Is Meat That Important?

I’m not sure this dude’s really a doctor…

1 Like

I think you’re onto something here, Yogi Bear.

Controlled slaughter is far more humane than getting caught in a plow or harvesting equipment. If we “stop slaughtering hundreds of billions of animals” we have to quit most farming, even the organic sustainable kind, especially considering the deaths from plant farming are non-productive and less humane.

just checking
cloned beef
lab beef
two different things

How many bug deaths are morally equivalent to 1 cow death?

1 Like

If that were true, more vegans would feed themselves by hunting local species that are overpopulated and in desperate need of population control. They’d snack on dead cicadas when they’re in season and scavenge fresh roadkill when the opportunity presented itself. But they don’t, do they? They pat themselves on the back for not killing bambi with a rifle, but don’t shed any tears when deer that could have fed people feeds the crows on the side of the road after dying a horrific, slow death due to vehicle collision.

I’ve heard more than a few vegans make exactly that argument, and you’re here right now claiming moral high ground while dodging key questions.

What kind of animals are okay to slaughter to grow food, and which ones aren’t? What’s the acceptable number of dead rodents per acre of soybean harvested? How can you claim any sort of moral high ground without calculating these animal suffering quotients? What kind of doctor are you, anyway?

Lol, you’re an idiot. 6/10 troll job, would read again.

Google not work where you’re from?

one of them did not walk around

1 Like

he MARINE
his Organization got its start in a BAR
sometimes they little slow

Just so we are clear, you’ve lost the sustainability argument, you’ve lost the kills fewer animals argument, and you are now arguing a personal evaluation of the moral consequence of the motives of killing animals and the relevant value of types of consciousness. You are reduced to personal evaluations of worth. To be clear, there is absolutely no science in this final stand of an argument. And while I can’t say you are wrong (because it’s a personal judgment) we are now light years away from your initial claim of science and fact based superiority. If I can live on one grass fed cow that had a happy life for a year versus eating soil depleting grains that kill million of insects by spraying gallons of poison on the earth, while mangling rodents, worms, ets, I choose the cow. And when you do the math using the facts I have plenty of ground to stand on with that decision.

The fact that the animals plants kill are indirect and the deaths are wasted makes them worse than direct killing in my opinion. Eating what you kill is morally superior than killing without eating. One is directly useful and one is not.

It’s not my job to educate you, do your own research.

Losing these arguments has never stopped any of the self-righteous vegans that I’ve met, and I don’t expect it to stop the good Dr. Chipperson, either. In his mind, he hasn’t actually lost those arguments.

I explained earlier why several of these misleading “statistics” hold little actual relevance. The fact that it takes “trillions of gallons of water” to raise livestock is only relevant if it would NOT take the same trillions of gallons of water to produce an equivalent quantity of other food, right? Ditto that for land. If we vaporize all of the world’s cattle, the land they currently occupy will have to be used to produce other food…so merely stating that it uses X% of the world’s land or X% of the world’s water doesn’t mean anything unless you can illustrate for me how much less of those resources will be used to produce an equivalent quantity of food.

A single large steer produces somewhere between 400-500 pounds of meat. Please tell me how much water and land it would take to grow enough soybeans to produce 400 pounds of tofu (a food which is significantly inferior to beef, by the way, in overall nutritional profile). Or 400 pounds of whatever.

**EDIT: I should be clear that I have literally no idea what the answer to this question is. I am genuinely curious. I just know that it’s bullshit to merely toss out numbers about how much land and water is needed for production of beef/meat without considering the fact that there would be at least SOME cost of those resources for whatever food was used to replace said beef/meat.

Traditional oil based mono-crop farming is also wholly and totally unsustainable. It requires oil, a non renewable resource and depletes the soil which is also largely non-renewable. You haven’t refuted any of this. Another hint: water is a renewable resource that is neither created or destroyed in any appreciable quantity, no mater what we do. The only reason you’d focus on water and overlook things like the fossil fuel based agricultural system is confirmation bias.

You’ve also outright refused to answer my questions on numbers of animals killed by things like pesticides which could easily be in the 10s of millions of animals for a single farm when a single ant hill could have 100,000+ animals. You can either answer the questions or you need to stop making unsupported claims.

Damn. Now I have to drive over to Burger King to get one. Look what you’ve done!

The moral thing to do would be to starve to death. Do you know how much water you consume??? Don’t be a dick, eat grass instead.

2 Likes

4 chicken mayos and a banana milkshake for breakfast this very day.

Vegans can suck it

Nice, I had slow cooked chicken thigh with squash, peppers, and onions. It was immorally delicious!

“We’re carnivores. When the pilgrims landed, first thing they did was eat a few Indians.”

Denny Crane

1 Like