It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Cut Global Warming by being a Vegetarian?

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 03:59 PM
link   
To each his own Azazelus, i do it for personal reasons and for my existence.


And for me it's not hypocricy it's


Compassion



[edit on 23-1-2007 by selfless]




posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test
Yum yum.
If it's all the same to you I think I'll do my bit by just commitiing suicide


So what is the point of your post? As usual a thread that makes ppl think gets filled with stupid comments that have nothing to do with the topic.
Sry but it's just ignorant, it's not the food it's how it's prepared, and cooked well vegan/veggie food can taste as good if not better than meat.
Go try it, you will be surprised.

And sry but the Earth, your home if you forgot, and it's inhabitants are far more important than your selfish taste preferences.

Think about this comment for awhile...


It should and can be a basic human right to eat. According to John Robbins, a renowned author and spokesperson on sustainable environments, if Americans were to eat only 10 percent less meat, it would free enough land and resources to grow over twelve million tons of grain annually for human consumption, "more than enough to adequately feed every one of the 40 to 60 million human beings who will starve to death on the planet this year.
Nearly half of the grains from world harvests are fed to "livestock." According to Robbins, it takes sixteen times more resources to produce a pound of food from livestock than it does to produce a pound of food without raising animals as "livestock." It takes only one pound of grain to produce a pound of bread. In his book May All Be Fed, Mr. John Robbins wrote: "By cycling our grain through livestock and into beef, we end up with 6 percent as much food to feed human beings as we would have if we ate the grain directly."


Source

[edit on 23/1/2007 by ANOK]



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by greenfruit
Some vegetarian groups claim that since humans possess grinding teeth, like herbivorous animals, and longer intestines than carnivorous animals, this proves the human body is better suited for vegetarianism. This argument fails to note several human physiological features which clearly indicate a design for animal product consumption.


That's why we're omnivors, duh.



First and foremost is our stomach's production of hydrochloric acid, something not found in herbivores. Hydrochloric acid activates protein-splitting enzymes. Further, the human pancreas manufactures a full range of digestive enzymes to handle a wide variety of foods, both animal and vegetable.


That's evolution. As humans, we can eat almost anything (notice I didn't say live off of).



Dr Walter Voegtlin's in-depth comparison of the human digestive system with that of the dog (a carnivore)


dog's are omnivors, they eat vegetables, and fruit and nuts, and they choose to. Hell, I've even seen my dogs eat grass.



and the sheep (a herbivore) clearly shows that we are closer in anatomy to the carnivorous dog than the herbivorous sheep.


I've also heard about sheep cannibalism...I may have heard wrong though.



While humans may have longer intestines than animal carnivores, they are not as long as herbivores; nor do we possess multiple stomachs like many herbivores; nor do we chew cud.


you won't see a cow eat brocoli either. big deal. Didn't herbavors eat different plants. Just as different carnivors eat different meat.



Our physiology definitely indicates a mixed feeder or an omnivore--much the same as our relatives the mountain gorilla and chimpanzee, who have all been observed eating small animals and in some cases other primates.


Well, I suggest you live on NOTHING but meat (no veggies, grains, legumes, fruits, etc.), and see how long you live.

But you're missing the point of the article. If man didn't FARM animals, green house gases would drop drastcially. That's the entire point of this thread.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Hey what about we ban all cars - got to decrease global warming, and while we are at it, why dont we shut down all power stations. Thats got to decrease global warming. Me I vote for all the vegitarians to start. I mean they are the ones who think that us meat eaters are all the problem so show us, go on get rid of all your cars and turn off the electricity - what, you wont? seems that the vegitarians are the problem now!

To a completely different direction, New Zealander farmers were going to be taxed for greenouse gas emissions from their animals, but their was such an uproar that it never went ahead - after all we all contribute to the problem - yes I looking at you vegitarians, so we all should be taxed or none.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Compromise.
Become a part-time vegetarian.
Save some fat calories.
My wife and I do this. Twice a week, no meat.

You might end up being a little healthier, might lose a little weight, save a little money. And as an aside, if this methane theory is correct, you may save a glacier.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 08:02 PM
link   
It's an interesting proposal, but as you can see, most folks would not embrace it whole-heartedly.

BUT... we could probably educate people to eat smaller portions of meat. Tie this in with "don't overeat... we all know how bad it is for you" and you can reduce the amount of meat-based protein that folks eat and lower the number of animals needed to feed us.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Forget being a vegetarian, you need to become a vegan. If you stop using animal flesh and secretians and stop breeding animals for that purpose, the strain on the environment would decrease. It's really that simple, people.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 08:56 PM
link   
dragon12
Grow up kid. Just becuase you're incapable of simple comprehension, doesn't mean you need to fly off the handle and start blaming those who aren't even in the argument. Just because someone doesn't eat meat, doesn't mean they're some staunch crazy libertarian. Grow up.


spacedoubt and byrd: Those are excellent suggestions.


If there were less livestock, we'd have MUCH more room to grow crops (which would then bring the cost down as well, they're getting pricey!), as well as more room for living area (developments, etc.). Plus the benifits of the aformentioned article (less emissions). I can't see why anyone would be against it (except the meat and dairy industry and their huge lobby firms).



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dragon12
Hey what about we ban all cars -


Hey now that's a great idea! Car culture sucks. Think how much more pleasent living in the city would be not having to dodge cars when I go out walking.
I'd but much more healthy not having to breath in those emitions everyday also.

And my place would be cleaner, everyday there's a layer of black dust on everything, can't be good for ya. Prob why I sneeze all the time and have blocked nasel passages.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by spacedoubt
Compromise.
Become a part-time vegetarian.
Save some fat calories.
My wife and I do this. Twice a week, no meat.

You might end up being a little healthier, might lose a little weight, save a little money. And as an aside, if this methane theory is correct, you may save a glacier.





This is basically where I'm at!

But I have cut out processed and red meat all together.

What's wrong with using hemp for a renewable source of fuel. It would all but end our dependence on foreign oil and it would be "green" as well.

www.hemp4fuel.com

Can someone tell me the problem with this route?



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by timeless test
Yum yum.
If it's all the same to you I think I'll do my bit by just commitiing suicide


So what is the point of your post? As usual a thread that makes ppl think gets filled with stupid comments that have nothing to do with the topic.
Sry but it's just ignorant,


No, it's not ignorant it was just a poor attempt at a humourous way of saying that whilst I am prepared to accept that some individuals find a vegetarian lifestyle preferable I certainly do not.

What is particularly irritating is that it appears perfectly acceptable for vegetarians to frequently criticise those of us who enjoy eating all forms of meat for being cruel to animals, having no compassion for them, ("meat is murder" anyone?), abusing our bodies, (and now damaging the environment!), or whatever but critical comments about vegetarian foods, (not even the vegetarians themselves please note), are instantly classed as "ignornant".

I am quite prepared to be tolerant of your interesting idea that we slaughter all livestock despite the fact that it may be tempting to regard the concept as more than a trifle "off the wall" so please be tolerant of my personal belief that the "menu" you suggested sounded absolutely vile.

Thanks.


edit - my apologies, it wasn't your "off the wall" idea at all, just the "menu" then.


[edit on 24-1-2007 by timeless test]



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 03:03 AM
link   
Maybe the plan is to make everyone poor as dirt and they will be forced to live on cereal grains, since they can't afford meat. Works that way in poorest nations...less income = less meat.

Economic vegetarianism Wiki

Environmental vegetarianism Wiki


[edit on 24-1-2007 by Regenmacher]



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test
No, it's not ignorant it was just a poor attempt at a humourous way of saying that whilst I am prepared to accept that some individuals find a vegetarian lifestyle preferable I certainly do not.

What is particularly irritating is that it appears perfectly acceptable for vegetarians to frequently criticise those of us who enjoy eating all forms of meat for being cruel to animals, having no compassion for them, ("meat is murder" anyone?)


Yes I know it was a poor attempt at humour, you get at least one in every thread about vegetarianism, that's why I jumped on it.

And I'm not criticising anyone, just pointing out facts. If you find it irritating you have the choice of not reading. It's not like anyone is forcing you to read this stuff.

And as far as being vile, again that's just an ignorant opinion cause you obviously have never tried it.

But don't flatter yourself, I couldn't care less about what you eat or don't eat. The earth and a few starving millions might though...



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOKYes I know it was a poor attempt at humour, you get at least one in every thread about vegetarianism, that's why I jumped on it.


Well don't be too surprised if someone jumps back then please...


And as far as being vile, again that's just an ignorant opinion cause you obviously have never tried it.


Well that sure sounds like a criticism to me, the word "ignorant" kind of gives it away. Oh, and yes I have tried much of it and it's not to my taste.


I couldn't care less about what you eat or don't eat.


Sure sounds like you do

Look, no need for a row about it. My point, poorly made before, is simple. Vegetarianism as a principle tends to suffer from a considerable number of vegetarians who take their lifestyle very seriously, (nothing wrong with that), but can't accept that others don't and won't. This extreme sensitivity tends to undermine the arguments of those who take a more reasonable approach.

If a lot of vegetarians looked on the rest of us as something other than villans and animal murderers we'd probably all get along a whole lot better.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 05:09 AM
link   
You are also not counting the extra fuel and chemical usage and need that would come with eating 100% vegitarian which means more vegitarian food production.

You'd also still need cows around to produce natural fertilizers and have somewhere to go with byproducts and wasteproducts from vegitable and grain/mais production.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arcane Demesne

But you're missing the point of the article. If man didn't FARM animals, green house gases would drop drastcially. That's the entire point of this thread.


But if we all stopped farming animals we'd have to slaughter hundreds of million of them - which in turn would produce even more carbon emissions through decomposition and/or burning of the bodies


Of course, there's one way we could cut greenhouse gas emission even more dramatically. Stop chopping down rain forests.

About time palm oil products were banned perhaps?



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Glad me and my family have been a contribution.


Been vegetarians since birth, thanks to Krishna consciousness.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 10:10 AM
link   
But if vegetarians eat only vegetables, what do humanitarians eat?




posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dragon12
Hey what about we ban all cars - got to decrease global warming, and while we are at it, why dont we shut down all power stations. Thats got to decrease global warming. Me I vote for all the vegitarians to start. I mean they are the ones who think that us meat eaters are all the problem so show us, go on get rid of all your cars and turn off the electricity - what, you wont? seems that the vegitarians are the problem now!



Why do you even say such things? no one said anything against meat eaters it was just a suggestion thread about ''what if''

To each his own man but at least i don't insult you for eating meat.

And by the way, yes cars are a big polution factor and yes it would be a good idea to stop ussing gas alltogether... there's even rumors that there is free energy and they are not releasing it because it would be the end of corporations and their monumental profits. If we truely do have free energy the person not releasing this to the public is a dirty rotten greedy bastard.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan

But if we all stopped farming animals we'd have to slaughter hundreds of million of them - which in turn would produce even more carbon emissions through decomposition and/or burning of the bodies



Ha, I seee your opint. But I doubt 300 milion people would drop everything and become vegetarian or Vegan (and I wouldn't want them to. There needs to be choice, this is America). But you'd do it gradually...like step #1, stop force impregnating the farm animals. #2 seprate the different sexes. #3 Go about business as normal.

In 10-25 years, the livestock numbers would drop. Then, when we have enough meat still alive and left, those who choose to eat meat can. Farms would be MUCH cleaner and healthier, less crowded, and meat would cost more (like it should). Only the rich used to be able to afford meat. It's almost the opposite now, meat bieing to dirt cheap (and full of dirt
).



Of course, there's one way we could cut greenhouse gas emission even more dramatically. Stop chopping down rain forests.


Couldn't agree w/ you more there. Although, we've been saying this forever, and the logging companies keep their lobbyists well paid...



About time palm oil products were banned perhaps?


Not sure I understand this statement. Palm Oil is great for you. Vitaman A&E, Omega-6, lowers bad cholesterol.... en.wikipedia.org...

Inless there is a practice to extract it that I don't kow about that's hurting the environment. In which case, I'd love to see a different way of extracting it. But it's a great natural oil.




top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join