Report, edit, etc...Posted by Wilhelm on 2005-07-18 at 10:07:15
Oh yeah? Read up on this:
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill
Now sit down and shut up, we're not going to stop eating meat because you want us to, the way nature works is that the strongest will survive, and should it be a meat eater, it will kill what it can. In man's case, what it can is EVERY animal. We evolved into the best, why are you trying to act as though creatures that we can easily kill are somehow above or equal to us? The only judgement in nature is how well an animal survives, and man is surviving fine, better then all large species around him. Too bad we're not getting eaten by a larger predator, right?
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill
Now sit down and shut up, we're not going to stop eating meat because you want us to, the way nature works is that the strongest will survive, and should it be a meat eater, it will kill what it can. In man's case, what it can is EVERY animal. We evolved into the best, why are you trying to act as though creatures that we can easily kill are somehow above or equal to us? The only judgement in nature is how well an animal survives, and man is surviving fine, better then all large species around him. Too bad we're not getting eaten by a larger predator, right?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by n2o-SiMpSoNs on 2005-07-18 at 10:10:08
QUOTE(Wilhelm @ Jul 18 2005, 10:07 AM)
Oh yeah? Read up on this:
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill
[right][snapback]264836[/snapback][/right]
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill
[right][snapback]264836[/snapback][/right]
pwnt
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Parthx86 on 2005-07-18 at 11:11:02
QUOTE(Wilhelm @ Jul 18 2005, 07:07 AM)
Oh yeah? Read up on this:
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill
Now sit down and shut up, we're not going to stop eating meat because you want us to, the way nature works is that the strongest will survive, and should it be a meat eater, it will kill what it can. In man's case, what it can is EVERY animal. We evolved into the best, why are you trying to act as though creatures that we can easily kill are somehow above or equal to us? The only judgement in nature is how well an animal survives, and man is surviving fine, better then all large species around him. Too bad we're not getting eaten by a larger predator, right?
[right][snapback]264836[/snapback][/right]
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill
Now sit down and shut up, we're not going to stop eating meat because you want us to, the way nature works is that the strongest will survive, and should it be a meat eater, it will kill what it can. In man's case, what it can is EVERY animal. We evolved into the best, why are you trying to act as though creatures that we can easily kill are somehow above or equal to us? The only judgement in nature is how well an animal survives, and man is surviving fine, better then all large species around him. Too bad we're not getting eaten by a larger predator, right?
[right][snapback]264836[/snapback][/right]
Eat your next door neighbor next time you see him, because you are the best.
By the way, I believe that site is MaddOx. The guy who made it is very close minded and a bit conceaded, he might be funny, but he goes too far.
QUOTE
A number of people have pointed out that the amount of grain grown to feed animals for slaughter every year is greater than the amount of grain grown for humans. So I guess the amount of grain grown for human consumption suddenly becomes negligible and we can conveniently ignore the fact that animals are still ruthlessly murdered either way because of your diet, right? Not to mention that the majority of grain grown for livestock is tough as rocks, coarse, and so low-grade that it's only fit for animal consumption in the first place. Spare me the "you could feed 500 people with the grain used to feed one cow" line of 
; it's not the same grain. Then there are the people who jump on the bandwagon with "you could plant billions of potatoes on the land used for cows"--good point, except for the fact that not every plot of land is equally fertile; you think farmers always have a choice on what they do with their land?
; it's not the same grain. Then there are the people who jump on the bandwagon with "you could plant billions of potatoes on the land used for cows"--good point, except for the fact that not every plot of land is equally fertile; you think farmers always have a choice on what they do with their land?Thats
ed, of course not all land is equally fertile, but if you can grow some sort of grain on it, then you can grow 'edible' grain too.And I still recieve no response to my quotes and websites.
QUOTE
Yeah if i only eat meat and if i only drink milk.(or other dairy products)
I eat meat with lunch and supper. usually not breakfast but i like to have eggs and bacon and such. I am about 100 pounds to 110. hmm ill weigh my self later... im not obese from eating meat. The people who get bese are the idiots who go to mc donalds everyday or go to kfc everyday..
I eat meat with lunch and supper. usually not breakfast but i like to have eggs and bacon and such. I am about 100 pounds to 110. hmm ill weigh my self later... im not obese from eating meat. The people who get bese are the idiots who go to mc donalds everyday or go to kfc everyday..
And those people are the reasons more animals are dead.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Infested-Jerk on 2005-07-18 at 11:35:33
I'm surprized noone's thought of this. If humans from the beginning vegitarions, we probably wouldn't be walking erect on two feel and we wouldn't have any need for thumbs, unless it includes climbing.
My point is, our primal need for meat caused us to use tools. The abilety to use tools is a very good indicator that a creature, human or not, is smart enough to be considered "Thinking". Chimpanzees use tools, and they often have emotions. Not to be confused with reading sadness in a dog who doesn't have food. Humans evolved to make tools, because to hunt in our groups, to feed all those people, we needed tools, which lead to thumbs, walking upright, and smarts. Because with tools, it allowed us to think outside of just survive, but how to become (hopefully) better.
IF we were totaly vegitarians, the only reason we'd ever need hands to climb with is to get at leaves, and considering, we'd probably be much shorter, much like teh chimps, and we'd be much like rabbits, horses, cow,s lambs, and otehr grazing animals. Grazers have no use for tools. Because the only reason tools were ever developed were to hunt.
So thank the heaven humans decided a moose looked tasty instead of worrying about the animal's feelings.
DId I mention if animals truly were sentient (Thinking at teh same, or better level than a human.) that they would ahve organized, and try to futher their standing in the world? Wolves will combine in packs, and have dominance and all that junk, but they don't create tools cars, they don't try to do anything but survive, and breed. What does a pig do? Eat, eat some more, eat, take mudbaths, and eat. Not much thinking involved.
My point is, our primal need for meat caused us to use tools. The abilety to use tools is a very good indicator that a creature, human or not, is smart enough to be considered "Thinking". Chimpanzees use tools, and they often have emotions. Not to be confused with reading sadness in a dog who doesn't have food. Humans evolved to make tools, because to hunt in our groups, to feed all those people, we needed tools, which lead to thumbs, walking upright, and smarts. Because with tools, it allowed us to think outside of just survive, but how to become (hopefully) better.
IF we were totaly vegitarians, the only reason we'd ever need hands to climb with is to get at leaves, and considering, we'd probably be much shorter, much like teh chimps, and we'd be much like rabbits, horses, cow,s lambs, and otehr grazing animals. Grazers have no use for tools. Because the only reason tools were ever developed were to hunt.
So thank the heaven humans decided a moose looked tasty instead of worrying about the animal's feelings.
DId I mention if animals truly were sentient (Thinking at teh same, or better level than a human.) that they would ahve organized, and try to futher their standing in the world? Wolves will combine in packs, and have dominance and all that junk, but they don't create tools cars, they don't try to do anything but survive, and breed. What does a pig do? Eat, eat some more, eat, take mudbaths, and eat. Not much thinking involved.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Parthx86 on 2005-07-18 at 12:36:42
+Jul 18 2005, 08:35 AM-->QUOTE(Infested- @ Jul 18 2005, 08:35 AM)
@ Jul 18 2005, 08:35 AM)I'm surprized noone's thought of this. If humans from the beginning vegitarions, we probably wouldn't be walking erect on two feel and we wouldn't have any need for thumbs, unless it includes climbing.
My point is, our primal need for meat caused us to use tools. The abilety to use tools is a very good indicator that a creature, human or not, is smart enough to be considered "Thinking". Chimpanzees use tools, and they often have emotions. Not to be confused with reading sadness in a dog who doesn't have food. Humans evolved to make tools, because to hunt in our groups, to feed all those people, we needed tools, which lead to thumbs, walking upright, and smarts. Because with tools, it allowed us to think outside of just survive, but how to become (hopefully) better.
IF we were totaly vegitarians, the only reason we'd ever need hands to climb with is to get at leaves, and considering, we'd probably be much shorter, much like teh chimps, and we'd be much like rabbits, horses, cow,s lambs, and otehr grazing animals. Grazers have no use for tools. Because the only reason tools were ever developed were to hunt.
So thank the heaven humans decided a moose looked tasty instead of worrying about the animal's feelings.
DId I mention if animals truly were sentient (Thinking at teh same, or better level than a human.) that they would ahve organized, and try to futher their standing in the world? Wolves will combine in packs, and have dominance and all that junk, but they don't create tools cars, they don't try to do anything but survive, and breed. What does a pig do? Eat, eat some more, eat, take mudbaths, and eat. Not much thinking involved.
[right][snapback]264867[/snapback][/right]
My point is, our primal need for meat caused us to use tools. The abilety to use tools is a very good indicator that a creature, human or not, is smart enough to be considered "Thinking". Chimpanzees use tools, and they often have emotions. Not to be confused with reading sadness in a dog who doesn't have food. Humans evolved to make tools, because to hunt in our groups, to feed all those people, we needed tools, which lead to thumbs, walking upright, and smarts. Because with tools, it allowed us to think outside of just survive, but how to become (hopefully) better.
IF we were totaly vegitarians, the only reason we'd ever need hands to climb with is to get at leaves, and considering, we'd probably be much shorter, much like teh chimps, and we'd be much like rabbits, horses, cow,s lambs, and otehr grazing animals. Grazers have no use for tools. Because the only reason tools were ever developed were to hunt.
So thank the heaven humans decided a moose looked tasty instead of worrying about the animal's feelings.
DId I mention if animals truly were sentient (Thinking at teh same, or better level than a human.) that they would ahve organized, and try to futher their standing in the world? Wolves will combine in packs, and have dominance and all that junk, but they don't create tools cars, they don't try to do anything but survive, and breed. What does a pig do? Eat, eat some more, eat, take mudbaths, and eat. Not much thinking involved.
[right][snapback]264867[/snapback][/right]
Humans still would've realized their need for electricity, lighting, transportation and so on. They would need hands for their tools for building things.
Animals aren't super-intelligent, they can simply think. Do you ever think outside of something out of your day or concern? If you were surviving, what else would you need to do? I think surviving involves some thinking, you can't just turn your brain off and run into a cage of wild starving lions and expect to survive, you COULD survive (chances are you won't) if you THOUGHT.
By the way, eating does involve thinking, if you didn't think, you wouldn't worry about anything, no food, no shelter, no water, you would sit in a spot and do nothing. Actually taking mudbaths helps pigs cool down because they contain no sweat glands, so they're THINKING to cool themselves off. Come on, you didn't learn anything in 7th grade Earth Science?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Snake)Ling on 2005-07-18 at 18:59:54
Parth, could you summarize all of your reasons not to eat meat? It'll make the argument a lot easier for both sides.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-18 at 20:15:30
QUOTE
By the way, eating does involve thinking, if you didn't think, you wouldn't worry about anything, no food, no shelter, no water, you would sit in a spot and do nothing. Actually taking mudbaths helps pigs cool down because they contain no sweat glands, so they're THINKING to cool themselves off. Come on, you didn't learn anything in 7th grade Earth Science?
That helps Infested-
's point. Eating DOES involve thinking. Animals that HUNT for MEAT need to THINK about how to catch their food. All herbivores really have to do is find some plants, and roam around and graze, maybe they have to search, but they don't have to hunt.And so that leads to this:
QUOTE
Animals aren't super-intelligent, they can simply think. Do you ever think outside of something out of your day or concern? If you were surviving, what else would you need to do? I think surviving involves some thinking, you can't just turn your brain off and run into a cage of wild starving lions and expect to survive, you COULD survive (chances are you won't) if you THOUGHT.
Okay so all animals need to do is survive, and to do that means they do need to "think". So I would think hunting for another actual THINKING animal, that needs to survive as well, would be harder than trying to find an immobile plant!
I believe that some animals evolved so that they are better suited to their environment and for getting the food they need. So if that's the case then animals that hunt other "thinking" animals that are trying to survive as well might need more intelligence. Humans for instance aren't the fastest, or biggest, so that means we had to use our intelligence to hunt food, because we needed that meat to live.
So I think that the need for meat did have something to do with us evolving more intelligence. So Infested does have a point.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Wilhelm on 2005-07-18 at 20:37:49
Meh. I say that if it can't beat me, I decide. If it has charm, if letting it live gives me pleasure, then sure, let it live. I wouldn't eat a dog or a primate, dogs are enjoyable animals, and primates are fascinating in their complexity. Cows are big, smelly, and noisy. They taste good. They have no redeeming qualities besides taste, so drive a spike through their head, I want a burger! As for eating meat, the protein helped our brains evolve and become larger, (and better), then those around us. If we had never eaten meat, we'd be in a zoo, and those damned dirty apes would rule us! We'd be placed in zoos and pointed at and laughing at by Gorilla children! Damn you all to hell! You god damn apes!!!
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Pineapple on 2005-07-18 at 21:27:57
No, Im not a vegetarian. I like meat, And meat like's me.
I would never give up meat for just some vegetables or some other green food.
I would never give up meat for just some vegetables or some other green food.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-18 at 23:25:22
Being vegetarian is like saying I'll only eat meat from now on, which no one does, even people who eat a lot of meat eat some vegetables. I can live with vegetarians saying it's healthier (which doesn't really help you that much, if you eat meat occasionally I heard they live slightly longer than pure vegetarians), and that they just don't like meat, or they were raised vegetarian, but when someone says they don't eat meat just because they feel they are saving animals, then they're full of , or saying that it's "against" nature or meat is bad for you, then they are full of . Also preaching the evils of meat is too.
, or saying that it's "against" nature or meat is bad for you, then they are full of . Also preaching the evils of meat is too.Report, edit, etc...Posted by Parthx86 on 2005-07-19 at 00:27:23
QUOTE(Snake)Ling @ Jul 18 2005, 03:59 PM)
Parth, could you summarize all of your reasons not to eat meat? It'll make the argument a lot easier for both sides.
[right][snapback]265013[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]265013[/snapback][/right]
Or you could not be a lazy bum and go read.
QUOTE(devilesk @ Jul 18 2005, 05:15 PM)
That helps Infested- 's point. Eating DOES involve thinking. Animals that HUNT for MEAT need to THINK about how to catch their food. All herbivores really have to do is find some plants, and roam around and graze, maybe they have to search, but they don't have to hunt.
And so that leads to this:
Okay so all animals need to do is survive, and to do that means they do need to "think". So I would think hunting for another actual THINKING animal, that needs to survive as well, would be harder than trying to find an immobile plant!
I believe that some animals evolved so that they are better suited to their environment and for getting the food they need. So if that's the case then animals that hunt other "thinking" animals that are trying to survive as well might need more intelligence. Humans for instance aren't the fastest, or biggest, so that means we had to use our intelligence to hunt food, because we needed that meat to live.
So I think that the need for meat did have something to do with us evolving more intelligence. So Infested does have a point.
[right][snapback]265035[/snapback][/right]
's point. Eating DOES involve thinking. Animals that HUNT for MEAT need to THINK about how to catch their food. All herbivores really have to do is find some plants, and roam around and graze, maybe they have to search, but they don't have to hunt.And so that leads to this:
Okay so all animals need to do is survive, and to do that means they do need to "think". So I would think hunting for another actual THINKING animal, that needs to survive as well, would be harder than trying to find an immobile plant!
I believe that some animals evolved so that they are better suited to their environment and for getting the food they need. So if that's the case then animals that hunt other "thinking" animals that are trying to survive as well might need more intelligence. Humans for instance aren't the fastest, or biggest, so that means we had to use our intelligence to hunt food, because we needed that meat to live.
So I think that the need for meat did have something to do with us evolving more intelligence. So Infested does have a point.
[right][snapback]265035[/snapback][/right]
What?! That doesn't help his point, he was saying that animals aren't thinking creatures. That goes AGAINST his point.
QUOTE(Wilhelm @ Jul 18 2005, 05:37 PM)
Meh. I say that if it can't beat me, I decide. If it has charm, if letting it live gives me pleasure, then sure, let it live. I wouldn't eat a dog or a primate, dogs are enjoyable animals, and primates are fascinating in their complexity. Cows are big, smelly, and noisy. They taste good. They have no redeeming qualities besides taste, so drive a spike through their head, I want a burger! As for eating meat, the protein helped our brains evolve and become larger, (and better), then those around us. If we had never eaten meat, we'd be in a zoo, and those damned dirty apes would rule us! We'd be placed in zoos and pointed at and laughing at by Gorilla children! Damn you all to hell! You god damn apes!!!
[right][snapback]265056[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]265056[/snapback][/right]
Have you tasted your dog, or the animals at your local zoo?
No we would not be in a zoo, because we would still be the dominant species. We'd have all of our technology, we'd just not be killing animals. Just because they're alive doesn't make it so they're gonna rule us all.
QUOTE(Zero @ Jul 18 2005, 06:27 PM)
No, Im not a vegetarian. I like meat, And meat like's me.
I would never give up meat for just some vegetables or some other green food.
[right][snapback]265146[/snapback][/right]
I would never give up meat for just some vegetables or some other green food.
[right][snapback]265146[/snapback][/right]
Meat likes you? I'm sure animals LOVE to die for you!
QUOTE(devilesk @ Jul 18 2005, 08:25 PM)
Being vegetarian is like saying I'll only eat meat from now on, which no one does, even people who eat a lot of meat eat some vegetables. I can live with vegetarians saying it's healthier (which doesn't really help you that much, if you eat meat occasionally I heard they live slightly longer than pure vegetarians), and that they just don't like meat, or they were raised vegetarian, but when someone says they don't eat meat just because they feel they are saving animals, then they're full of , or saying that it's "against" nature or meat is bad for you, then they are full of . Also preaching the evils of meat is too.
[right][snapback]265260[/snapback][/right]
, or saying that it's "against" nature or meat is bad for you, then they are full of . Also preaching the evils of meat is too.[right][snapback]265260[/snapback][/right]
I'm not saying its against nature, I'm saying its wrong. *sigh* living breathing creature? Must I go over it again?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-19 at 00:41:47
Oh yea I forgot to add that "saying its wrong" is too 
And saying it's "wrong" is just you're opinion, and it doesn't mean you're right. Which is why I say that saying eating meat is wrong is .
He never said they "weren't" thinking creatures, he just said they didn't think MUCH, specifically not as much as humans do, which leads to his actual point which is that the need to hunt for meat lead us to evolve a higher intelligence to meet hose needs
Now he may have a different definition of "thinking" but that's not really his point.
I believe that this is really the point I saw and responded to, which you seemed to have ignored:
too And saying it's "wrong" is just you're opinion, and it doesn't mean you're right. Which is why I say that saying eating meat is wrong is .QUOTE
What?! That doesn't help his point, he was saying that animals aren't thinking creatures. That goes AGAINST his point.
He never said they "weren't" thinking creatures, he just said they didn't think MUCH, specifically not as much as humans do, which leads to his actual point which is that the need to hunt for meat lead us to evolve a higher intelligence to meet hose needs
QUOTE
I'm surprized noone's thought of this. If humans from the beginning vegitarions, we probably wouldn't be walking erect on two feel and we wouldn't have any need for thumbs, unless it includes climbing.
My point is, our primal need for meat caused us to use tools. The abilety to use tools is a very good indicator that a creature, human or not, is smart enough to be considered "Thinking". Chimpanzees use tools, and they often have emotions. Not to be confused with reading sadness in a dog who doesn't have food. Humans evolved to make tools, because to hunt in our groups, to feed all those people, we needed tools, which lead to thumbs, walking upright, and smarts. Because with tools, it allowed us to think outside of just survive, but how to become (hopefully) better.
IF we were totaly vegitarians, the only reason we'd ever need hands to climb with is to get at leaves, and considering, we'd probably be much shorter, much like teh chimps, and we'd be much like rabbits, horses, cow,s lambs, and otehr grazing animals. Grazers have no use for tools. Because the only reason tools were ever developed were to hunt.
So thank the heaven humans decided a moose looked tasty instead of worrying about the animal's feelings.
DId I mention if animals truly were sentient (Thinking at teh same, or better level than a human.) that they would ahve organized, and try to futher their standing in the world? Wolves will combine in packs, and have dominance and all that junk, but they don't create tools cars, they don't try to do anything but survive, and breed. What does a pig do? Eat, eat some more, eat, take mudbaths, and eat. Not much thinking involved.
My point is, our primal need for meat caused us to use tools. The abilety to use tools is a very good indicator that a creature, human or not, is smart enough to be considered "Thinking". Chimpanzees use tools, and they often have emotions. Not to be confused with reading sadness in a dog who doesn't have food. Humans evolved to make tools, because to hunt in our groups, to feed all those people, we needed tools, which lead to thumbs, walking upright, and smarts. Because with tools, it allowed us to think outside of just survive, but how to become (hopefully) better.
IF we were totaly vegitarians, the only reason we'd ever need hands to climb with is to get at leaves, and considering, we'd probably be much shorter, much like teh chimps, and we'd be much like rabbits, horses, cow,s lambs, and otehr grazing animals. Grazers have no use for tools. Because the only reason tools were ever developed were to hunt.
So thank the heaven humans decided a moose looked tasty instead of worrying about the animal's feelings.
DId I mention if animals truly were sentient (Thinking at teh same, or better level than a human.) that they would ahve organized, and try to futher their standing in the world? Wolves will combine in packs, and have dominance and all that junk, but they don't create tools cars, they don't try to do anything but survive, and breed. What does a pig do? Eat, eat some more, eat, take mudbaths, and eat. Not much thinking involved.
Now he may have a different definition of "thinking" but that's not really his point.
I believe that this is really the point I saw and responded to, which you seemed to have ignored:
QUOTE
Humans evolved to make tools, because to hunt in our groups, to feed all those people, we needed tools, which lead to thumbs, walking upright, and smarts. Because with tools, it allowed us to think outside of just survive, but how to become (hopefully) better.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Snake)Ling on 2005-07-19 at 07:20:59
Parth, the problem is, I can't really read your arguments cause they are full of bull .
.Report, edit, etc...Posted by Wilhelm on 2005-07-19 at 09:23:55
Parth, you don't pick up sarcasm easy, huh? I guess you've never seen Planet Of The Apes, either. Meh. People don't get cultural references anymore. The point I was trying to make is that protein is what made helped us become the dominant species of the planet. If we had never eaten meat, we might've just died off. But why the hell did you make this thread? We don't care that animals are thinking, breathing, and feel pain. We like meat, so go to hell. Maddox has a point, a point which DESTROYS your bull argument, but you dismiss him as comedy, because you can't face the truth: You kill millions of wild animals because of your diet, and the only way to stop it is to plant your own crops. But I bet you won't, because it's too inconvenient. Hell, you could save the lives of five children with just a few dollars of donation every day, but you're not going to do that, right? Too inconvenient, huh? Hypocritical .
argument, but you dismiss him as comedy, because you can't face the truth: You kill millions of wild animals because of your diet, and the only way to stop it is to plant your own crops. But I bet you won't, because it's too inconvenient. Hell, you could save the lives of five children with just a few dollars of donation every day, but you're not going to do that, right? Too inconvenient, huh? Hypocritical .Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-19 at 18:09:50
QUOTE(Snake)Ling @ Jul 19 2005, 04:20 AM)
Parth, the problem is, I can't really read your arguments cause they are full of bull .
[right][snapback]265441[/snapback][/right]
.[right][snapback]265441[/snapback][/right]
You have no right to say that. Just because it is his beliefs, you say it's bull
?QUOTE(Wilhelm @ Jul 19 2005, 06:23 AM)
Parth, you don't pick up sarcasm easy, huh? I guess you've never seen Planet Of The Apes, either. Meh. People don't get cultural references anymore. The point I was trying to make is that protein is what made helped us become the dominant species of the planet. If we had never eaten meat, we might've just died off. But why the hell did you make this thread? We don't care that animals are thinking, breathing, and feel pain. We like meat, so go to hell. Maddox has a point, a point which DESTROYS your bull argument, but you dismiss him as comedy, because you can't face the truth: You kill millions of wild animals because of your diet, and the only way to stop it is to plant your own crops. But I bet you won't, because it's too inconvenient. Hell, you could save the lives of five children with just a few dollars of donation every day, but you're not going to do that, right? Too inconvenient, huh? Hypocritical .
[right][snapback]265463[/snapback][/right]
argument, but you dismiss him as comedy, because you can't face the truth: You kill millions of wild animals because of your diet, and the only way to stop it is to plant your own crops. But I bet you won't, because it's too inconvenient. Hell, you could save the lives of five children with just a few dollars of donation every day, but you're not going to do that, right? Too inconvenient, huh? Hypocritical .[right][snapback]265463[/snapback][/right]
Uh... Where did you get that from?
Eating Protein doesn't make us the dominant speecies, wtf? Every mammel eats protein, wtf?
We became the best because of two reasons:
We have bigger brains, and we have aposable thumbs.
If we had never have eaten meat, we would have died off...? Where do you get these arguments?
Throughout history, it has been shown, that some civilizations go months without meat. Did they die off?
He made this thread to see how many people were vegetarians, not to get dissed on by newbs like yourself.
The only "point" I can see from Madox, is that he will eat three more animals for ever animal that a person eats (There is no point in that, that is his opinion, fool) So therefor, it does not destroy his "poo" argument.
Maddox is a comedian, he cracks me up.
And Wilhelm, I don't like your attitude. What did Parthx ever do to you except show his opinion? Are opinions against the law in your town or something? WTF!
So before you diss on my friend here (who happens to be a damn smart thirteen year old) I would get whatever personlal issues you have, and put them aside.
THANK YOU!
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-19 at 19:04:28
hey, what do you call a vegitarian with diareah? a salad shooter! lol
i have no ploblem with veggies, i dont hate them for not eating meat. i dont hate them for getting there protine from beans. i dont care. its the tree hugging hippie s that i hate. so....eat your salad, dont go to war for it!
i have no ploblem with veggies, i dont hate them for not eating meat. i dont hate them for getting there protine from beans. i dont care. its the tree hugging hippie
s that i hate. so....eat your salad, dont go to war for it!Report, edit, etc...Posted by Wilhelm on 2005-07-19 at 19:11:21
How'd we get those bigger brains? Protein. Stimulated brain grwoth in the species we evolved from. If we had never had eaten meat, then we wouldn't be the dominant species, and chances are a better ape would just overcome us. Yeah, I guess I kinda overreacted, but it's the fact that he's apparently trying to make me feel guilty for eating meat that es me off. Maddox's only point is a spiteful bit of comedy? No, his POINT is that you could kill less animals then you do by plating your own crops, and until you do, you're full of sh-it. Health reasons, fine, religion, sure, but the minute you try to make me feel as though you're above me for eating only plants, is when you start to pi-ss me off.
es me off. Maddox's only point is a spiteful bit of comedy? No, his POINT is that you could kill less animals then you do by plating your own crops, and until you do, you're full of sh-it. Health reasons, fine, religion, sure, but the minute you try to make me feel as though you're above me for eating only plants, is when you start to pi-ss me off.Report, edit, etc...Posted by Snake)Ling on 2005-07-19 at 19:51:43
Um, Kellimus, I'd like your friend, or for that matter, you, to answer this
(Based off an earlier argument which went like this:
"Animals die in the production of veggies!"
"But its unintentional."
"But they still die, and YOU DONT EAT THEM! You leave them to rot! At least I eat the animals I kill!"
"But they rot and feed the plants nutrients!")
So, if plants can eat the nutrients of rotted/rotting animals morally unobstructed, and we allow animals in the wild to kill eachother, sometimes grotesquely, morally unobstructed, why is it that humanity is morally obstructed when it wants to eat meat? EH? ANSWER THAT!
AND, I'd like to hear, is it more humane for the animals to die 'unintentionally' to the grinding of a combine harvester (A cruel death that is most likely very bloody), or more humane to die almost instantly to a gunshot/spike/whatever to the head?
Also, Kellimus, it is possible for us to become vegetarian after we have gained our intelligence because, well, we are already sentient. Before that, however, we were omnivores. That mean we hunted animals. And hunting animals that are superior to you requires brain.
(Based off an earlier argument which went like this:
"Animals die in the production of veggies!"
"But its unintentional."
"But they still die, and YOU DONT EAT THEM! You leave them to rot! At least I eat the animals I kill!"
"But they rot and feed the plants nutrients!")
So, if plants can eat the nutrients of rotted/rotting animals morally unobstructed, and we allow animals in the wild to kill eachother, sometimes grotesquely, morally unobstructed, why is it that humanity is morally obstructed when it wants to eat meat? EH? ANSWER THAT!
AND, I'd like to hear, is it more humane for the animals to die 'unintentionally' to the grinding of a combine harvester (A cruel death that is most likely very bloody), or more humane to die almost instantly to a gunshot/spike/whatever to the head?
Also, Kellimus, it is possible for us to become vegetarian after we have gained our intelligence because, well, we are already sentient. Before that, however, we were omnivores. That mean we hunted animals. And hunting animals that are superior to you requires brain.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-19 at 19:57:46
QUOTE(Wilhelm @ Jul 19 2005, 04:11 PM)
How'd we get those bigger brains? Protein. Stimulated brain grwoth in the species we evolved from. If we had never had eaten meat, then we wouldn't be the dominant species, and chances are a better ape would just overcome us. Yeah, I guess I kinda overreacted, but it's the fact that he's apparently trying to make me feel guilty for eating meat that es me off. Maddox's only point is a spiteful bit of comedy? No, his POINT is that you could kill less animals then you do by plating your own crops, and until you do, you're full of sh-it. Health reasons, fine, religion, sure, but the minute you try to make me feel as though you're above me for eating only plants, is when you start to pi-ss me off.
[right][snapback]265841[/snapback][/right]
es me off. Maddox's only point is a spiteful bit of comedy? No, his POINT is that you could kill less animals then you do by plating your own crops, and until you do, you're full of sh-it. Health reasons, fine, religion, sure, but the minute you try to make me feel as though you're above me for eating only plants, is when you start to pi-ss me off.[right][snapback]265841[/snapback][/right]
No offence, but are you dumb? Apes eat protein, too. And so do other mammals. Seriousy, you're argument about the "protein" making us the best species alive has to many faults to be true. Everything alive eats protein!
Protein doesn't just come in meat, either.
How is he "making you feel guilty"? No one can make you feel guilty but yourself. So therefor, you're trying to blame your actions on his words, which doesn't work good.
Sigh.... The only animals that get killed when you plow fields, are those motha *ucking mice! Whipty do!
He never once hinted, or even said he was above us because he eats only vegitables. So why are you putting words in his mouth?
To me, it sounds like you are trying to blame every problem of yours on him.... WTF?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-07-19 at 20:00:19
QUOTE
Hell, you could save the lives of five children with just a few dollars of donation every day, but you're not going to do that, right? Too inconvenient, huh? Hypocritical .
This made me think of something else. You say that "oh you're saving lives not eating animals". There are so many other things you could do to save the world that are even MORE serious than abstaining from eating animals. Heh, you're saving a few animals from dying, yet you still pollute the world with your garbage, killing their environment and making them die too. Also, do you use paper or any other wood products? Why don't you stop doing that, many trees are being cut down and destroying animals environment.
Kellimus try reading the better arguments above
QUOTE
If we had never have eaten meat, we would have died off...? Where do you get these arguments?
See go back to what infested said:
QUOTE
Humans evolved to make tools, because to hunt in our groups, to feed all those people, we needed tools, which lead to thumbs, walking upright, and smarts. Because with tools, it allowed us to think outside of just survive, but how to become (hopefully) better.
I added to it with my reply before, yet Parthx just responded to something irrelevant:
QUOTE
That helps Infested- 's point. Eating DOES involve thinking. Animals that HUNT for MEAT need to THINK about how to catch their food. All herbivores really have to do is find some plants, and roam around and graze, maybe they have to search, but they don't have to hunt.
And so that leads to this:
Okay so all animals need to do is survive, and to do that means they do need to "think". So I would think hunting for another actual THINKING animal, that needs to survive as well, would be harder than trying to find an immobile plant!
I believe that some animals evolved so that they are better suited to their environment and for getting the food they need. So if that's the case then animals that hunt other "thinking" animals that are trying to survive as well might need more intelligence. Humans for instance aren't the fastest, or biggest, so that means we had to use our intelligence to hunt food, because we needed that meat to live.
So I think that the need for meat did have something to do with us evolving more intelligence. So Infested does have a point.
And so that leads to this:
Okay so all animals need to do is survive, and to do that means they do need to "think". So I would think hunting for another actual THINKING animal, that needs to survive as well, would be harder than trying to find an immobile plant!
I believe that some animals evolved so that they are better suited to their environment and for getting the food they need. So if that's the case then animals that hunt other "thinking" animals that are trying to survive as well might need more intelligence. Humans for instance aren't the fastest, or biggest, so that means we had to use our intelligence to hunt food, because we needed that meat to live.
So I think that the need for meat did have something to do with us evolving more intelligence. So Infested does have a point.
The idea was that the need to hunt would cause us to evolve the traits you say make us the best:
QUOTE
We became the best because of two reasons:
We have bigger brains, and we have aposable thumbs.
We have bigger brains, and we have aposable thumbs.
QUOTE
Sigh.... The only animals that get killed when you plow fields, are those motha *ucking mice! Whipty do!
That's just hypocritical, oh some animals should and shouldn't be killed right?
BTW Kellimus, do you believe that eating meat is wrong?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Snake)Ling on 2005-07-19 at 20:06:05
Not only mice are killed, but rabbits and stuff too.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-07-19 at 20:10:13
QUOTE(Snake)Ling @ Jul 19 2005, 04:51 PM)
why is it that humanity is morally obstructed when it wants to eat meat? EH? ANSWER THAT!
AND, I'd like to hear, is it more humane for the animals to die 'unintentionally' to the grinding of a combine harvester (A cruel death that is most likely very bloody), or more humane to die almost instantly to a gunshot/spike/whatever to the head?
Also, Kellimus, it is possible for us to become vegetarian after we have gained our intelligence because, well, we are already sentient. Before that, however, we were omnivores. That mean we hunted animals. And hunting animals that are superior to you requires brain.
[right][snapback]265870[/snapback][/right]
AND, I'd like to hear, is it more humane for the animals to die 'unintentionally' to the grinding of a combine harvester (A cruel death that is most likely very bloody), or more humane to die almost instantly to a gunshot/spike/whatever to the head?
Also, Kellimus, it is possible for us to become vegetarian after we have gained our intelligence because, well, we are already sentient. Before that, however, we were omnivores. That mean we hunted animals. And hunting animals that are superior to you requires brain.
[right][snapback]265870[/snapback][/right]
To answer your first question is simple and easy:
1st: Evnos are on crack. They can't think right because they lack the vitamin B12... Like I clearely said earlyer
2nd: Because humans are idiots.
To answer your second one:
1st What does that have to deal with the argument?
2nd: Where did I ever say we didn't?
I just hate it when people asume, and make up stupid
that people don't even say.... Tsk, tsk, tsk....ADDITION:
Now when did they start editing the word for poo?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Snake)Ling on 2005-07-19 at 20:11:54
I just hate it when you call me a liar. I didn't say that YOU said anything. I said that Parth said things, and if you read back, you can see how my post relates.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Parthx86 on 2005-07-20 at 05:11:54
QUOTE(Snake)Ling @ Jul 19 2005, 04:20 AM)
Parth, the problem is, I can't really read your arguments cause they are full of bull .
[right][snapback]265441[/snapback][/right]
.[right][snapback]265441[/snapback][/right]
I don't think you should even be part of this conversation considering you're way too lazy and ignorant to read others' opinions
QUOTE(Wilhelm @ Jul 19 2005, 06:23 AM)
Maddox has a point, a point which DESTROYS your bull argument, but you dismiss him as comedy, because you can't face the truth: You kill millions of wild animals because of your diet, and the only way to stop it is to plant your own crops. But I bet you won't, because it's too inconvenient. Hell, you could save the lives of five children with just a few dollars of donation every day, but you're not going to do that, right? Too inconvenient, huh? Hypocritical .
[right][snapback]265463[/snapback][/right]
argument, but you dismiss him as comedy, because you can't face the truth: You kill millions of wild animals because of your diet, and the only way to stop it is to plant your own crops. But I bet you won't, because it's too inconvenient. Hell, you could save the lives of five children with just a few dollars of donation every day, but you're not going to do that, right? Too inconvenient, huh? Hypocritical .[right][snapback]265463[/snapback][/right]
Face the truth?! I understand millions of animals are killed because of my diet. I don't think YOU realize the fact that BILLIONS of animals are killed because of your diet, and when did you suddenly start caring that millions of animals are dieing?
YOU could save lives of five THOUSAND children and many animals if you dared to change your diet because if meat stopped selling, wouldn't the farms be turned into wheat and grain?
QUOTE(Snake)Ling @ Jul 19 2005, 04:51 PM)
Um, Kellimus, I'd like your friend, or for that matter, you, to answer this
(Based off an earlier argument which went like this:
"Animals die in the production of veggies!"
"But its unintentional."
"But they still die, and YOU DONT EAT THEM! You leave them to rot! At least I eat the animals I kill!"
"But they rot and feed the plants nutrients!")
So, if plants can eat the nutrients of rotted/rotting animals morally unobstructed, and we allow animals in the wild to kill eachother, sometimes grotesquely, morally unobstructed, why is it that humanity is morally obstructed when it wants to eat meat? EH? ANSWER THAT!
AND, I'd like to hear, is it more humane for the animals to die 'unintentionally' to the grinding of a combine harvester (A cruel death that is most likely very bloody), or more humane to die almost instantly to a gunshot/spike/whatever to the head?
[right][snapback]265870[/snapback][/right]
(Based off an earlier argument which went like this:
"Animals die in the production of veggies!"
"But its unintentional."
"But they still die, and YOU DONT EAT THEM! You leave them to rot! At least I eat the animals I kill!"
"But they rot and feed the plants nutrients!")
So, if plants can eat the nutrients of rotted/rotting animals morally unobstructed, and we allow animals in the wild to kill eachother, sometimes grotesquely, morally unobstructed, why is it that humanity is morally obstructed when it wants to eat meat? EH? ANSWER THAT!
AND, I'd like to hear, is it more humane for the animals to die 'unintentionally' to the grinding of a combine harvester (A cruel death that is most likely very bloody), or more humane to die almost instantly to a gunshot/spike/whatever to the head?
[right][snapback]265870[/snapback][/right]
1. I did answer your question, its not eating the meat thats wrong, its the killing which is wrong. Do NOT tell me that even after dieing, being sliced, cut, and skinned is not considered
QUOTE
grotesquely, morally unobstructed
QUOTE(devilesk @ Jul 19 2005, 05:00 PM)
This made me think of something else. You say that "oh you're saving lives not eating animals". There are so many other things you could do to save the world that are even MORE serious than abstaining from eating animals. Heh, you're saving a few animals from dying, yet you still pollute the world with your garbage, killing their environment and making them die too. Also, do you use paper or any other wood products? Why don't you stop doing that, many trees are being cut down and destroying animals environment.
Kellimus try reading the better arguments above
See go back to what infested said:
I added to it with my reply before, yet Parthx just responded to something irrelevant:
The idea was that the need to hunt would cause us to evolve the traits you say make us the best:
That's just hypocritical, oh some animals should and shouldn't be killed right?
BTW Kellimus, do you believe that eating meat is wrong?
[right][snapback]265883[/snapback][/right]
Kellimus try reading the better arguments above
See go back to what infested said:
I added to it with my reply before, yet Parthx just responded to something irrelevant:
The idea was that the need to hunt would cause us to evolve the traits you say make us the best:
That's just hypocritical, oh some animals should and shouldn't be killed right?
BTW Kellimus, do you believe that eating meat is wrong?
[right][snapback]265883[/snapback][/right]
I'm sure a spear would've helped a LOT in discovering electricity. The wheel was definetly made while stabbing game. All your hunting made was guns and other weapons, which are of course SO GOOD for our communities.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Snake)Ling on 2005-07-20 at 06:26:44
Parth, YOU STILL DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION. How come we dont stop animals from killing eachother, yet we cannot kill animals (in the vegetarian view)?
AND, tell me what is wrong with slicing up a dead animals? It's already dead, we are making it useful by well, eating it. If we didn't eat it, some scavengers or such would eat it. And, if it were a mad cow and scavengers got to it, they could spread the disease.
(Mad Cow disease is NOT spread only by eating the brain/spinal cord)
AND, tell me what is wrong with slicing up a dead animals? It's already dead, we are making it useful by well, eating it. If we didn't eat it, some scavengers or such would eat it. And, if it were a mad cow and scavengers got to it, they could spread the disease.
(Mad Cow disease is NOT spread only by eating the brain/spinal cord)