The Veganism Thread

[davetapson]

 

 

Vegans: This is WRONG!!! The cattle must be killed and IT MUST BE PLOUGHED UP AND CABBAGES PLANTED!!!

 

Because that is the RIGHT THING TO DO!!

Edited August 3, 2019 by davetapson

[Edition 507]

The hypocrisy of vegans #3.

 

Consume products that are the result of human exploitation in the sweat shops of Asia and China and excuse themselves by thinking veganism is only about not eating meat, so buying cheap T-shirts is okay .

 

Humans are animals too!

[Edition 507]

The hypocrisy of vegans #4.

 

Won’t eat meat, but bring on the animal experimentation when it comes to curing their cancer and fixing their broken bones.

[Edition 507]

You know, as a responsible parent you have to teach your kids to be grateful and thankful for the good things they have, so before bed we let them say a little prayer to God.

 

“Dear God, thank you for mummy and daddy and thank you for my warm bed. And thank you for Teddy to keep me safe. And God, thank you for all the bunnies and puppy dogs that you give us to experiment on so that I don’t ever have to get sick. Amen”

[Edition 507]

*overly dramatic yawn*

 

See if you can twist them even more.

So Odinson, what is it? 

Have you devalued you and your family members lives to that of a pig or have you increased the value of a pigs life to be that of your family members?

[davetapson]

Kill all the birds...

 

The silent spring reference is referring to Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring. It's worth a read. Esp. if you think growing plants is a benign process.

Edited August 3, 2019 by davetapson

[davetapson]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/03/ipcc-land-use-food-production-key-to-climate-crisis-leaked-report?CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium=&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1564842653

 

Attempts to solve the climate crisis by cutting carbon emissions from only cars, factories and power plants are doomed to failure, scientists will warn this week.

 

A leaked draft of a report on climate change and land use, which is now being debated in Geneva by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), states that it will be impossible to keep global temperatures at safe levels unless there is also a transformation in the way the world produces food and manages land.

 

The new IPCC report emphasises that land will have to be managed more sustainably so that it releases much less carbon than at present. Peat lands will need to be restored by halting drainage schemes; meat consumption will have to be cut to reduce methane production; while food waste will have to be reduced.

 

Among the measures put forward by the report is the proposal of a major shift towards vegetarian and vegan diets. “The consumption of healthy and sustainable diets, such as those based on coarse grains, pulses and vegetables, and nuts and seeds … presents major opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions,” the report states.

So much BS.

 

Greenhouse gas emissions due to cows in the US? 2.03%

 

Greenhouse gas emissions due to vegan agriculture? 4.57%

 

So vegans emit 200+% more greenhouse gas than cows.

 

And that doesn't even include the greenhouse gases emitted by vegans/vegetarians THEMSELVES!!

 

Which, as anyone who has tried it will tell you is not unappreciable.... [emoji849][emoji849][emoji849]

 

[Thor Buttox]

Jesus H Martinez, there is some wild 'science' on this thread...

 

(And let me say that as someone who supports the vegan orinciple but who is 'hypocritical' or, alternatively, self-aware enough to make a concious choice to eat limited amounts of meat based on a holistic assessment of health, welfare and conversely, the negative effects of pure veganry, or as it appears to some 'devilry' on people.

 

The science is not settled on this, people. There are many aspects - global warming, personal health, overpopulation/nutritional production, eg. I know which way I think it leans (heavily), currently hence my support above. Which brings me to my main point.

 

Even if your answer is 'I don't know which side the science falls' there is still an ethical decision to be made. Because that is where personal preference over the facts, and the associated hypocrisy sit, of which I am fully cognisant I still have some

 

Separate those and stop mangling them together and perhaps we may even have some kumbaya...)

 

I mean, kambucha.

Edited August 4, 2019 by Thor Buttox

[davetapson]

Jesus H Martinez, there is some wild 'science' on this thread...

 

(And let me say that as someone who supports the vegan orinciple but who is 'hypocritical' or, alternatively, self-aware enough to make a concious choice to eat limited amounts of meat based on a holistic assessment of health, welfare and conversely, the negative effects of pure veganry, or as it appears to some 'devilry' on people.

 

The science is not settled on this, people. There are many aspects - global warming, personal health, overpopulation/nutritional production, eg. I know which way I think it leans (heavily), currently hence my support above. Which brings me to my main point.

 

Even if your answer is 'I don't know which side the science falls' there is still an ethical decision to be made. Because that is where personal preference over the facts, and the associated hypocrisy sit, of which I am fully cognisant I still have some

 

Separate those and stop mangling them together and perhaps we may even have some kumbaya...)

 

I mean, kambucha.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat!!?? You trying to tell me vegans don't fart..??

[Thor Buttox]

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat!!?? You trying to tell me vegans don't fart..??

No, never said that. My wife is vegan and she...

 

Uhm, on second thought.

[Odinson]

Ja, Dave. You armed with Google have got the IPCC pipped.

[Mojoman]

So Odinson, what is it? 

Have you devalued you and your family members lives to that of a pig or have you increased the value of a pigs life to be that of your family members?

Daft comment of the week...!

 

 

[DJR]

Kill all the birds...

 

The silent spring reference is referring to Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring. It's worth a read. Esp. if you think growing plants is a benign process.

As an interesting aside, we have seen something very similar here in South Africa as well. It was even researched by the Percy Fitzpatric Institute for Avian Research at the University of Cape Town.

 

Basically, it was noticed that the guinea fowl population in KwaZulu Natal had declined very severely. At first it was suspected that it was due to poisons from agriculture, but, surprisingly, that turned out to be a false alarm. Many other reasons were looked into, but in the end the one thing that remained was very simple. Where agricultural lands were small, with hedgerows and bits of natural vegetation, shrubs and trees in between, the birds flourished. Where lands got large, monoculture, with no natural vegetation left, like in modern farming practices where a single crop stretches almost from horizon to horizon, they disappeared!

 

It was really that simple - if you took away the physical shelter, nesting sites and roosting sites, it did not matter how much food there was, the population declined and became extinct from the area. (Note that this applies to resident, non-migrating species like guinea fowl)

 

I'm pretty sure that the French birds are going the same way because of modern farming practices. 

[davetapson]

As an interesting aside, we have seen something very similar here in South Africa as well. It was even researched by the Percy Fitzpatric Institute for Avian Research at the University of Cape Town.

 

Basically, it was noticed that the guinea fowl population in KwaZulu Natal had declined very severely. At first it was suspected that it was due to poisons from agriculture, but, surprisingly, that turned out to be a false alarm. Many other reasons were looked into, but in the end the one thing that remained was very simple. Where agricultural lands were small, with hedgerows and bits of natural vegetation, shrubs and trees in between, the birds flourished. Where lands got large, monoculture, with no natural vegetation left, like in modern farming practices where a single crop stretches almost from horizon to horizon, they disappeared!

 

It was really that simple - if you took away the physical shelter, nesting sites and roosting sites, it did not matter how much food there was, the population declined and became extinct from the area. (Note that this applies to resident, non-migrating species like guinea fowl)

 

I'm pretty sure that the French birds are going the same way because of modern farming practices.

Put in some pastures with hedgerows. Boom.

[davetapson]

Ja, Dave. You armed with Google have got the IPCC pipped.

Well, on the face of it they don't seem much to understand dynamic systems.

 

Or choose not to, probably because it's detrimental to the permanence of their employment..?

 

Dunno.

[IceCreamMan]

https://wokennews.com/2018/12/25/vegans-now-claiming-that-stuffing-the-turkey-to-be-sexual-assault/