Childhood indoctrination

[The Grand Nudger]

Thing is .... I wouldn't presume to know what your "backyard soil structure" is like and like yourself would love to know more. Here I can tell you it is sand; high mineral content and high iron content but low nutrient...basically add cow poo and stand back!

I came from sand down in FL. Pros and cons to that. Nutrient content is definitely a con
(ever wonder, or where you already aware of, the driving factor in -why- sandy soils are notoriously short of nutrients and simultaneously famously alkaline? Fascinating stuff if you ask me.)

As I intimated before we are lucky to have anything resembling "top soil" here to a depth of about 30cms (12 inches) Clay is virtually unheard of except in small isolated pockets as can be identified by the range of flora growing in the vicinity. See the white strip? That's where the tide has gone out and hasn't come back since millenia ago. Limestone sand isn't THAT bad but then again it isn't the type of "soil" that will feed multitudes (either with veggies or meat protein)

Well, don't go bemoaning your lack of clay too stridently. I could bake a jar out of any given handful of dirt round these parts. Loaded with nutrients and generally very moist...but here's the rub. The clay forms such a tight bond with the water that the salinity in the root structure of my plants is often incapable of separating the two - and since the water is used as the medium to convey nutrients from one place to another....they don't get any of those either..lol.

Rgr that about feeding the multitudes. Resources are limited and not evenly distributed. Just to try and keep this thread at least near the rails - I sometimes wonder how much of what we absorb as children leads us to conclude that the earth is even -capable- of providing for us left to it's own devices.

[littleendian]

I would say you are still trying to remove yourself from the food chain Forbi and set yourself up as "lord and master" complete with religious overtones.

A master is who has power over someone else, which is exactly what a meat eater exerts, power over someone elses life.

Justify religion then. Why should an omnivore justify the way they want to live to you?

Not doing something doesn't require a justification (in this context), doing something krass like killing an animal however does require justification. We are talking about whether there even IS a reasonable justification, whether you feel you owe it to anyone or not doesn't enter into it.

Not necessarily so. Have you read Rudolph Steiner?

Yes. There is life in the soil, and if that life is doing good then there's no need for significant amount of fertilizer to grow something. That this is not a possible way of doing "Big Ag" in a larger scale has not been shown and until it's done so I would assume it's feasible. Steiner's given some great impulses, and by the way if you have read him you will know he believes mankind will evolve towards vegetarianism. That aside (or maybe included for you), he had some very strange ideas as well...

This is where you show you complete lack of understanding of biology, evolutionary theory, genetic theory, germ theory and your place on this planet.

I would argue as humans we define our place on the planet, it's animals and savages who are locked in their given ecosystem and behaviors.

Have you not seen how chimpanzees (our closest relatives) delight in cannibalism for their share of meat protein?

These are isolated cases, just as you can find with many species including humans, which weren't caused by need for "protein" but rather pathological behaviour or survival conditions, just as you would call someone eating another human (without starving) "insane".

However, I do thank everyone, including Kichi and Rhythm, for raising my awareness about potential environmental considerations that I wasn't aware of, I will certainly look into those. These raise some questions about one aspect of the issue, while I do hold most of the good reasons for veganism still stand.

[KichigaiNeko]

Rgr that about feeding the multitudes. Resources are limited and not evenly distributed. Just to try and keep this thread at least near the rails - I sometimes wonder how much of what we absorb as children leads us to conclude that the earth is even -capable- of providing for us left to it's own devices.

My point in bringing up my own local soil structure Rhythm. Left to it's own devices (see that bit in the middle where nothing grows?) the majority of it would be isolated pockets of vegetative edibles/ fauna and if it wasn't for the indigenous "fire farming" would barely feed the human population of 8000 that were found in the South West corner of this state. Currently we have around 2 million people in this state (large as it is) and the majority are concentrated in this tiny South-West corner where the cattle/ sheep/ pigs/ fowl/ kangaroos/emus and other meat edibles are concentrated. Also the granite, you will notice is concentrated.

---

Essentially I guess I am striving to point out that this "vegan/ vegetarian utopia" is an unrealistic aspiration from a first world-elitist-city dwelling-intellectual who has never gotten their hands dirty.

I grew up on the east coast and really do miss my clay soils!

[littleendian]

This is further to my point, should yourself or anyone else find that a vegan/vegetarian diet suits your particular metabolism and genetics all kudos to you. Vegan/vegetarianism is NOT a panacea and there are many who are unable to partake of such a diet for mainly genetic or metabolic reasons.

I will yield that point, it might not be possible for everyone. But I would like to stress that this can be an enormously tempting pretense to eat what one likes most taste-wise. I'm not saying it is in your case, but in general.

[KichigaiNeko]

This is further to my point, should yourself or anyone else find that a vegan/vegetarian diet suits your particular metabolism and genetics all kudos to you. Vegan/vegetarianism is NOT a panacea and there are many who are unable to partake of such a diet for mainly genetic or metabolic reasons.

I will yield that point, it might not be possible for everyone. But I would like to stress that this can be an enormously tempting pretense to eat what one likes most taste-wise. I'm not saying it is in your case, but in general.

That is only accurate if one ignores one's body and genetics I am thinking. It is also very unwise to generalise. As I have stated, I tried the vegetarian pathway for around a year and failed. My body/ metabolism won't tolerate it; ergo it is not for everyone and vegan/vegetarian advocates like yourself should pull your heads in and stop making a lifestyle choice that works for you a doctrine to beat upon those who are unable or choose a different path. You only end up looking ridiculously liken to a religion.

---

This is our temperature ranges (Maxima) for 2006


It is offered to also point out that the temperatures of a given area along with rainfall are vital to supporting this veggies utopia ..... in which case my whole state fails rather miserably. Great for cattle, sheep, pigs and other edible livestock...sucky for plant life though

---

Here is another (rather bleary) Map of just about everything that can and is done in this country.



Note the lack of Grain production as compared to cattle and sheep

---

this is my childhood indoctrination (or a map thereof). See the tiny blue squiggly bits around the edges of the country? THAT is where our population lives...within 60km of the ocean.

---

Source material:

http://www.davidmhart.com/Teaching/2006/...index.html

[The Grand Nudger]

Mine (metabolism) does just fine. I'm quite the little vegan chef when I want to be. I also roast a baddass rack of ribs. My wife won't put any vegetable in her mouth that isn't contained within a bottle of V8 - and my kids think that 90% of whatever you put on their plate is yucky regardless of what it is (or whether it was part of the 10% they didn't think was yucky last time it was on their plate). After everyone else gets their porkchop there's usually a bite left over for daddy (which gets chopped up and handed to daddy's yipping little brood after they inhale their own portions). It makes little sense for me to cook two meals at every sitting - and I generally end up with all the green beans anyway. Further, due to my understanding of the process of livestock production I don't have the sorts of moral misgivings that some of us might.

I'll take the falafel over the burger any day of the week - and I'll take the lobster over the steak. I have no vested interest either in the production of cattle/sheep/what have you - or it's consumption. My two favorite terrestrial protein sources just so happen to be venison and wild boar. I don't get too much of either these days because I don't have the time to go ambushing them at 0-dark thirty anymore.

I'm personally investing vast amounts of time and money to create and provide proof of concept (specifically for economic viability in low income/impoverished regions) for an integrated aqua/ag production method and associated business model that provides high quality protein (in the form of freshwater fish , crustaceans, and mollusks) as a byproduct of the manufacture of non-petrochem nutrient sources that are then used to produce large amounts of vegetables in a fantastically dense way (due to being vertical hydro) without any contamination of the soil (as none is present) or water (as the byproducts of one process are used as the inputs of the other - an artificial closed loop). In short, I want to produce more food - of a higher quality, at a lower price, with fewer inputs in a smaller space, for poorer and hungrier people.....all the while, hopefully, turning them a profit.

So when I advocate for the usefulness and reality of livestock in agricultural production -that- is why I do so. Not because I'm some moral midget looking for a way to make it okay to continue supporting cruelty to animals because I like the taste of sirloin tips.

(and Forb..if you're still onboard, lets see that omnivore bingo link again btw..so we can take a crack at where what I just explained falls)

---

A master is who has power over someone else, which is exactly what a meat eater exerts, power over someone elses life.

Already been over this, the things we eat also exert "power" over us. We like to think that we're in the drivers seat..and of course we'd like to think that....but whether or not we actually are....lulz

Yes. There is life in the soil, and if that life is doing good then there's no need for significant amount of fertilizer to grow something. That this is not a possible way of doing "Big Ag" in a larger scale has not been shown and until it's done so I would assume it's feasible. Steiner's given some great impulses, and by the way if you have read him you will know he believes mankind will evolve towards vegetarianism. That aside (or maybe included for you), he had some very strange ideas as well...

It has been shown, and thats why we add fertility. Steiner, btw..big cowshit guy in case you were unawares. Also a peddler of magical production methods. Good luck with that - make sure theres enough quartz crystal and cowshit in that bulls horn...and that the phases of the moon are right -

I would argue as humans we define our place on the planet, it's animals and savages who are locked in their given ecosystem and behaviors.

Argue that all you like, when you're done arguing it, go out and grow food where food will not grow, using methods that do not work. Then get back to me about how we aren't locked into our ecosystems.

These raise some questions about one aspect of the issue, while I do hold most of the good reasons for veganism still stand.

I've seen good reasons for opposing the cruel treatment of animals (including ourselves - and I'm onboard), but I haven't seen any good reasons offered up for veganism- as of yet. What seems to be happening here is that a certain segment of us do not comprehend that the one is not synonymous with the other.

[littleendian]

What seems to be happening here is that a certain segment of us do not comprehend that the one is not synonymous with the other.

Here's why I don't believe a quick, clean death is proper treatment of animals: If the grim reaper came to you and told you your time had come, your time for a quick, clean, "humane" death, wouldn't you argue and beg? Wouldn't you cry and squeal? Wouldn't you piss yourself and run?

I would, and I suspect foul play if anyone denies they would try anything, ANYTHING to just stay alive. "Humane" doesn't enter into it. Now dealing this out is not a good idea if we ourselves would do anything to avoid it for ourselves, it's not proper treatment of anyone, including animals. Death penalty is reserved for the worst kind of criminals and outlawed in many countries for a good reason!

[Rahul]

*eh* Well I'm hungry so something's going to have to fucking die. Preferably a bovine something.

[littleendian]

*eh* Well I'm hungry so something's going to have to fucking die. Preferably a bovine something.

Thank you very much for this deep and profoundly differentiated analysis of the discussion

[Rahul]

Thank you very much for this deep and profoundly differentiated analysis of the discussion

Thank you. I'm pre-hysterical. *grunts*