It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Fido And Fluffy Are Ruining The Environment, UCLA Study Says

page: 7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 04:56 PM
a reply to: Blaine91555
Oh, but we can give them supplements instead! And how much energy used and pollution be produced from the manufacture of those supplements?

This argument is as dumb as the whole "Solar energy is green" argument when if looked at on a holistic model, it becomes clear that the "savings" of solar energy utilization will never be enough to cover the energy used and pollution produced from the mining and manufacture of said "energy savers." But this type of mentality doesn't look at the whole picture---just their little world where the slavery for the mining of rare earth minerals and pollution are happening on the other side of the world. As long as they don't have to see the slaves and pollution, they're in love with their electronic gadgets and solar panels.

posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 05:29 PM
a reply to: diggindirt

Well, no. I don't think it's fair to call it dumb. I think in most cases peoples hearts are in the right place and we all have the same right have an opinion. We learn and form our opinions from each other and when we just say well, your idea is dumb, it shuts down the discussion.

I'd call it unwise to try and change a carnivores diet to that of a vegetarian or vegan human's. It's not fair to the pet to not consider what is in fact best for them.

That farming and growing vegetables produces a huge share of the CO2 is relevant to this and it's often overlooked. It's likely true that a world of Vegans would produce a similar amount of CO2 and make little difference in the end.

posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 06:05 PM
a reply to: Blaine91555

Okay, maybe we can compromise and call it ignorance. Ignorance from not looking at any situation from a holistic viewpoint. Perhaps ignorance of the law of unintended consequences? Lack of critical thinking skills? The tendency of government supported schools to do more indoctrination than actual education? As my 42 year-old daughter often observes, "My generation was the first to be punished for thinking critically and defending our right to defend ourselves when Zero Tolerance was introduced."

posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 06:18 PM
a reply to: diggindirt

Which do you think leads to more productive discussion and learning from both sides.

"You don't agree with me so you're ignorant!"

"We don't agree so lets discuss it, compare notes and learn from each other."

I think the latter.

The older I get, the dumber I get personally. The more things I believe to be right, I find out were wrong.

I don't honestly know for certain if the GW concerns are right or not, but I currently believe they are wrong. I don't have the evidence in hand to say for sure, but then neither does the other side. The millions of years of data needed to even begin to know don't exist, so I tend to think the very normal climate change would be happening whether we were here or not. I can debate it, but neither side can prove it one way or the other. Neither side is ignorant, just short on data to work from.

Arguing, debating is for now what we have. We can either listen to each other and try and figure it out, or we can plant our feet firmly, close our minds and just call each other names.

posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 07:42 PM
a reply to: Blaine91555
How do you "discuss" things with a five year-old who tells you that driving a car is attempted murder? How about a twelve year-old who tells you that eating meat is bad for the earth? These ideas are being planted into young brains systematically. Re-education is hard once those things get into the mind, especially when critical thinking has been thrown out of education. I'm all for discussion with informed discussants but guilt trips are far from discussions. This "study" is an attempt at guilt-tripping by basically saying that those of us who have pets care more about our feelings for our pets than we care for Mother Earth.

posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 11:36 PM
a reply to: diggindirt

I'd not really argue with any of that. I just think there is a better approach than a mud slinging contest. The "I'm right!", "no I'm right!" approach gets nowhere. Both sides plant their feet and close their ears.

posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 12:07 AM
Nitrogen accounts for 78% of the atmosphere, oxygen 21% and argon 0.9%. Gases like carbon dioxide, nitrous oxides, methane, and ozone are trace gases that account for about a tenth of one percent of the atmosphere.Aug 9, 2013. It hasn't changed since then.

This is what they currently teach (younger) kids in school. College likely uses "alternative facts"

I suppose they have a separate set of percentages for special applications outside of the classroom for all the rest of the country to support the CO2 is BAD thing?
edit on 7-8-2017 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 8 2017 @ 01:30 PM

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: InTheLight

I find it interesting that anyone would want to change an animals natural diet. That cats are carnivores is as obviously true as humans and dogs are omnivores.

I've always found those arguments a bit odd even about humans. Clearly the fact that no person can survive as a pure Vegan should scream that these things are unnatural. Generally those espousing these things are all about being natural except when it comes to eating a natural diet, the diet a species evolved to eat.

Even herbivores must have the insects they get while feeding to survive. It's their only source of B12.

It's been a while, but you used to see cases now and then where parents had caused the death of their own child by trying to make it Vegan, not realizing the infant would slowly die.

It's best to feed pets their proper diet. It's bad enough that the pet food industry peddles food that does not meet pets needs and mostly passes through them without providing needed nutrition. That's why when you feed a dog or cat the right food, they can survive and thrive on far less of it. It's not just becoming a pile of feces on the lawn instead of digesting.

We already have changed humans' and our pets' diets from what they were once naturally. We humans got our B12 mainly from eating insects, and maybe a rare hummingbird. Our pets' food is totally screwed up, as you pointed out, and we all are not getting the proper nutrition and most likely have all sorts of digestion problems from these modern diets, hence a contributing factor to the CO2 (assumption)? I am not advocating for changing any diet, but just pointing out that the vegans that have been doing it for their pets for 15 years via supplements claim they are happy and healthy; probably without digestions problems too.
edit on 18CDT01America/Chicago03310131 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 10:42 AM
Once our Chinese overlords recall all of our debt and take control, there wont be a cat or dog left.

posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 01:07 PM
a reply to: InTheLight

Vegans claim they eat no meat at all, even insects. Do that to a cat and it will die. I don't see any way around that truth. I suspect a lot of fudging is going on in Vegans diets.

We already have changed humans' and our pets' diets from what they were once naturally. We humans got our B12 mainly from eating insects, and maybe a rare hummingbird.

There are still examples of people living as we all once did on the planet. They hunt and fish for the bulk of their calories and nutrition to survive. You don't burn 5,000 calories a day living off the land and survive on a few insects. I think your stretching it a bit saying mainly insects. Fishing and hunting provide most of their calories or they simply would not thrive.

Up here in Alaska we have villages still doing things the old way, which is relying on hunting and fishing and meat for the main part of the diet. Whales are the difference between surviving and starving for some villages. Moose are a huge part of the diet along with the Salmon. I'm waiting for the day when the activists go after them for living as they have for centuries and I have no doubt they will.

Harvard on B12.

By: Linda Antinoro, R.D., L.D.N., J.D., C.D.E.

Vitamin B12 is vital for the body to produce healthy red blood cells. It also is needed for proper nerve function and DNA synthesis.

Vitamin B12 deficiency occurs when there are low levels of stored B12 in the body. This can lead to:

Soreness of the mouth and tongue
Decreased appetite
Weight loss
Numbness and tingling in the hands and feet
Dizziness, light-headedness
Poor memory and confusion...

...Vegans (strict vegetarians who do not eat any meat, fish, egg or dairy products) can develop vitamin B12 deficiency because they lack vitamin B12 in their diets. There are no known plant foods that are natural sources of B12. Fortunately, eating fortified foods, such as breakfast cereals, soy milk and vegetarian meat substitutes, can help prevent a potential deficit. However, research shows that vegans who don't take a B12 supplement often have inadequate B12 levels.

And of course B12 supplements do not come from vegetable sources. Meaning a pure Vegan diet can be fatal. I'd call that very unnatural and in fact more than a bit foolish. Doing that to animals is just plain old fashioned cruel. To risk a pets health for what amounts to a silly fad is just wrong.

edit on 8/9/2017 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 9 2017 @ 01:16 PM

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Christosterone

Look there is a compromise here to be found, as a dog person I say let's get rid of cats. That's a win win situation for all involved.

As a cat person I say get rid of most dogs.I didn't say get rid of ALL dogs!

top topics

<< 4  5  6   >>

log in