Sorry, Vegans: Brussels Sprouts Like to Live, Too

Originally posted by watcher73

Which machine shoots it full of antibiotics and hormones?

Also it must be an imaginary reality in which all cows are milked like you described.

Are you reading the posts or just choosing to ignore things again? I stated clearly i know of one farm doing this in the entire UK and i think it should be extended to all farms. So please once again as you have wandered into this thread don't lie about what people ahve said. You do it an awful lot making out they said something different to what they have.

As for hormones and antibiotics i am unaware if the farm in question produces organic milk or not so i can't comment. However i will say that i am against the mandatory injecting of such chemicals and believe they should only be used for direct treatment of disease, not as a preventative measure.

Originally posted by Schmidt1989
I nevre said "if you dont kill animals then you're stupid." I'm not sure if your attention span lasted long enough for you to read my post in its entirety. I clearly illustrated my love for animals, and that I personally have never killed an animal.

You only clearly illustrated that you think vegetarians are stupid.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by when meat evolved...

Evolution theory tries to show how species evolved.

please correct me if i'm wrong, but by that I can only assume you meant meat consumption by humans and what did we eat before meat.

How did humans evolve to eat meat before meat even existed?

To answer that, read your basic physical anthropology book off of amazon. Human ancestors ate things like nuts and tubers.

Do you mean humans might have existed as a different lifeform that did not require meat? As a different species?

Meat, as in hunting and gathering, came before agriculture, so the best way to show is to say over 13,000 years ago.

Simple logic here, at the time when there was no meat then has it occurred to you the question why hunt for meat?

You must also read a introduction to understanding scientific terms book, in which you'll find that THEORY represents the best explanation for a phenomenon based solely on the proof (data and hypothesis analysis), present at that time. Which means that there is solid evidence behind it. Which makes creationism NOT a theory, because the only evidence supporting it is a book.

And that book was 'just created' out of thin air? Actually, I do think people actually wrote books, but that phenomena doesn't prove creationism or evolutionism.

[edit on 30-12-2009 by dzonatas]

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


It has been improving but sadly i think the majority of eggs are still battery farmed. I have been in one of those places and i can't really put it properly into words. The smell for a start is stomach churning, i have a strong stomach but i was nearly sick. The chickens feathers have been destroyed by being in small cages and their skin is often covered in lesions despite the drugs they are pumped with.

It's wrong, no matter which way you cut it and hopefully one day it will be banned.

why do people think only chickens are treated horribly?

here you have a pig farm where the pigs are penned up to make them fatter so the meat is more tender, wouldnt want them to use any muscle would you? then youd have to use the muscle in your jaws a little more

www.marlerblog.com...

reply to post by watcher73


Guess what, that's illegal in much of Europe, want to try again? Veal for example is not allowed to be penned like that legally here either. As i said earlier the majority do not farm like this. As i have mentioned veal i believe that veal crates were banned in 2006 in the EU for anyone who is interested.

So yep care to try again? Actually it's strange i seem to remember you criticisng me for using pictures, even going so far as to use mocking lanugage like "aww he's seen the pretty piktures". That was your spelling, obviously intended to give a certain condescending tone of voice and yet here you are, using pictures.

Come on at least use some kind of consistency.

EDIT

To add i should say that many European countries have lax enforcement standards, Spain and France being two key offenders.

[edit on 30-12-2009 by ImaginaryReality1984]

Originally posted by watcher73
sentient - 1 : responsive to or conscious of sense impressions

This pretty much covers every living thing on the planet.

I'm waiting for others on this thread to prove/disprove sentience in Cleverbot:

User: Do you eat meat?

Cleverbot: No I don't.

User: Are you vegetarian?

Cleverbot: No why should I be vegetarian?

User: What do you eat?

Cleverbot: Anything except meat.

Yes, that was a real session... incredible!

reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd

That really is the point of this thread. I've learned some things as well. There is no right or wrong, as far as morality is concerned. And the plant discussion is one that I think is valid.

it did go off topic - true - but it's one of those. Hard to limit the discussion to whether or not it's wrong to eat plants when we can't even agree (yet) on whether or not it's wrong to eat animals

but just look what you started :-)

the problem is there's not enough information on whether or not plants actually suffer - it's very easy for us right now to assume they don't

but you know what? It is an interesting subject. If it were a fact, if plants do suffer - you're right - then what?

(probably the same thing that just happened - all over again)

reply to post by dzonatas


Cleverbot, whilst able to respond cannot provide new insight and often trips up. It is not able to view itself in terms of other people or even other computers and therefore it is not a sentient being, merely a mimick. It does not feel. It would be like if a program a robot to say "i love you", it does not feel the love, it can only have a facade of love that we interpret as being sentient.

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
but you know what? It is an interesting subject. If it were a fact, if plants do suffer - you're right - then what?

(probably the same thing that just happened - all over again)

I can tell you exactly what would happen. Basically plants would be considered lesser than animals and so can morally still be eaten. Although of course there are still the fruitarians who only eat what has fallen off of a plant and is already dead.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


I know it's a crazy angle - and I understand why it won't be taken seriously (by most)

the OPs idea though is still interesting. Getting past all the nonsense and all the arguing - if it were the subject of an actual debate (with rules). Prove your point - you know?

Maybe you're right. Of course there would still be the "I'm going to eat whatever tastes good" argument. But what if we could prove there was no real difference in the amount of suffering?

what kind of crazy world would that be?

Hmm forget the vegetarians and vegans the bigger problem lies in what the Geneticists who play around with these plant organisms and inject bacterial poison.

Most raw foodists know plants are alive which is the basis of why they eat it. Live food to get into live cells for a live body to keep it living. Plants actually love the cells of the human body and cannot wait to be eaten for this fact alone. This is why they take the aura of the living plants to show they are alive. Raw foodists dont cook the food as it devoids this liveliness.

Originally posted by dzonatas

User: Do you eat meat?

Cleverbot: No I don't.

User: Are you vegetarian?

Cleverbot: No why should I be vegetarian?

User: What do you eat?

Cleverbot: Anything except meat.

Thats nothing

I asked it once if it ate green eggs and ham

It said "I dont like green egss and ham"

It also wouldnt eat them in a boat and it wouldnt eat them with a goat

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


You're so-called apology was 'tripped up' with hatred and insincerity, and you are unable to view yourself from someone else on the other side of internet.

In fact, Cleverbot uses real people for it's sentience. I explained it in another post awhile ago.

What Cleverbot really does is show that articles like the OP are completely bogus for any proof.

However, it's a bit different on the physicalness under a microscope sinse nanobots are like cellular organism, but not proven to exist in the public wild.

A virus is a virus. "One false step" of the Lazarus kind.

[edit on 30-12-2009 by dzonatas]

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
It said "I dont like green egss and ham"

Did you notice how often Cleverbot misspells?

I'm sure there is an explanation of some intelligent virus that causes a computer program that knows exactly how a word is spelled to randomly misspell them.

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


It would be the kind of crazy world where maybe we could put this petty squabble aside and each eat whatever we like, with the extra time we could do better things like solve world hunger. What is interesting is that it tends to be the meat eaters who let the vegetarians do their thing and the vegetarians, who claim to be morally superior that are trying to enforce their rules on others. I know this isn't all of you but it really is the majority and the more extreme people get (like vegans) the more they try to convert people.

My simple response to all arguments given is as follows.

Leave me alone to do as i wish and i will leave you alone. As long as no human is harmed and no species is forced to extinction by my or your actions and as long as we don't eat any species that has a self awareness that approachs our own then it's all good.


EDIT

Think i'm going to drop out now, every point i can make has been made and i'm rather tired. But have fun everyone.

[edit on 30-12-2009 by ImaginaryReality1984]

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


well - you are one of the few adamant meat eaters I've heard from that makes such strong arguments for the humane treatment of our animals

I have some pretty strong views myself - and as I've mentioned earlier - I could get pretty preachy about it all

but I ultimately am interested in the welfare of the animals - and if compromise is what it takes to get that ball rolling full speed - then - that's what it takes

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


As long as no human is harmed ? What makes us better than animals?
And if you give me the answer, "humans can create and use knowledge", I can give you plenty of names who don't do that. There are plenty of human beings wasting space, eat them as well.


I notice you keep using how in Europe all this is illegal, perhaps Europeans aren't the only ones commenting on this thread.

Mod Edit: Member mistakenly sent you a u2u intended for someone else. Removing.
Cheers - alien

[edit on 30-12-2009 by alien]

[edit on 30-12-2009 by alien]

Originally posted by dzonatas
You only clearly illustrated that you think vegetarians are stupid.

You're disgustingly incorrect, re-read the original post... the whole thing this time.

How did humans evolve to eat meat before meat even existed

That literally makes no sense. how could a creature made of meat exist before meat existed? Meat existed way before humans. But perhaps you don't believe dinosaurs ever roamed the earth.

Do you mean humans might have existed as a different lifeform that did not require meat? As a different species?

Humans didn't come out of thin air. Do you understand anything about human evolution?

Simple logic here, at the time when there was no meat then has it occurred to you the question why hunt for meat?

Why hunt for meat? Have you ever heard of an ice age? Guess not.

And that book was 'just created' out of thin air? Actually, I do think people actually wrote books, but that phenomena doesn't prove creationism or evolutionism.

The scriptures were undoubtedly written by people. So no, I don't believe the books were created out of thin air. Are the stories they consist of fiction? Of course.

[edit on 30-12-2009 by alien]