Eating Meat and Dairy is Wrong !

revzen

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2010
Location
England
Original Poster
I am fairly certain that about half of the group that has gone vegetarian or vegan
Has done so in an effort to improve their health.

The other half does it so they can have a false sense of superiority over the majority who eats as an omnivore.

Most health conscious people eat whatever they thrive on better or attempt to do so.

Animals should be treated humanely, but not as humans They exist for our use as pets, beasts of burdon, or food.

Dan
Dan, so wrong! Animals are our equals and in many cases are superior to us. You have been well indoctrinated by the System. The 'experts' have done their job well in your case!

We, as a species are the monsters. The evidence is plain to see. The destruction of the planet is bringing life to a close here, and we are guilty; and we think of ourselves as intelligent!

So intelligent that we may bring an end to ALL LIFE on planet Earth.

Pathetic.
 

D Bergy

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2006
Yes, I have been indoctrinated by tens of thousands of years of human history. I assume this is the system you are referring to.

Dan
 

Ted_Hutchinson

Active member
Joined
May 25, 2009
So intelligent that we may bring an end to ALL LIFE on planet Earth.

Pathetic.
Indeed it's Pathetic that some people don't understand that in order to continue to survive we have to maintain our topsoil and the hundreds of different species it contains. The best and easiest way to maintain topsoil is to ensure that the ground is regularly grazed and animal waste is incorporated into the topsoil to maintain it's fertility.
We can't grow any crops naturally without topsoil. Going back to mixed farming where animal were an essential part of maintaining soil fertility is more sustainable than the current reliance on intensive fertilizer, pesticide and herbicide applications.
We have to understand how modern over-processed over refined carbohydrates are creating the ideal substrate for the growth of pathogenic gut flora to flourish which produce the acidosis that creates current dysbiosis for the animals (including humans) that consume it. The acidosis creates the inflammation that underlies most of the chronic diseases of western civilisation.
We don't have to turn the clock back very far. The enormous rise in obesity, diabetes, osteoporosis, cancer heart disease and dementia has occurred in my lifetime.

Reducing our reliance on refined grains, sugars HFCS and omega 6 oil consumption would reduce our caloric intake naturally and also reduce the pro-inflammatory gut flora that are adversely affecting our physical health and mental well-being, Human brains require animal fats to function optimally. Reducing High Blood sugar the key to preventing Alzheimer's We need to put the fat back into our diets and reduce the over-processed over-refined carbohydrates.
 

knightofalbion

New member
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Location
Glastonbury, England
Wide of the mark.

35% of global topsoil erosion is directly due to grazing, or rather overgrazing, animals for meat production.

30% of global topsoil erosion is due to deforestation. And the main driving force behind deforestation? - meat production.
An area of Amazonian rainforest the size of France has been cut down, destroyed and lost forever, to graze cattle for beef production and grow animal feed to be fed to cattle for beef production.

http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/land_deg/land_deg.html

As for needing animal fats for 'optimal brain function'. Apart from Christ, the greatest person of the Age and the cleverest was Leonardo da Vinci, a man literally hundreds of years ahead of his time. He shunned animal foods, didn't eat meat, refused to 'permit injury to any living creature'...
 

D Bergy

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2006
It would seem to be a problem of overpopulation then, not of food choices. Overpopulation will eat up virtually all resources of the earth if the birth rate keeps climbing unabated. Nature usually will take care of this also through plagues, starvation, war etc if the problem is not checked by ourselves.

Dan
 

knightofalbion

New member
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Location
Glastonbury, England
The two are inexorably linked. Meat production is at the tipping point. We could feed up to 11 billion people on a plant based diet, using all existing agricultural land to grow food exclusively for human consumption, instead of using such a large proportion of it, so inefficiently, for meat production and growing crops for animal feed.

But man needs to see the bigger picture. It is what you might term the Old Testament attitude that we can help ourselves to the natural world, asset stripping with gay abandon, that has landed us in this mess.

Man was created to be the guardians of the natural world. We need to recognise the unity of all life and learn to live in harmony with Nature.
Before it is too late...
 

Solstice Goat

Frater Aegagrus
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Location
Seattle, WA
Wide of the mark.

35% of global topsoil erosion is directly due to grazing, or rather overgrazing, animals for meat production. .

No way that 30% of the animal products in the US are pasture raised. It's much closer to 2%, with the rest being raised CAFO.


Based on anecdotal evidence gathered from friends who own goats, I must reverse my initial response to Ted and concur; grazing animals do build topsoil, which in turn generates greater plant yields. If you don't believe me, do a search for 'permaculture' and see what you come up with.






Yes, I have been indoctrinated by tens of thousands of years of human history. I assume this is the system you are referring to.

Dan

DING DING DING!!!!!!!!


Man evolved by animal consumption, pure and simple.

Furthermore, NOT feeding my dog that I rescued from 14 months of cruelty raw meat, would be cruelty, because he too, was born to eat meat.
 

knightofalbion

New member
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Location
Glastonbury, England
No way that 30% of the animal products in the US are pasture raised. It's much closer to 2%, with the rest being raised CAFO.

Based on anecdotal evidence gathered from friends who own goats, I must reverse my initial response to Ted and concur; grazing animals do build topsoil, which in turn generates greater plant yields. If you don't believe me, do a search for 'permaculture' and see what you come up with.

If you check the website listed you'll see the 35% mentioned is a global figure.

2%? It's 25%. US Government's own figures.
http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/ag101/landuse.html

http://www.makingpages.org/health/veg-facts.html
 

Solstice Goat

Frater Aegagrus
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Location
Seattle, WA
If you check the website listed you'll see the 35% mentioned is a global figure.

2%? It's 25%. US Government's own figures.
http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/ag101/landuse.html

http://www.makingpages.org/health/veg-facts.html

Oh, you mean the clowns that are fighting a proxy war in Syria right now?

For some reason they don't show up on my list of trusted sources at this time.

I have to search hard for pasture raised dairy products with over 99% of the offerings CAFO.


So, where is all this overgrazed dairy and meat products for sale at?
 

D Bergy

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2006
I would agree that the methods common to factory type farming are destructive to the land and lead to soil exhaustion, but that is a relatively recent deviation from traditional farming. Where farming occurs is equally important. One of the biggest milk producing states is California. Not because it is a good place to raise dairy cows but because the milk subsidies from the government encourage farming in places that would not occur under normal circumstances.

It is difficult to find a dairy farm in Minnesota today, although it is far better suited for this.

Using Corn for producing fuel is about as inefficient as it gets so now we have millions of acres growing a monoculture of fuel crops. No animals to replenish the soil, but more petroleum based fertilizer is used to make a petroleum substitute. Not much future in that either. Subsidies keep that practice alive also.

The argument that animals feel pain as a result of slaughter is certainly true, but animals raised in the traditional way have an excellent life otherwise. They do not face starvation, disease, constant preditation, etc. There is always pain and cruelty involved with life. That does not mean we should not try to minimize the experience, much like it is done with child birth and surgery.

I have watched a house cat torture mice, birds for hours. That is their nature. It should not be ours, but the harmony with nature thing does not exist as presented. Nature is every bit as cruel as humans can be, and you can't get around that fact. I have seen deer dragging their guts in the dirt due to a wolf attack or a Red Squirrel biting the testicles off of a Grey Squirrel "ouch". Nothing pretty or harmonious about that. It is reality, but if you live in the middle of Chicago you probably are not aware of how things really are in nature.

You probably have not witnessed a mother rabbit killing its offspring because it has a defect. Humans do not normally do that. Nature does.

Nature is not like a Bambi movie, it is often ugly, cruel, painful but that is part and parcel of life in general.

Dan
 

Mad Scientest

New member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Location
Illinois
but if you live in the middle of Chicago you probably are not aware of how things really are in nature.
Dan
[FONT=&quot]Oh I think he might be, if one goes into the “right areas” it can be a virtual jungle with the gang bangers fighting over their turf. :lol: :(
[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]As I said earlier there is no life on this plant that can exist without first taking the life of something else. Every living thing feeds on some other living thing and as Dan stated the results are not always very pretty. Yet this is the norm. However if the creator finds all of this offensive should he/(she?) not be able to but a stop to it with a simple snap of his magnificent fingers. But I haven’t heard any snaps lately. So there must be a reason for allowing it to continue. [/FONT]
 

knightofalbion

New member
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Location
Glastonbury, England
I would agree that the methods common to factory type farming are destructive to the land and lead to soil exhaustion, but that is a relatively recent deviation from traditional farming. Where farming occurs is equally important. One of the biggest milk producing states is California. Not because it is a good place to raise dairy cows but because the milk subsidies from the government encourage farming in places that would not occur under normal circumstances.

It is difficult to find a dairy farm in Minnesota today, although it is far better suited for this.

Using Corn for producing fuel is about as inefficient as it gets so now we have millions of acres growing a monoculture of fuel crops. No animals to replenish the soil, but more petroleum based fertilizer is used to make a petroleum substitute. Not much future in that either. Subsidies keep that practice alive also.

The argument that animals feel pain as a result of slaughter is certainly true, but animals raised in the traditional way have an excellent life otherwise. They do not face starvation, disease, constant preditation, etc. There is always pain and cruelty involved with life. That does not mean we should not try to minimize the experience, much like it is done with child birth and surgery.

I have watched a house cat torture mice, birds for hours. That is their nature. It should not be ours, but the harmony with nature thing does not exist as presented. Nature is every bit as cruel as humans can be, and you can't get around that fact. I have seen deer dragging their guts in the dirt due to a wolf attack or a Red Squirrel biting the testicles off of a Grey Squirrel "ouch". Nothing pretty or harmonious about that. It is reality, but if you live in the middle of Chicago you probably are not aware of how things really are in nature.

You probably have not witnessed a mother rabbit killing its offspring because it has a defect. Humans do not normally do that. Nature does.

Nature is not like a Bambi movie, it is often ugly, cruel, painful but that is part and parcel of life in general.

Dan
Be it individuals or humanity as a whole, always there is a better, higher way. And it must be found if there is to be progress.
 

knightofalbion

New member
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Location
Glastonbury, England
[FONT=&quot]Oh I think he might be, if one goes into the “right areas” it can be a virtual jungle with the gang bangers fighting over their turf. :lol: :(
[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]As I said earlier there is no life on this plant that can exist without first taking the life of something else. Every living thing feeds on some other living thing and as Dan stated the results are not always very pretty. Yet this is the norm. However if the creator finds all of this offensive should he/(she?) not be able to but a stop to it with a simple snap of his magnificent fingers. But I haven’t heard any snaps lately. So there must be a reason for allowing it to continue. [/FONT]
It's called free will.

Whenever man gets too big for his boots and decides to 'play God' / when man fails to live in harmony with Nature, it always ends in calamity.

No culture or civilisation lasts forever. We are fools if we think ours will be any different.
 

knightofalbion

New member
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Location
Glastonbury, England
Oh, you mean the clowns that are fighting a proxy war in Syria right now?

For some reason they don't show up on my list of trusted sources at this time.

I have to search hard for pasture raised dairy products with over 99% of the offerings CAFO.


So, where is all this overgrazed dairy and meat products for sale at?
They won two elections fair and square did they not? That's democracy.

The reality is not in question. The Livestock Industry is wholly unsustainable even at the present level, never mind with a population of 10 billion.

40 years from now...
* You'll be vegan
* You'll be chewing insects and 'meat' grown in a laboratory
or
* You'll be dead.

That's the reality for everyone.
 

Mad Scientest

New member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Location
Illinois
That's the reality for everyone.
[FONT=&quot]Well there is another possible reality. However it requires opening your mind to what some might consider to be fantasy. But from what I have been hearing and reading the entire earth and everything on it is about to evolve into a “higher dimension” and we are now in the beginning stages of this change. When this change is complete many of the more negative aspects of our current society will no longer be able to function. Hence many of our so called elite realize that their era of control and dominance over the world is coming to an end, and this has them terrified. Thus they are desperately trying to hold the world at its current lower “dimension” thru the use of war. (think [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Syria[/FONT][FONT=&quot])[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]So how would this higher dimension affect the farming of both animals and plants? Imagine if you had free energy and what if you had a Star Trak like replicator to produce your food? Apparently there is a lot more science in this “science fiction” then there is fiction . Thus no more killing of animals or plants for food, your replicator now gives you all the food you want and without any GMO or added drugs. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]So is this something the conspiracy and tinfoil had folks dreamed up and is just fantasy or wishful thing? Perhaps. But what if as many are claiming this coming change is for real? [/FONT]
 

D Bergy

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2006
I have seen at least a dozen "end of the world" predictions in my life time. While I have no doubt there will be an end to the world eventually I doubt anyone will see it coming ahead of time.

Predictions based a on statistics moving in a straight line are bound to be wrong because nature hates a straight line and something always mucks up a straight line prediction. Try making money on a stock using that method and you will lose your ass.

Whether eating animals is right or wrong is an opinion in the end. I do not have an aversion to it, because it is obvious to me that I was designed to eat that way. I did not design myself so I will assume the creator is smarter than me and had a reason for that. I have no qualms about people not eating animals either. That is what freedom of choice is all about. We are all Humans and humans come first in my book. Like any other species I am looking out for my species first.

That means preserving other species and using them as needed. Not being wasteful and realizing every species has a purpose even if I do not know what that purpose is.

Things change as needed. If our farming methods prove to be adversarial to our existence they will change eventually. The rain forest can grow back, just as a the farmers fields in my area have reverted back to forest. My neighbors live on a former potato farm. I could not tell that from looking at it but an old timer remembers it. The land is covered in trees now.

Have a little faith, and your warning is likely moving things in another direction be it slowly.

Dan
 

mommysunshine

New member
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Location
Sunny, tropical, CA.
To feel pain a plant would need a central nervous system, which they haven't got.

To register pain a plant would need a brain/mind, which they haven't got.
A fascinating read is The Secret Life of Plants by Peter Thompkins. A brief overview of the book is that, yes, plants do have emotions and respond to a variety of stimuli. It's fascinating and humbling.

When the time comes and I'm to meet my maker, a question I will ask (if allowed) is, "Why the food chain? Why eat other living things?"

I've Monarch caterpillars growing on a milkweed outside on my patio. I go to bed at night and there are 6 caterpillar eggs. I wake up the next morning and the eggs are gone. Who ate them?
 

ozzie

Active member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Location
australia
I Agree with both revzen and knightofalbion.
I don't believe we should be growing acres and acres of grain to feed animals to slaughter for human consumption when we can use that same grain to feed starving humans directly.
 

Ted_Hutchinson

Active member
Joined
May 25, 2009
I Agree with both revzen and knightofalbion.
I don't believe we should be growing acres and acres of grain to feed animals to slaughter for human consumption when we can use that same grain to feed starving humans directly.
Why don't you try reading Grain Brain or
Wheat Belly to understand the effect of modern grain varieties and the effect of modern pesticides/herbicides on health?

Sure we shouldn't be feeding modern grains to animals or to humans.
Animals evolved to live outdoors eating grass and vegetation.

We cannot go on destroying our topsoil with the current system of grain production (either for humans or animals) If we promote farming styles that lead to the desertification of the planet that isn't best solution for animals or humans.
 


Top