I am late to this article, however putting aside the ethical treatment of animals in farms (which I agree with. Also, the over use of anitbiotics and running the risk of superbugs. Eating meat is not different than eating plants.

When you eat a plant, something else died to nurture that plant, also the plant dies for you when you either cook it or eat it (fruits aside). The point is simple, laws of nature simply states that for new things to be created or maintain a lot of times, something else has to be destroyed. Stars die to make new elements and solarsystems, animals die to feed plants when they decompose. Animals die to feed other animals, plants die to feed other animals. It is an inescapable fact that it is an unavoidable system, something will perish for you to persist and exist.

I do not condone the environmental destruction of animals, nor technological process to eliminate the need to biological death. However, right now it is the way it. Fight the unethical treatment of animals that is a good fight. However, stating eating meat is bad or what ever subjective philosophy is not only impossible to depend objectively. There is not a lot of science to say herbivore diet is superior to omnivores diet. I say don't like meat, then do not eat it. Let me keep eating my steaks, fish, and other animal proteins my body needs. Also, get into the field of biology and help them move forward with lab grown meat if you feel this convicted.

(May 23, 2014 at 10:13 am)whateverist Wrote:

(May 23, 2014 at 9:58 am)Riketto Wrote: CAN MAN DEAL WITH SATURATED FAT, CHOLESTEROL AND TOXINS?

.. for how many years? It may be that those things will only permit you to live to 75 - 85 years of age. Most of us would be able to reproduce within that time frame so I suppose as a species we'll be okay with such a diet.

I still remember my grandfather with his cigar and his glass of wine
day after day.
He was a very strong man.
He died at 92.
Strange indeed. If i smoke a cigar and drink wine i will get very sick
very quickly so how did it do?
If you don't believe in reincarnation it is obvious that you will not
believe what i am going to tell you so let us put as a guessing.
Day after day, life after life you can build up a strong body-mind-consciousness.
At the same time day after day life after life you can at the same time
destroy what you achieved in the past so it happen that my grand-father
in that life used up his previous achievement and he will have to rebuild
again what he lost in that life.
What a waste Whatever!!!
Coming back to your point the same thing happen with a wrong diet.
In this life we may live longer then in previous lives but this doesn't mean that we are doing ok.
It is just the boost that come from previous lives that makes us live longer.
This has nothing to do with meat eating in this life.
In any case despite we live a bit longer men have a
dramatic incidence of diseases previous under control like cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular, dementia, Parkinson, Alzhemeir .....so the
results of this meat madness are now apparent.

(May 23, 2014 at 10:46 am)Riketto Wrote:

(May 23, 2014 at 10:13 am)whateverist Wrote: .. for how many years? It may be that those things will only permit you to live to 75 - 85 years of age. Most of us would be able to reproduce within that time frame so I suppose as a species we'll be okay with such a diet.

I still remember my grandfather with his cigar and his glass of wine
day after day.
He was a very strong man.
He died at 92.
Strange indeed. If i smoke a cigar and drink wine i will get very sick
very quickly so how did it do?
If you don't believe in reincarnation it is obvious that you will not
believe what i am going to tell you so let us put as a guessing.
Day after day, life after life you can build up a strong body-mind-consciousness.
At the same time day after day life after life you can at the same time
destroy what you achieved in the past so it happen that my grand-father
in that life used up his previous achievement and he will have to rebuild
again what he lost in that life.
What a waste Whatever!!!
Coming back to your point the same thing happen with a wrong diet.
In this life we may live longer then in previous lives but this doesn't mean that we are doing ok.
It is just the boost that come from previous lives that makes us live longer.
This has nothing to do with meat eating in this life.
In any case despite we live a bit longer men have a
dramatic incidence of diseases previous under control like cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular, dementia, Parkinson, Alzhemeir .....so the
results of this meat madness are now apparent.

What is the climate like on your planet?

Dude, he's not on another planet, he's in another universe.

(May 23, 2014 at 10:42 am)bladevalant546 Wrote: I am late to this article, however putting aside the ethical treatment of animals in farms (which I agree with. Also, the over use of anitbiotics and running the risk of superbugs. Eating meat is not different than eating plants.

When you eat a plant, something else died to nurture that plant, also the plant dies for you when you either cook it or eat it (fruits aside). The point is simple, laws of nature simply states that for new things to be created or maintain a lot of times, something else has to be destroyed. Stars die to make new elements and solarsystems, animals die to feed plants when they decompose. Animals die to feed other animals, plants die to feed other animals. It is an inescapable fact that it is an unavoidable system, something will perish for you to persist and exist.

I do not condone the environmental destruction of animals, nor technological process to eliminate the need to biological death. However, right now it is the way it. Fight the unethical treatment of animals that is a good fight. However, stating eating meat is bad or what ever subjective philosophy is not only impossible to depend objectively. There is not a lot of science to say herbivore diet is superior to omnivores diet. I say don't like meat, then do not eat it. Let me keep eating my steaks, fish, and other animal proteins my body needs. Also, get into the field of biology and help them move forward with lab grown meat if you feel this convicted.

Welcome to the thread.
Let me say an old saying in Latin first of all.
MORS TUA VITA MEA ......which means.....YOUR DEATH IS MY LIFE.
True indeed.
Not only when we eat meat but even when we eat a carrot or any vegetable we destroy a life.
Your understanding of how the system works however is lacking.
It is all about consciousness.
While an animal has got an high degree of consciousness a vegetable
has only got a low degree of consciousness.
What this means?
Again i come down with one more saying...........NO BRAIN NO PAIN.
In other words you got to understand how the scale of consciousness
works.
When an animal is killed he feel million time more pain than a carrot
so this level of pain reach the top of the scale as far consciousness
is concern and therefore it become tamasik (the opposite of sentient (good)).
On the other end a carrot can not pass us this high level of cruelty.
If you eat a fruit then the level of cruelty is nil as you are not destroying any life.
Anyway good luck with your analysis.

(May 23, 2014 at 6:32 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: Also when he said Dynamo, a magician from West Yorkshire, was actually magical, as in, supernatural magical, even though he's just an illusionist.

A lot of people believed that Uri Geller has genuine magic powers. Just be thankful that Enrico's belief in magic powers isn't costing taxpayers money.

Stargate Project

Quote:The Stargate Project[1] was the code name for one of several projects established by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency to investigate claims of psychic phenomena with potential military and domestic application, such as "remote viewing", the purported ability to psychically "see" events, sites, or information from a great distance.[2]

Major General Albert Stubblebine[edit]

A key sponsor of the research internally at Fort Meade, MD, MG Stubblebine was convinced of the reality of a wide variety of psychic phenomena. He required that all of his Battalion Commanders learn how to bend spoons a la Uri Geller, and he himself attempted several psychic feats, even attempting to walk through walls. In the early 1980s he was responsible for the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), during which time the remote viewing project in the US Army began.

(May 23, 2014 at 10:46 am)Riketto Wrote: In any case despite we live a bit longer men have a
dramatic incidence of diseases previous under control like cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular, dementia, Parkinson, Alzhemeir .....so the
results of this meat madness are now apparent.

With the exception of diabetes, these are diseases associated with living longer. People didn't get cancer as often in prior times because they didn't live as long. So, you're staring at the cause of these illnesses (living longer) and coming up with a stupid, unrelated guess.

(May 23, 2014 at 11:10 am)Riketto Wrote: Not only when we eat meat but even when we eat a carrot or any vegetable we destroy a life.
Your understanding of how the system works however is lacking.
It is all about consciousness.
While an animal has got an high degree of consciousness a vegetable
has only got a low degree of consciousness.
What this means?
Again i come down with one more saying...........NO BRAIN NO PAIN.
In other words you got to understand how the scale of consciousness
works.
When an animal is killed he feel million time more pain than a carrot

http://youtu.be/EWTd0BMdtvg

What you brought up is subjective. Pain is something that just happens and do plants feel pain? (http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...chamovitz/) you be the judge here. There are trees that send a pheromone to other trees to warn of a predators or other dangers (http://www2.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF7/762.html). Just because plants are immobile does not make them less. This is the critical error that most vegans/vegetarians make. Their while premise is based on the inductive logic about stimuli and reactions from their environment from the position of the animal kingdom. This whole axiom is founded in a bias assumption that animals are the template which we measure all life. Plants begot animal cells billions of years ago, since that split they have taken tremendously different biological paths. Thus you need to rethink on how to define a plants role and how it interacts with its environment.

Now I say that not to challenge your philosophical view, I can understand how you despise the maltreatment of animals when they are eaten. However, do not make the bias assumption that you can justify killing of one organism over another based on animal biology. It not only comes off as short sighted, it comes off either willingly dishonest, or pure cognitive dissonance. Now I do want to make emphasis that I do not disagree with the fact that it seems "wrong" that an animal feels pain when killed. There is no doubt that there is some violence involve in killing an animal. That however is a subjective view point, me personally killing quickly is honorable.

So in conclusion plants could very well be very aware of its environment and feel threatened or even in a new definition pain. I will not force you to side with me, however when you make philosophical argument to biological mechanisms. It puts you under the microscope of science to support your assertion. I merely want you expand your mind and see that in truth the real answer is in science to find a solution not a philosophical choice that winds up being subjective.

(May 23, 2014 at 12:20 pm)bladevalant546 Wrote: What you brought up is subjective. Pain is something that just happens and do plants feel pain? (http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...chamovitz/) you be the judge here. There are trees that send a pheromone to other trees to warn of a predators or other dangers (http://www2.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF7/762.html). Just because plants are immobile does not make them less. This is the critical error that most vegans/vegetarians make. Their while premise is based on the inductive logic about stimuli and reactions from their environment from the position of the animal kingdom. This whole axiom is founded in a bias assumption that animals are the template which we measure all life.

This is goofy logic. We know for sure that animals suffer. Many of the animals we eat have a nervous system almost identical to our own, and we therefore have some insight into the nature of their suffering.

Maybe plants do experience suffering. Maybe a crystal suffers when it is broken. Maybe the Earth suffers when its orbit more closely approaches the sun. Maybe a hammer suffers every time it hits a nail. But none of this speculation is a good reason to ignore and deliberately sustain the suffering that we know exists, and which is for the most part inflicted on animals whose existence is unnecessary.

Now, if you can show me an animal that doesn't suffer, and doesn't eat much more food than it produces, then maybe we are looking at a new paradigm. Until then, please stop with the goofy logic.