"Goonius" > wrote in message
...
> > There is a huge logical problem with being vegetarian
> > for the pseudo-ethical reason you have given, and I'm
> > asking questions to get you to acknowledge the problem,
> > and then to see and acknowledge seeing that your
> > dietary response does not address the problem.
> >
> > You've now compounded your ethical problems by lying,
> > being snippy, being evasive, and lying some more.
> >
> > Why are you even responding, SeeJames, if your
> > responses are only going to serve to illustrate that
> > you are lying and being evasive?
>
> I'll be glad to offer the information you are so desperately trying to
> pry from James.
>
> Let's start with the facts:
>
> The population in the US alone is in excess of 270,000,000. Worldwide,
> 38,000 children die of starvation each day.
===========
There is already an excess of food in the world. starvattionis not a
production issue.

If we were to do away with
> the meat industry, the US alone would free up enough grains and soy to
> feed 1,300,000,000 people.
===============
And the same numbers would still starve...


That's more than the entire population of
> the US - in fact for the same output of resources, we could feed the
> population of this country alone nearly four times over.
======================
Production isn't the problem. Despots, like vegans, who wish to rule the
world are the problem.

>
> But here is your pedestal of sorts:
>
> >>>>>What SPECIFICALLY is wrong with that assessment given the
> >>>>>fact that vegans do little or nothing -- MOSTLY NOTHING --
> >>>>>about collateral deaths and casualties from agriculture?
> >>>>
> >>>>First of all, most vegans outside of this newsgroup probably have
> never
> >>>>considered the idea of collateral deaths resulting from
> agriculture.
> >>>
> >>>Most vegans IN this ng haven't considered it, either.
> >>
> >> How could they possibly miss it with all the ranting that goes on
> here?!
>
> >It isn't whether they've missed it, it's what they've not done with
> such
> >information. They continue making categorical statements of moral
> >superiority despite the evidence against them.
>
> And granted I can't dispute that. No matter how we live we're going to
> inadvetantly have an effect of some sort on our surroundings.
> Agriculture is no exception even when meat production is not included.
> What blows my mind is that you seem to think that the amount of damage
> done by a human who consumes only plant matter equals even half that
> which is done by the meat industry alone.
=======================
We're not talking about what an "industry" can do, we're talking about what
an individual vegan can do. ou remember them don't you? their the ones
that claims to be living in a way that supoosedly saves animals.


>
> Consider this:

snippage of facts that have no bearing on what a vegan can do to improve
their bloody footprints.
Of course, they don't really want to do anything, as long as they can focus
on what they think others are doing...

>
> So laid out in these simplistic terms (and don't worry I won't leave
> you hanging to draw these conclusions for yourself) if this entire
> country were to switch to a plant-based diet it would not only
> significantly cut down the damage to both the land, the waterways, and
> the environment as a whole, but farming of plant matter could easily
> be cut to nearly half what it is now if it were limited to plants
> considered edible by humans.
=======================
No, your conclusions are false. All you need to do is switch production
methods, for meat and veggies...

>
> I'll reiterate a point that Strutz made: There's a certain point where
> it comes down to numbers. None of us can, at this point in time
> certainly, live a cruelty-free existance.
=====================
Yet you could do better. The problem is, you prove with each post that you
don't really want to.


In fact, I'm highly
> skeptical of the idea that such a thing would ever be possible. Still
> skepticism is my nature and as much as possible I attempt to hope we
> will come as close as is possible.
>
> In the meantime, we can choose to take the path less travelled in an
> effort to accomplish this goal in the long term.
=====================
But you aren't accomplishing anything. That's the point. You have no idea
of your impact before, or after. therefore you cannot claim an improvment.


This is the only life
> we have so far as we know (unless you think there are golden gates in
> the sky - no matter, we're all entitled to our opinions, true?).
> Better yet, let me rephrase that: Based on a combination of statistics
> and common sense, I and others have made the choice to try to maintain
> a sustainable world for the future of all creatures on this planet.
> You're under no obligation to follow in my (our) footsteps. If you can
> read the facts and still insist that they're not true, I'm not here to
> convince you otherwise.
===========================
Of course you are. You need to convenice others so that you delusions work
for you and make you 'feel' good. Otherwise they're just a spew that means
nothing, which of course is what it is.


>
> However, if you're interested, Carl Sagan's "Billions and Billions" is
> an excellent read and touches on many of the above mentioned issues in
> a clear concise manner. But if you dislike Sagan for his liberal
> stance hunt down a copy of "World Scientists' Warning To Humanity"
> signed in 1993 by over 1,670 scientists, including 104 Nobel laureates
> (a majority of the living recipients of the prize in the sciences).
> This piece almost made it to mainstream media upon its release in late
> 1992, but was overshadowed by the big story on one of the Spice Girls
> quitting the band (gotta keep our priorities straight, right?). And
> last but not least John Robbins' "Food Revolution" is filled with
> annotated facts and quotes from both opponents and proponents of the
> meat industry including the extensive lists above.
>
> Good luck to you... Oh, and as for the homicidal tendencies? I'd see a
> shrink on that one. A good dose of Seroquel should fix you right up.
================
More vegan relience on a chemical industry to suppliment their failed diiet?
Typical...


>
> -Goon