Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,721
- Location
- Welling, London
How do you feel about Inuits who kill seals for meat and clothes?
Last edited:
Distasteful vegan TV ad
- Thread starter lookitsjonno
- Start date
- Status
Yes it did but at the expense of wildlife, no animal cruelty there then.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,413
I don't know how you be so obtuse, that was obviously not the point of my post.Seeing as I was eating animals twice a day, at least 3 times a day if you include dairy/eggs, yes it will have an impact, not really sure what you mean by "did it work" though.
Ah yea seen that before, its interesting but it supports my position, not yours, you didn't read it
"The water, land and carbon footprint of growing and transporting such large, perishable fruit meant the environmental impact was far larger than they had expected. Once the data from all 153 vegans, vegetarians and omnivores in the study was taken into account, however, it showed that eating meat was on average worse for the environment"
For the third time, im for animal rights, not an environmentalist.
I really doubt we could add up our total emissions and environmental impact from our diets and compare the 2, that would take a ton of time and effort.
Car, holidays, telling people what to eat and then posting hundreds of times that it's better for the environment = hypocrite. Diet becomes irrelevant when the rest of your lifestyle craps all over the environment to the tune of at least 8 times worse.
Same thing as telling people not to eat meat, making the environment argument and then still eating out of season fruit avacados, products rammed with palm oil etc. Like you don't even get to make that argument.
It's like trying to argue you're a good person because you only **** in my cornflakes a little bit.
Last edited:
I've also cut down (and plenty of meats out) for animal suffering. Not the environment.
I could claim I'm not having kids because of the environment.. That would be a lie, even though its a huge positive benefit an individual can make.
I could claim I'm not having kids because of the environment.. That would be a lie, even though its a huge positive benefit an individual can make.
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 4,698
- Location
- Wiltshire
No, the point of your post is stupid, its called a nirvana fallacy, because we cant live without some harm, we should try to cause more? (I have actually avoided palm oil where possible for years)
Cars (a necessity) and holidays are worse than killing billions of animals? (trillions if we include fish and other marine life) that also happens to have a bad impact on the environment.
No idea how they live or what access to food they have, but like some other remote tribes they probably have no choice.
I know that commercial fisherman still bludgeon and stab seals to death though, so id be more concerned with this..... https://www.humanesociety.org/resources/about-canadian-seal-hunt
Last edited:
They are not and he know this (I'd hope). They are only kept in the farrowing crates when about to birth and rear the piglets until they are removed. The farrowing crates are used to protect the piglets from the sow killing/damaging them by laying on them etc. All other times, they are not in a farrowing crate
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,304
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
I'm afraid Johnno won't see this, he will have made choices in his head that these other things are OK.
I love Greta and her 'listen to the experts' because I really believe in what she is saying however when she's holding a mobile phone you think 'Hmm OK'.
Or prints millions of books...
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,413
Yes, according to the links YOU posted
Cars are not a necessity, they are a convenience. I don't have a car, which according to your data saves me damaging the environment to the tune of 8 times the amount of meat I eat.
You've decided car driving is ok even though it's 8 times more damaging than eating meat, do you not see how hypocritical that is?
Equally I'm not trolling the motors section telling everyone they are evil for owning a car.
And then you add a foreign holiday on top and your lifestyle is about 10 times more damaging than mine, but here you are posting ad nauseam that your diet is better for the environment. It's literally lala land your living in.
You won't even answer straight questions about what exactly your vegan diet consists of, because if it consists of imported fruit and nuts and fake meat you aren't even saving as much as you claim, you could even be generating more co2 and using more water than a local meat and veg diet. Food miles are actually a really key figure when it comes to these claims. Actually don't bother because no doubt you'll now claim you don't eat any of the things that are imported now.
And your only excuse is "but I'm not an environmentalist", so the pages and pages of "ooh look at me I'm a vegan, I'm better for the environment" is just pointless virtue signalling.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,304
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
The issue is the amount of information needed to understand the environmental problem… it’s too much for most people and extremism is the worst delivery strategy for those that do understand and are attempting to inform others. Although as you point out, Ms Thunberg most definitely isn’t one of those people that do understand.
Greta Thunberg. Yep, Vegan since 10! My lord, her parents need rockets.
I’m convinced veganism is a threat to health and the environment. I’m concerned groups of stupid could form and we might see movements towards Feelz terrorism.
Having meat every 5 seconds is also a threat to both of those things, it should never have been as regular as it has become since clearly it's devalued the animal and the farmers who work for pretty much nothing as a result.
Give it 20-30 years and the vast majority of farmland will be owned by debt-fuelled, growth hungry suits for which welfare is a bad word.
Veganism is somewhat akin to a religion, with meat being just one aspect of the issue. Veganism along with many other aspects of peoples lives or beliefs will have to change. Kicking or screaming, we must start dealing with our issues and the actions over the decade will determine the extremity of the changes needed.
We seem to be sticking on this point that in my case (and definitely some others) we are veggie/vegan for compassionate reasons and don't wish to be involved in suffering and/or death being the end result.
Environmental impact is obviously much better being vegan with only a few posters on here/ pre school kids not grasping this.
I don't have greta on speed dial,I have an oil boiler and a non ulez diesel,it's not about that ( but I don't fly if that helps or burn old car tyres)
Environmental impact is obviously much better being vegan with only a few posters on here/ pre school kids not grasping this.
I don't have greta on speed dial,I have an oil boiler and a non ulez diesel,it's not about that ( but I don't fly if that helps or burn old car tyres)
Veganism is non sustainable at scale now and will become less sustainable over time. The costs of all of our consumption, plus all previous generations now has to paid until death. Our lender is not the type to cross as the wrath is biblical.
If we're eventually going to be living/working in space then a vegan diet is quite literally the only option available realistically so it'll have to be made sustainable which has benefits for plebs on Earth when these giga-scale hydroponics farms actually start producing at a level that isn't comical. Plus there's a lot less awkwardness with genetically engineering our plants than animals so yields can be improved without messing with things we shouldn't.
Last edited:
Veganism would work on Mars. We have a whole new planet that actually requires some abuse.
Mars becoming more suitable for life as Earth becomes less… something poetically tragic about that.
- Status