Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The myth of "humane" slaughter

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by DokTOR. View Post

    3% of scientists don't believe in global warming
    Facts aren't affected by belief. I don't know anything about global warming but if 97% of people who are vastly smarter than me say it's real, that probably an indication that it's a thing.

    Comment


      Originally posted by Chara View Post

      Facts aren't affected by belief. I don't know anything about global warming but if 97% of people who are vastly smarter than me say it's real, that probably an indication that it's a thing.
      And if 3% of scientists say it isn't real, then those 3% are retards and just being a scientist isn't indicative of intelligence innit
      Originally posted by Kajin_Style ;n513566
      Why should I even give a damn that some faggot is being stoned to death in another country?

      Comment


        Originally posted by DokTOR. View Post

        And if 3% of scientists say it isn't real, then those 3% are retards and just being a scientist isn't indicative of intelligence innit
        They're still smarter than me, but why do 97% of scientists disagree with them? How would 97% of them be misled? Why do the 3% hold on to an idea that 97% disagree on?

        Comment


          Vegan diets cause autism, tho

          Comment


            Originally posted by Thar View Post
            Vegan diets cause autism, tho
            Autism is a birth mutation, it's only caused by being born.

            Comment


              Originally posted by Chara View Post

              Autism is a birth mutation, it's only caused by being born.
              Everyone is born tho, so that would mean everyone is autistic

              Comment


                Originally posted by Thar View Post

                Everyone is born tho, so that would mean everyone is autistic
                Not everyone, it's based on genetics and exposure to certain elements. It's basically random

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Chara View Post
                  basically random
                  Originally posted by Chara View Post
                  based on genetics and exposure to certain elements.
                  soooooo not random

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by Thar View Post


                    soooooo not random
                    It has the appearance of random because you don't know who's gonna be born with autism, it's just something you have to accept when you find out. It's pointless to think about it because 1. Nobody is under constant genetic scrutiny and 2. You can't get rid of autism. The only way to do that is to kill the person.
                    Last edited by Chara; December 1st, 2019, 06:10 PM.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by Chara View Post

                      It has the appearance of random because you don't know who's gonna be born with autism, it's just something you have to accept when you find out. It's pointless to think about it because 1. Nobody is under constant genetic scrutiny and 2. You can't get rid of autism. The only way to do that is to kill the person.
                      Or you could just not be a vegan

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Thar View Post

                        Or you could just not be a vegan
                        I'm not a vegan, I eat meat like all the time.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by DokTOR. View Post
                          Helly I literally ran over a cat the other day and didn't even look back, stopping would have compromised my own safety and forced me to crash
                          don't think any sane human being cares about animal wellbeing over their own comfort tbh
                          So, this is another example of people being weird whenever they talk about veganism. Lol

                          Doc, no one is asking you to literally kill yourself to save an animal. For God's sake, you're a philosophy student, why the heck are you making this ridiculous comment that doesn't even deserve to be labeled a counter-point. I would expect something like this to come from Kajin, what are you doing dude, lol.

                          Human beings are typically pretty hypocritical, but they will still forego a soda or a bag of chips to buy their pet the food it needs. So, you're wrong on that part. The answers to the question only become more varied when it's about animals they have no personal connection to, which is where the double-standards start to show themselves.
                          Last edited by Helly; December 1st, 2019, 06:57 PM.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Helly View Post

                            So, this is another example of people being weird whenever they talk about veganism. Lol

                            Doc, no one is asking you to literally kill yourself to save an animal. For God's sake, you're a philosophy student, why the heck are you making this ridiculous comment that doesn't even deserve to be labeled a counter-point. I would expect something like this to come from Kajin, what are you doing dude, lol.

                            Human beings are typically pretty hypocritical, but they will still forego a soda or a bag of chips to buy their pet the food it needs. So, you're wrong on that part. The answers to the question only become more varied when it's about animals they have no personal connection to, which is where the double-standards start to show themselves.
                            Humans are hypocrites, yeah. Idk what's up with that

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Chara View Post

                              They're still smarter than me, but why do 97% of scientists disagree with them? How would 97% of them be misled? Why do the 3% hold on to an idea that 97% disagree on?
                              The real question is "how much are those 3% getting paid to say they disagree."

                              (Also, it's 3% of climate scientists, not 3% of all scientists.)

                              Comment


                                I do agree that the meat industry is kind of a blight. (I like my burgers though, so yea I am a hypocrite). At the same time I don't really ( and can't really) see how eating animals is immoral (Animals that were personally caught and hunted by yourself. Like someone living in th Congo ambushing some antelopes to feed their family. Not a production line of machines gutting a hundred cows by the hour.)

                                You can't really have life without putting something at expense. Even many plants have a variety of defenses in order to deter and even mitigate being consumed, which heavily provides credence that plants don't fancy getting munched on like many other organisms.



                                Comment


                                  Originally posted by Zemoco View Post
                                  Even many plants have a variety of defenses in order to deter and even mitigate being consumed, which heavily provides credence that plants don't fancy getting munched on like many other organisms.
                                  That's an open field of research. I think I posted some scientific articles earlier in the topic. It's all pretty fascinating to learn about. Remember I read about a plant that legit braced itself for an impact after being dropped. Even found out that grass releases a pheromone when it's cut that essentially acts as a warning to the rest of the grass, or something crazy like that.

                                  Not gonna lie though, it'd be pretty fucked up if it turned out that my grass was fully sentient and I've been torturing it every week during spring and summer.

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by Cid View Post

                                    The real question is "how much are those 3% getting paid to say they disagree."

                                    (Also, it's 3% of climate scientists, not 3% of all scientists.)
                                    If they have to get paid to disagree it's probably shady

                                    Comment


                                      Originally posted by Cid View Post

                                      That's an open field of research. I think I posted some scientific articles earlier in the topic. It's all pretty fascinating to learn about. Remember I read about a plant that legit braced itself for an impact after being dropped. Even found out that grass releases a pheromone when it's cut that essentially acts as a warning to the rest of the grass, or something crazy like that.

                                      Not gonna lie though, it'd be pretty fucked up if it turned out that my grass was fully sentient and I've been torturing it every week during spring and summer.
                                      Even wheat doesn't want to be eaten. You get less nutrient eating it raw versus processing it and cooking it.

                                      Our veggies and fruits are selectively breed food for taste and appearance. The fact it has nutrients is just a side benefit really.

                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by Helly View Post

                                        So, this is another example of people being weird whenever they talk about veganism. Lol

                                        Doc, no one is asking you to literally kill yourself to save an animal. For God's sake, you're a philosophy student, why the heck are you making this ridiculous comment that doesn't even deserve to be labeled a counter-point. I would expect something like this to come from Kajin, what are you doing dude, lol.

                                        Human beings are typically pretty hypocritical, but they will still forego a soda or a bag of chips to buy their pet the food it needs. So, you're wrong on that part. The answers to the question only become more varied when it's about animals they have no personal connection to, which is where the double-standards start to show themselves.
                                        omg... I can't believe I'm defending, Doc...


                                        But IT IS a counter argument! He just gave you a personal experience as an example of how much people care about other creatures.

                                        Comment


                                          Originally posted by Helly View Post

                                          Preceding your incredibly useless video was a discussion on neu5gc and its effects on the human body. You denied the evidence because you're biased and watch Youtube videos to copy your opinions from because you're incapable of making your own, but Cid did his own actual research and discovered that there is a growing amount of evidence that suggests the animal sugar is tied to the development of autoimmunic diseases and the formation of malicious tumours.
                                          Need sources. Couldn't find anything on "animal sugar"


                                          Originally posted by Helly View Post
                                          It's about more than one study, actually, next time you should pay attention. And your point with this was to try and invalidate all the evidence I've posted ITT and use the Always Sunny argument of 'science is a liar sometimes'. That's exactly what you're doing, you have nothing to say against everything I've posted and that's why you resort to posting random youtube videos and linking to alternative medicine websites instead of to what reputable health organizations have to say.
                                          Never linked alternative medicine nor pushed for it. I don't argue science lies neither, bro. Get your facts straight.


                                          Originally posted by Helly View Post
                                          I'm talking about licensed professionals that are in officially recognized health organizations, what the hell are you talking about? What do you think the American Heart Association's recommendations are for the consumption of red meat? Go Google that instead of clouding the discussion with outlier opinions from random fence-sitting rubes - who, by the way, admit that they eat less animal products because of the enormous carbon footprint that the animal industry leaves on the planet.
                                          [/QUOTE]

                                          You mean these people? https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-liv...althy-proteins

                                          They seem pretty fine with meat to me. They just say to limit the amount. They suggest alternatives but don't tell you eating meat makes you a monster and will shorten your life as you seem to imply.

                                          Also yes I did google that. "American Heart Association red meat" was my actual google search. As for outlier opinions, this isn't an outlier it is the general norm. It is why your "Your a monster if you eat meat" rally cry keeps hitting a wall with people.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X