Pages:
Author

Topic: What's wrong with eating meat? - page 23. (Read 30256 times)

legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1024
April 22, 2014, 06:45:43 PM

That plants do not have a nervous system comparable to animals is of zero relevance to the whole argument.


If we follow your arguments, we'd have to affirm that destroying rocks make them suffer and that we can not imagine their subjective reality. That's wrong. The lack of a nervous system makes plants automatic beings, with a simple life that serves no other purpose than living, and there's no "emotions" needed to carry that task, just like in bacteria.

Sorry, but you did not get my argument. I'm not claiming that plants or rocks suffer in a human/animal sense. In fact I'm saying that the concept of suffering should not be applied to them because we (as organisms/matter of a different kind) can not fully understand their true nature. Therefore we have no moral justification to kill/destroy them while we spare animals.

All these things have equal right of existence. There is no moral justification only to kill what's dissimilar to us while protecting what we pity.

ya.ya.yo!
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 253
April 22, 2014, 06:45:11 PM

Sigh. You are talking to closed minded people here. A lot of them are trolls too. Even if you give them a good argument and they know they are wrong, they will make things up that don't make sense to make them think they're right. They will ask you simple questions that are extremely easy to answer.

They ask such simple questions like: "Why is it wrong to eat animals but not plants?" or "What's so bad about meat?" Even when you answer their questions correctly, they will probably not even read it and will reply back with a response that makes no sense.


I still think these questions are worth answering. Even if those who asks are trolls, that conversation might still educate a lurker, or maybe it will linger in the troll's subconscious and come back out when he'll open his mind later Wink
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
April 22, 2014, 06:44:59 PM
And has anyone raised the issue that if everyone went vegetarian in the world and we stopped meat production with farms and such we would run out of phosphor which we need to provide the population with vegetarian food by 2035~ (source forgotten but feel free to google it)?

This is not an issue. Because there's a huge margin between the current situation, and all the world becoming vegetarian; that's litteraly impossible. And actually, most of the phosphorus we use is mined from calcium phosphate rocks. And there's phosphorus in all cell membranes, wether they come from animals or plants.

I recommend the BBC documentary "How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth?" if you wanna learn about how much cultivation is ruining our planet. You can't blame the meat industry for everything, just saying'.

I don't think people are saying its the problem for everything, but it causes much harm and damage. I'll check out the doc.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
The General
April 22, 2014, 06:44:53 PM
No comeback required, you know you're wrong.

Pretty much every issue you discuss has already been discussed. I have been a meat eater for the majority of my life and know what it's like to be on both sides. I know where your arguments are coming from, but you do not have an open mind.

This is you:

"I believe in eating meat because it was the way I was born. I will only watch videos and look up sources that help my belief but will avoid anything that goes against it."

The vast majority of geniuses throughout history have all been meat eaters except some from India.

This argument holds no grounds as a large majority of the population in general have been meat eaters.

Out of all the geniuses possible, will you not agree that some of the most influential geniuses of all time have been vegan / vegetarian?:

And yes, almost everyone that is a vegetarian or vegan start out as a meat eater but found information that diverted them away from it.

Einstein - Theory of Relativity. Had the most groundbreaking discovery of the 20th century.
Isaac Newton - Created Calculus and Founded Physics. He is considered the father of Physics, the father of Calculus, the Father of Modern Medicine, and even the Father of Modern Science.
Nikola Tesla - Invented the radio and Alternating Current. Has a cult following that many of his inventions were stolen.
Gandhi - Civil Rights Movement
Buddha - Founded Buddhism
Steve Jobs - Created Apple
Ramanujan - Genius mathematician.
Edward Wittin - Einstein's successor and foremost string theorist
Brian Greene - Genius who refuted Einstein's theory that space could stretch but not tear.
Rosa Parks
Thomas Edison
Benjamin Franklin
Prince
Mike Tyson
Forest Whitaker
Natalie Portman
George Bernard Shaw
Leonardo Da Vinci
Leo Tolstoy
Cesar Chavez
Russell Brand
Carl Lewis
Paul McCartney
Bree Olson
Alicia Silverstone
John Harvey Kellogg, etc.

Quote
Q: Why do you think so many of the greatest geniuses have been vegetarian?

Greene: From my limited experience, vegetarians typically are people who are willing to challenge the usual, accepted order of things. Moreover, they’re often people willing to sacrifice their own pleasures in pursuit of what they believe is right. These same qualities are often what’s needed to make great breakthroughs in the arts and sciences.

There are so many influential geniuses who have been Vegan / Vegetarian like Ellen Degeneres and the Dalai Lama. Even Hitler was a Vegetarian. These guys were all open minded and challenged the culture they were born in. Unlike you trolls.

Also, you will probably just say everything I said here is BS, which is why it's pointless to argue with you guys. This is how atheists feel when they are arguing against Christians: You can't win, even though you are right every time.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 101
April 22, 2014, 06:42:53 PM
Has anyone actually been able to provide a legit and good argument why you should not eat meat? And no, I'm not asking why veganism is good, and I don't care about it, I just wanna know what's BAD with eating meat. And no bullshit "it's bad for you", constructive arguments.

There's no definitive answer to that, since it is subjective. Common reasons not to eat meat include:
1- Ethical reasons; when someone does not believe that killing animals is an OK thing to do when there are plenty of alternatives to eat.
2- Health reasons; many people like OP do feel more energetic and less blotted after switching to a vegetarian diet.
3- Environmental and economical reasons; it takes about 10 times more ressource (plants and water) to get one calory of meat, than if someone directly eats one plant-based calory. Also, factory farming litteraly releases a huge amount of crap in our soils, and some have concerns about that polluting the water we drink.


Sigh. You are talking to closed minded people here. A lot of them are trolls too. Even if you give them a good argument and they know they are wrong, they will make things up that don't make sense to make them think they're right. They will ask you simple questions that are extremely easy to answer.

They ask such simple questions like: "Why is it wrong to eat animals but not plants?" or "What's so bad about meat?" Even when you answer their questions correctly, they will probably not even read it and will reply back with a response that makes no sense.

This is why this chart makes sense:



Now back to topic, like I said, people are free to chose what they want to eat and that should be respected, but from there to say being a vegetarian, or an atheism makes have a better IQ is like I said before idiotic

Vegetarians more intelligent than meat eaters: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201005/why-vegetarians-are-more-intelligent-meat-eaters

High IQ Children more likely to become vegetarian: http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/DietNutrition/4721

High IQ Linked to being Vegetarian: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6180753.stm

Hahahahahhaha.
What a typical Common Joe moron getting fooled by headlines like "research shows that BLABLABLA". Studies were made on sub 10 000 people, and you call their results facts. You're ridiculous, and the point you're trying to make is wrong. Boom. Deal with it.

No comeback required, you know you're wrong.
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 253
April 22, 2014, 06:42:37 PM
And has anyone raised the issue that if everyone went vegetarian in the world and we stopped meat production with farms and such we would run out of phosphor which we need to provide the population with vegetarian food by 2035~ (source forgotten but feel free to google it)?

This is not an issue. Because there's a huge margin between the current situation, and all the world becoming vegetarian; that's litteraly impossible. And actually, most of the phosphorus we use is mined from calcium phosphate rocks. And there's phosphorus in all cell membranes, wether they come from animals or plants.

I recommend the BBC documentary "How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth?" if you wanna learn about how much cultivation is ruining our planet. You can't blame the meat industry for everything, just saying'.

The animals we eat have to be fed to grow; the vast majority of soy and corn produced in the USA goes to feed livestock. And like I said earlier, we need to feed an animal 10 times more in term of soy, than if we ate the soy ourselves, to get the same amount of calory.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
The General
April 22, 2014, 06:40:18 PM
Has anyone actually been able to provide a legit and good argument why you should not eat meat? And no, I'm not asking why veganism is good, and I don't care about it, I just wanna know what's BAD with eating meat. And no bullshit "it's bad for you", constructive arguments.

There's no definitive answer to that, since it is subjective. Common reasons not to eat meat include:
1- Ethical reasons; when someone does not believe that killing animals is an OK thing to do when there are plenty of alternatives to eat.
2- Health reasons; many people like OP do feel more energetic and less blotted after switching to a vegetarian diet.
3- Environmental and economical reasons; it takes about 10 times more ressource (plants and water) to get one calory of meat, than if someone directly eats one plant-based calory. Also, factory farming litteraly releases a huge amount of crap in our soils, and some have concerns about that polluting the water we drink.


Sigh. You are talking to closed minded people here. A lot of them are trolls too. Even if you give them a good argument and they know they are wrong, they will make things up that don't make sense to make them think they're right. They will ask you simple questions that are extremely easy to answer.

They ask such simple questions like: "Why is it wrong to eat animals but not plants?" or "What's so bad about meat?" Even when you answer their questions correctly, they will probably not even read it and will reply back with a response that makes no sense.

This is why this chart makes sense:



Now back to topic, like I said, people are free to chose what they want to eat and that should be respected, but from there to say being a vegetarian, or an atheism makes have a better IQ is like I said before idiotic

Vegetarians more intelligent than meat eaters: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201005/why-vegetarians-are-more-intelligent-meat-eaters

High IQ Children more likely to become vegetarian: http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/DietNutrition/4721

High IQ Linked to being Vegetarian: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6180753.stm
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 101
April 22, 2014, 06:39:22 PM
And has anyone raised the issue that if everyone went vegetarian in the world and we stopped meat production with farms and such we would run out of phosphor which we need to provide the population with vegetarian food by 2035~ (source forgotten but feel free to google it)?

This is not an issue. Because there's a huge margin between the current situation, and all the world becoming vegetarian; that's litteraly impossible. And actually, most of the phosphorus we use is mined from calcium phosphate rocks. And there's phosphorus in all cell membranes, wether they come from animals or plants.

I recommend the BBC documentary "How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth?" if you wanna learn about how much cultivation is ruining our planet. You can't blame the meat industry for everything, just saying'.
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 253
April 22, 2014, 06:36:26 PM
And has anyone raised the issue that if everyone went vegetarian in the world and we stopped meat production with farms and such we would run out of phosphor which we need to provide the population with vegetarian food by 2035~ (source forgotten but feel free to google it)?

This is not an issue. Because there's a huge margin between the current situation, and all the world becoming vegetarian; that's litteraly impossible. And actually, most of the phosphorus we use is mined from calcium phosphate rocks. And there's phosphorus in all cell membranes, wether they come from animals or plants.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 101
April 22, 2014, 06:32:08 PM
Has anyone actually been able to provide a legit and good argument why you should not eat meat? And no, I'm not asking why veganism is good, and I don't care about it, I just wanna know what's BAD with eating meat. And no bullshit "it's bad for you", constructive arguments.

There's no definitive answer to that, since it is in many ways subjective. Common reasons not to eat meat include:
1- Ethical reasons; when someone does not believe that killing animals is an OK thing to do when there are plenty of alternatives to eat.
2- Health reasons; many people like OP do feel more energetic and less blotted after switching to a vegetarian diet.
3- Environmental and economical reasons; it takes about 10 times more ressource (plants and water) to get one calory of meat, than if someone directly eats one plant-based calory. Also, factory farming litteraly releases a huge amount of crap in our soils, and some have concerns about that polluting the water we drink.

And has anyone raised the issue that if everyone went vegetarian in the world and we stopped meat production with farms and such we would run out of phosphor which we need to provide the population with vegetarian food by 2035~ (source forgotten but feel free to google it)?
global moderator
Activity: 3934
Merit: 2676
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
April 22, 2014, 06:31:17 PM

3) When we eat a plant product such as potato, tomato, apple, pineapple, broccoli, etc, we are not eating the planet itself, but rather a 'fruit' or part of the plant that easily comes off. The rest of the plant keeps growing and produces more.
Since it is a conversation between you two I don't want to middle but I'll just reply to this since you are writing in bold, hmm wouldn't a similar analogy to the animal world, is to leave the animals on their own and eat everything they give birth for ? I mean if you take for example potatoes aren't potatoes the seed for future potato plants the same is giving birth to spread ?

Seems like your brain is failing . "are your brain capacity fails to do this much?" doesn't make any sense. And 'dismantle anything you say with facts' lol. I definitely know you’re a troll now.
How am I a troll? you are not replying to me on the correct thread and you are polluting other topics with this discussion, sorry but if anyone is trolling here it would be you. yeah and again thank you for you pointing out my poor grammar and typos, like I said before English is the 4th language I speak, if you want to pick that feel free to do so as if I care.

You probably shouldn't get into arguments in English then if you can't articulate yourself or understand it properly .
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 253
April 22, 2014, 06:28:54 PM
Has anyone actually been able to provide a legit and good argument why you should not eat meat? And no, I'm not asking why veganism is good, and I don't care about it, I just wanna know what's BAD with eating meat. And no bullshit "it's bad for you", constructive arguments.

There's no definitive answer to that, since it is in many ways subjective. Common reasons not to eat meat include:
1- Ethical reasons; when someone does not believe that killing animals is an OK thing to do when there are plenty of alternatives to eat.
2- Health reasons; many people like OP do feel more energetic and less blotted after switching to a vegetarian diet.
3- Environmental and economical reasons; it takes about 10 times more ressource (plants and water) to get one calory of meat, than if someone directly eats one plant-based calory. Also, factory farming litteraly releases a huge amount of crap in our soils, and some have concerns about that polluting the water we drink. And cows produce impressive quantities of methane which is a greenhouse gaz.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 101
April 22, 2014, 06:24:13 PM
Has anyone actually been able to provide a legit and good argument why you should not eat meat? And no, I'm not asking why veganism is good, and I don't care about it, I just wanna know what's BAD with eating meat. And no bullshit "it's bad for you", constructive arguments.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1024
April 22, 2014, 06:24:06 PM

3) When we eat a plant product such as potato, tomato, apple, pineapple, broccoli, etc, we are not eating the planet itself, but rather a 'fruit' or part of the plant that easily comes off. The rest of the plant keeps growing and produces more.
Since it is a conversation between you two I don't want to middle but I'll just reply to this since you are writing in bold, hmm wouldn't a similar analogy to the animal world, is to leave the animals on their own and eat everything they give birth for ? I mean if you take for example potatoes aren't potatoes the seed for future potato plants the same is giving birth to spread ?

That analogy fits perfectly!

Potatoes are not "intended" to be eaten. They are plant organs that store energy for new sprout after winter.

ya.ya.yo!
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 253
April 22, 2014, 06:22:39 PM

That plants do not have a nervous system comparable to animals is of zero relevance to the whole argument.


If we follow your arguments, we'd have to affirm that destroying rocks make them suffer and that we can not imagine their subjective reality. That's wrong. The lack of a nervous system makes plants automatic beings, with a simple life that serves no other purpose than living, and there's no "emotions" needed to carry that task, just like in bacteria.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1024
April 22, 2014, 06:18:27 PM
I assume you read what I wrote in the paragraph, but did not read the substance that was quoted. Let me reiterate:

I read all. But apparently you do not get the substance of my post:

The whole concept of suffering is a human one. It is not permissible to judge the "subjective plant reality" based on concepts from subjective human reality (note that I do not use the term "subjective" to imply consciousness in a human sense). There's no way to infer that similarity or dissimilarity makes killing wrong in one case (animals) but right in another case (plants).

That plants do not have a nervous system comparable to animals is of zero relevance to the whole argument.


My last point

Most food plants are cultivated (ill-breeded, genetically mutilated and grown in unnatural habitats) only to serve human consumption.

was not refuted.


ya.ya.yo!
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
April 22, 2014, 06:01:09 PM

3) When we eat a plant product such as potato, tomato, apple, pineapple, broccoli, etc, we are not eating the planet itself, but rather a 'fruit' or part of the plant that easily comes off. The rest of the plant keeps growing and produces more.
Since it is a conversation between you two I don't want to middle but I'll just reply to this since you are writing in bold, hmm wouldn't a similar analogy to the animal world, is to leave the animals on their own and eat everything they give birth for ? I mean if you take for example potatoes aren't potatoes the seed for future potato plants the same is giving birth to spread ?

Seems like your brain is failing . "are your brain capacity fails to do this much?" doesn't make any sense. And 'dismantle anything you say with facts' lol. I definitely know you’re a troll now.
How am I a troll? you are not replying to me on the correct thread and you are polluting other topics with this discussion, sorry but if anyone is trolling here it would be you. yeah and again thank you for pointing out my poor grammar and typos, like I said before English is the 4th language I speak, if you want to pick on that feel free to do so as if I care.
global moderator
Activity: 3934
Merit: 2676
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
April 22, 2014, 05:58:46 PM
How many times do I need to tell you?  Are you really this moronic or just trolling? My point was you put three non-religious people on a list of religious people, but you quite clearly do not have the mental capacity or intelligence to process this or are just infinitely in denial. It's not a 'fact one' because the three I mentioned are not in any way shape or form religious or believe in god. I can give you a list of prominent atheist scientists but what would that have to do with anything? What would that be proof of in itself? Would it be a fact If I added three Christian scientists to my list of atheist ones? If I was claiming Newton was an atheist that would be incorrect and fud. And "fact two"? Give me the sources that over 50% of the current prominent scientists are religious. Where's this figure come from? But not that it matters or has to do with my argument. If 50% are religious then 50% aren't. I am not nitpicking about anything. My initial argument was there's three people on the list who are not religious. Nothing more. What facts do I need to check? My facts are fine. It's yours that you need to check.

Neither, and the moronic one here is obviously the one insulting others with no reason and being really off Topic, if you have anything to say reply to me on the topic we were discussing that on instead of polluting yet another topic, can't you even do that much? and you dare to call me moronic and no mental capacity and intelligence? seriously ?
And wait so you are saying that religion has nothing to do with intelligence right ? and your whole argument is about 3 people on the list not being religious? and the rest are fine, right? so my argument on religion was correct then, thank you.

Haha you're truly incredible. You see how you twist points here and someone think you're correct on something that was never even the argument. I've given you plenty of reasons why you're a moron. How can you be correct on an argument we weren’t even discussing (although for some bizarre moronic reason you think we were) and nobody but yourself was involved with? This just proves yet again you cannot comprehend anything I say. I'm nearly done with replying to the other thread, so I suggest you stop replying to this one with your nonsense.

sigh! can't you reply to me on the topic we were discussing this on instead of just insulting, you do like polluting other people topics don't you? are your brain capacity fails to do this much? after the 5 time asking you to do so I'm starting to believe it is the case. Post on the correct thread, and I'll be more than happy to reply to you and dismantle anything you say with facts.



Seems like your brain is failing . "are your brain capacity fails to do this much?" doesn't make any sense. And 'dismantle anything you say with facts' lol. I definitely know you’re a troll now.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
The General
April 22, 2014, 05:46:19 PM
No my last point was not addressed. The whole concept of suffering is a human one. It is not permissible to judge the "subjective plant reality" based on concepts from subjective human reality (note that I do not use the term "subjective" to imply consciousness in a human sense). There's no way to infer that similarity or dissimilarity makes killing wrong in one case (animals) but right in another case (plants).

Most food plants are cultivated (ill-breeded, genetically mutilated and grown in unnatural habitats) only to serve human consumption. This is in no way less condemnable than what humans do to animals.

The essence: Surviving sometimes means killing.

ya.ya.yo!

1) The plants we consume have evolved over time to be consumed by humans and other animals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domesticated_plants

2) Plants are a completely different kingdom than the animal kingdom. They don't have a neural network. They don't have the same type of cells as we do. They can't even move. You can't say they experience the same things as us as that is an ignorant assumption you are making.

3) When we eat a plant product such as potato, tomato, apple, pineapple, broccoli, etc, we are not eating the plant itself, but rather a 'fruit' or part of the plant that easily comes off. The rest of the plant keeps growing and produces more.





hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
April 22, 2014, 05:45:38 PM
How many times do I need to tell you?  Are you really this moronic or just trolling? My point was you put three non-religious people on a list of religious people, but you quite clearly do not have the mental capacity or intelligence to process this or are just infinitely in denial. It's not a 'fact one' because the three I mentioned are not in any way shape or form religious or believe in god. I can give you a list of prominent atheist scientists but what would that have to do with anything? What would that be proof of in itself? Would it be a fact If I added three Christian scientists to my list of atheist ones? If I was claiming Newton was an atheist that would be incorrect and fud. And "fact two"? Give me the sources that over 50% of the current prominent scientists are religious. Where's this figure come from? But not that it matters or has to do with my argument. If 50% are religious then 50% aren't. I am not nitpicking about anything. My initial argument was there's three people on the list who are not religious. Nothing more. What facts do I need to check? My facts are fine. It's yours that you need to check.

Neither, and the moronic one here is obviously the one insulting others with no reason and being really off Topic, if you have anything to say reply to me on the topic we were discussing that on instead of polluting yet another topic, can't you even do that much? and you dare to call me moronic and no mental capacity and intelligence? seriously ?
And wait so you are saying that religion has nothing to do with intelligence right ? and your whole argument is about 3 people on the list not being religious? and the rest are fine, right? so my argument on religion was correct then, thank you.

Haha you're truly incredible. You see how you twist points here and someone think you're correct on something that was never even the argument. I've given you plenty of reasons why you're a moron. How can you be correct on an argument we weren’t even discussing (although for some bizarre moronic reason you think we were) and nobody but yourself was involved with? This just proves yet again you cannot comprehend anything I say. I'm nearly done with replying to the other thread, so I suggest you stop replying to this one with your nonsense.

sigh! can't you reply to me on the topic we were discussing this on instead of just insulting, you do like polluting other people topics don't you? are your brain capacity fails to do this much? after the 5 time asking you to do so I'm starting to believe it is the case. Post on the correct thread, and I'll be more than happy to reply to you and dismantle anything you say with facts.

MEAT!



is that rabbit? It looks like it is just want confirmation
Pages:
Jump to: