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.

 

I Hate PeTA People

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 05:00 PM
link   
and plants respond to sotthing words music and such sounds liek a type of consiousness to me.




posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Jovi1
 


I noticed that, too. But I'm wondering if it has more to do with the collapse of the wave function in quantum physics than plants being emo.



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Beachcoma
 


Being concerned about global warming and eating meat is like justifying your Hummer by recycling your beer cans. Your burger is doing more damage than your car... Check it out. Being hip and relevent in the "green generation" is like a full time job for you half a**ers, huh? Bummer..

Why global warming proponents are most likely hypocrites..



[edit on 18-9-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues
 


Not following your logic. If you're talking about the methane produced by cows when they fart, ask yourself, where is the carbon coming from and where is it cycling to. It comes from the grass the cow eats, which gets it's carbon from the air, which comes from methane breaking down to CO2, which is absorbed by the grass the cow eats.

Fossil fuels are a totally different animal.

Edit: Grammar

[edit on 18-9-2007 by Beachcoma]



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 08:29 PM
link   
In all reality this arguement breaks down in to the same category as christians vs. nonbelievers, smoker vs. nonsmoker, and such basically you have one group of people who got it in thier head that they are gonna force their beliefs down your throat. And pretty much according to this article if we quit eating meat it would be worse for the environment as there would be more animals than we have now, and before you even start talking about birth controling them your main arguement against eating meat is subjecting them to fear and pain so you have just ruled out any medical operation. and then you will say well we can do it chemically but wouldnt that make you just as vile as the people injecting them with hormones.



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 10:20 PM
link   
So you're only against the damaging effects of fossil fuels but not any other industry that is a major contributer to the same effects of which you are so adamantly against. The way in which they produce the meat is grossly unnatural with an excessive amount of cows confined to one spot creating a hot spot of methane gas, so much so that it can't be effeciently broken down by natural elements. Not to mention the kind of land companies need to graze which is COMPLETELY damaging in its own right. I think it's your logic as a psuedo environmentalist or environmentally aware that is questionable, not my own.

Jovi1... Come on, little guy. You act like there's an absence of rational thinking among the community if ever there was to come an end to the industry.To end something this firmly established there would be a multitude of issues that would present themselves. And be it there would be burgers for another year or so but after that the killing would end, saving the 100,000 head of cattle A DAY in America alone from there on from ever being bred for the very same purpose. It wouldn't be an abrupt end but more likely a gradual one. I'm not saying it will be humane but it is a means to an end. This is a little more heavy than "open the gates."


I don't even know why this is becoming a tense subject anyway. I don't think the meat industry will stop doing what it's doing anytime soon. Meat is a staple in our diet because it's cheap, easy, and it "tastes good." We don't care what kind of detrimental effects it has on our health or our environment, ignoring the facts of it deteriorating both, all because the taste of food. Well I'm glad we didn't cave to simple reasoning.... ........ ................................

A number of environmental reasons < taste. Genius.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues
 

My argument has nothing to do with "meat taste good". You're the one who implied it. In another thread I had already expressed what my concerns are. Besides, I'm not from Burger Nation, for your information. I'm not from a cattle-herding nation. Why are you directing all this to me?

[edit on 19-9-2007 by Beachcoma]



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 05:42 PM
link   
I'm not. My last post was pretty generalized for not only you but the starter of the thread and everyone inbetween.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Oh. Hmm. Well it was difficult to not think you were referring to me, being that nobody else (myself included) brought up global warming into the discussion, but at the same time I'm the only one with a reference to GW in my sig.

Look, if you want to discuss global warming and it's relation to meat eating, I don't think this thread is the best place for it. It is after all a "rant" thread. Besides, the subject in the OP was PETA people.

Here, let me recommend to you a thread where your concerns and your thoughts on global warming and cattle-herding would be much more well received.

Less Meat, Less Heat -- Fewer Steaks may Save Planet

khunmoon has laid out plenty of facts in the OP of the thread. I myself have posted in that thread expressing my concerns on that subject. Perhaps you should respond in that thread as well. It would receive more coverage that's for sure, being that it's on ATS, while this is a rant thread in BTS.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 01:50 AM
link   
You're right. The tangent to global warming was first initially directed towards you and I think we had our rounds afterwards. Total lack of focus on my part. And too, this obviously isn't the forum we should be discussing this in. Thanks for the heads up and nothing personal.



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 09:17 PM
link   
=.= what's next? They going to try and stop animals from eating other animals? Jeez..



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 12:10 PM
link   
The PETA people are pretty much harmless. I will be seeing them in a few weeks when I go to my confernece that is related to biomedical research. They will have their protest and go home. Their website is very amusing as well, filled with inaccuaracies and lies.

However, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) is a terrorist group. This is the group that firebomb universities and laboratories. Because of the new terrorist laws a lot of these yahoo's have been locked up for awhile. And they don't get the slap on the wrist like they use to.

The animal rights movement is a lot different in the States then in Europe. There is still a lot of violence towards animal users in the Euorpe, while in the States is mostly peaceful protest.

I wish I could find the video of ALF leader Jerry Vlasak saying that people who use animals for research need to be murdered. And FYI, Jerry Vlasak is a surgeon, who wouldn't be where he is without animal research.



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 04:12 PM
link   
(Double Post)

[edit on 10/1/2007 by Kacen]



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Another thing that irritates me about these people is they need to -really- get their priorities straight.

Really, there are way more important causes in the world.

There are HUMANS dieing every day, but the fact that these people focus all their efforts on animals is just disgusting.

There are some animals that should not be harmed IMO, namely primates and dolphins and other intelligent cetaceans, we should draw the line there, I think.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join