|
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,misc.rural,alt.food.vegan,talk.politics.animals
|
|
|
"collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]"
On 31 Aug 2006 22:51:28 -0700, "Rupert" > wrote:
>
>dh@. wrote:
>> On 30 Aug 2006 16:09:53 -0700, "Rupert" > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >dh@. wrote:
>> >> On 30 Aug 2006 01:12:03 -0700, "Rupert" > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >dh@. wrote:
>> >> >> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:35:02 +0100, brother > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >dh@. wrote:
>> >> >> >> On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:13:25 +0100, brother > wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >> >>>> __________________________________________________ __________
>> >> >> >>>> From: diderot >
>> >> >> >>>> Subject: collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]
>> >> >> >>>> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:21:44 EDT
>> >> >> >>>> Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animal s,rec.food.veg
>> >> >> >>>> Message-ID: >
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>> This is seven year old uncorroborated hearsay
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> It's first hand observation from a rice farmer.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >It's the intellectual equivalent of using the evidence from somebody you
>> >> >> >met at a bar.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >He says he's driven a tractor, thousands of miles. - I can believe that!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Then he says "We have organic as well as conventional farms". Ask
>> >> >> >yourself; 'Who is he referring to when he says "we"?'For all I know he
>> >> >> >could be referring to the population of Texas.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "the facts, data, assumptions and conclusions, while developed
>> >> >> on two organic rice farms (900 and 160 acres) and one 'conventional'
>> >> >> rice farm of 1340 acres in colorado county, texas" - diderot
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If you think the "population of Texas" only has two organic rice
>> >> >> farms and one conventional rice farm in the whole state, you're
>> >> >> incredibly "naive" to say the very least, but for your sake (though
>> >> >> none of the readers' sake) let's hope you're being deliberately
>> >> >> dishonest about that stupid suggestion.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Do you REALLY think that there are more than 5 amphibians in every
>> >> >> >square FOOT of rice?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Paste the quote. I believe he was referring to eggs, tadpoles,
>> >> >> and adults. There may be thousands of eggs in one square foot,
>> >> >> and a hundred tadpoles in another...averaging out to 5 or more in
>> >> >> the big picture.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >It's a pretty big assumption that ethical vegetarians have an ethical
>> >> >problem with destroying an egg.
>> >>
>> >> LOL! As we can see by the replys, supposedly "ethical" vegetarians
>> >> not only don't have an ethical problem with destroying eggs, tadpoles,
>> >> frogs, snakes, lizards, and whatever else gets killed in rice production,
>> >> but they are OPPOSED to anyone even pointing out that they are!
>> >
>> >This is an evasion of the point.
>>
>> That IS my point!
>
>???
Dishonest veg*ns, claiming dishonestly to be "ethical", lie in public forums
about the many deaths associated with rice production in a desperate attempt
to maintain the deception of being ''ethical".
>> >Ethical vegetarians usually do think there is some sort of presumption
>> >against killing sentient animals. You have no reason to think anyone
>> >here is opposed to people pointing out that sentient animals are killed
>> >in the course of rice production.
>>
>> So far I have reason to believe that veg*ns are opposed to seeing
>> it pointed out. Damn good reason in fact.
>>
>
>What reason?
The opposition you people have presented to seeing it pointed out.
Duh.
>> >Some people here think that Diderot's
>> >account of the matter distorts the truth to some extent and are
>> >responding accordingly.
>> >
>> >I was simply pointing out that eggs are not and never have been
>> >sentient. If it significantly affects the calculation to take eggs into
>> >account, he should make explicit that he's doing so, which he didn't.
>>
>> Then maybe he was only referring to sentient animals and not
>> eggs too.
>>
>
>Maybe. That's not what you were speculating before.
>
>> >If you think that the "5 amphibians per square foot" figure can only be
>> >justified by counting eggs, then you're basically admitting that the
>> >figures are being inflated in a misleading way.
>>
>> How many are killed then?
>
>I have absolutely no idea.
I know, but I'm suprised that you're honest enough to admit it...
VERY surprised.
>> How do you know?
|