >> turkeys
>> >> >> broiler chickens
>> >> >
>> >> >wild chickens or turkeys.
>> >>
>> >> I will never consider them comparable.
>> >
>> >Why not? They are the same species.
>> >
>> >> >> beef cattle
>> >> >> dairy cattle
>> >> >
>> >> >wild cattle.
>> >>
>> >> I will never consider them comparable.
>> >
>> >Why not? They are the same species.

>>
>> Because their lives are nothing similar. You can't figure that out?

>
>How is the quality of life (quantity * quality) better for farmed
>chicken
>or cattle than it is for wild chicken


There are no wild chicken, because they can't survive in the
wild long enough to establish large populations.

>or cattle?


Farmed cattle eat better.

>If you wish to argue
>that animals benefit from being farmed then this is the question
>you need to answer.



  #96 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 86
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?

****wit David Harrison, cracker, lied:
> On 6 Feb 2006 15:56:11 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
>
> >
> >****wit David Harrison, cracker, lied:
> >> On 2 Feb 2006 16:52:14 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >****wit David Harrison, cracker, lied:
> >> >> On 1 Feb 2006 19:00:39 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >****wit David Harrison, cracker, lied:
> >> >> >> On 25 Jan 2006 19:51:41 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >****wit David Harrison, cracker, lied:
> >> >> >> >> On 23 Jan 2006 20:01:01 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >****wit David Harrison, cracker, lied:
> >> >> >> >> >> On 18 Jan 2006 10:11:17 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >****wit David Harrison, cracker, lied:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 17 Jan 2006 09:28:38 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Why should it matter exactly which wildlife get to experience
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >life
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Because it would be necessary in order to consider whether
> >> >> >> >> >> >> or not it would be worth doing away with livestock so they can
> >> >> >> >> >> >> exist.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >Suppose we let nature decide which animals get to experience life.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> My question is: Why should we let ONLY nature decide?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >No reason why we should
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Agreed.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > but that is not the point.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> It's a very significant point when we consider human influence on
> >> >> >> >> animals.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >How is it significant?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Because we have to consider it in order to be sure that we should
> >> >> >> try to eliminate human influence, which is what "ar" pretends to want.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I am not defending AR. I am opposing your reasons for promoting
> >> >> >livestock farming.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not yet. You have to suggest something better, but you haven't
> >> >> done it. None of you have done it.
> >> >
> >> >But you aren't advocating livestock farming on the grounds that no one
> >> >has suggested anything better. You are advocating livestock farming
> >> >because it causes some of the animals that get to experience life
> >> >to experience being farmed.
> >>
> >> No. I'm just saying that we need to take it into consideration if
> >> we consider whether or not it's cruel to the animals to be raised
> >> for food.

> >
> >Why is the fact that some of the animals who get to experience
> >life in the future will also experience being farmed relevant
> >to the question of whether livestock farming is cruel to the animals?

>
> Because we're questioning whether or not it's cruel to animals when
> we farm them.


Thus, you clearly understand why the "aras" feel it *is* cruel. You
feel it isn't, and you know why they feel it is, so you're a liar when
you say they haven't explained their belief.

Causing animals to exist (and be "farmed") is not doing something good
for them.


>
> >> Other people want to attach a lot of absurd ideas to it
> >> in their attempts to prevent us from giving the animals' lives as
> >> much or more consideration than their deaths.

> >
> >In as much as a sitaution where more happy animals are in
> >existence is a good thing, I agree with the premise. You
> >seem very concerned about how many animals experience being
> >farmed but much less concerned about how many experience
> >life.

>
> As yet we have been given no reason to consider wildlife only


You're a liar. You have been given reasons. If you don't find them
persuasive, then say so, you chickenshit liar, but stop lying and
saying that you haven't been given any. You have.

  #97 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default Challenge: can you do better than the Goos?

On 7 Feb 2006 the Goober wrote:

>****wit David Harrison, cracker, lied:


>> Because we're questioning whether or not it's cruel to animals when
>> we farm them.

>
>Thus, you clearly understand why the "aras" feel it *is* cruel. You
>feel it isn't, and you know why they feel it is, so you're a liar when
>you say they haven't explained their belief.


None of you have explained *why* it's wrong to kill them Goo.

>Causing animals to exist (and be "farmed") is not doing something good
>for them.
>
>
>>
>> >> Other people want to attach a lot of absurd ideas to it
>> >> in their attempts to prevent us from giving the animals' lives as
>> >> much or more consideration than their deaths.
>> >
>> >In as much as a sitaution where more happy animals are in
>> >existence is a good thing, I agree with the premise. You
>> >seem very concerned about how many animals experience being
>> >farmed but much less concerned about how many experience
>> >life.

>>
>> As yet we have been given no reason to consider wildlife only

>
>You're a liar.


What is the reason we've been given Goo?

  #98 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,misc.rural
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default ?¿Wonderings of a pathetic, drooling Goober¿?¿?

On 9 Feb 2006 10:22:40 -0800, "Leif Erikson" > wrote:

>*WHY*


Because of "aras" who insist that:

"ONLY deliberate human killing deserves any moral
consideration . . . humans deliberately killing animals
for food is an immoral thing to do." - Goo

>does killing animals require mitigation, ****wit?


Because of "aras" who insist that:

"the deliberate killing of animals for use by humans . . . the evil of
killing it . . . DOES deserve moral consideration, and gets it." - Goo

>Answer the
>question, ****wit.


Because of "aras" who insist that:

"having deliberately caused them to live in the first place does not
mitigate the wrong in any way. . . "giving them life" does NOT mitigate
the wrongness of their deaths" - Goo

>You believe it *does* require mitigation,


Because of "aras" who insist that:

"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude than
ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives"" - Goo

>does killing animals require mitigation, ****wit? and we
>want to know why.


Because of "aras" who insist that:

"It is morally wrong, in an absolute sense - unjust, in other words -
if humans kill animals they don't need to kill, i.e. not in self defense.
There's your answer." - Goo

>Answer.


Because of "aras" who insist that:

"the nutritionally unnecessary choice deliberately
to kill an animal ALWAYS causes a moral harm greater in
magnitude than . . . the moral "benefit" realized by the
animal in existing at all" - Goo
  #99 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,misc.rural
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,652
Default ?¿Wonderings of a pathetic, drooling Goober¿?¿?

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 21:28:24 GMT, Leif Erikson > wrote:

>****wit David Harrison, ignorant lying pig-****ing
>cracker, stupidly blabbered:
>
>> On 9 Feb 2006 10:22:40 -0800, "Leif Erikson" > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>*WHY* does killing animals require mitigation, ****wit? Answer the
>>>question, ****wit. You believe it *does* require mitigation, and we
>>>want to know why. Answer.

>>
>>
>> Because of "aras" who insist that:

>
>No


Yes Goo, it is ONLY in response to people condemning some
wrongness, or evil moral harm... :
__________________________________________________ _______
"the deliberate killing of animals for use by humans DOES
deserve moral consideration, and gets it." - Goo

""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
their deaths" - Goo

"having deliberately caused them to live in the first place does
not mitigate the wrong in any way." - Goo

"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
of the animals erases all of it." - Goo

"the evil of killing it." - Goo

"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude than
ANY benefit" - Goo

"logically one MUST conclude that not raising them in the first place
is the ethically superior choice." - Goo
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
that mitigation ever need be considered and discussed, my Goober.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
THE CHALLENGE OF THE QUR’AN Stu[_16_] General Cooking 0 05-04-2011 08:10 PM
Rupert kicks the Goos' collective asses. dh@. Vegan 11 09-09-2008 12:09 PM
Challenge: can you do better than the Goos? dh@. Vegan 0 09-01-2006 03:50 AM
a challenge for Goo dh@. Vegan 2 11-09-2005 08:06 PM
3 Zin challenge Emery Davis Wine 17 14-07-2005 10:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"