vegetarians

I've gone back and forth on this myself over the years. I was vegetarian, now am not, but am trying to get back to it. Humans have dual evolutionary traces of vegetarianism and predatory psysiology. We have long intestinal tracts that only herbivores have. Plant material goes through the intestines much quicker than meat, 24 hour digestion from mouth to out the ass. It does not ferment and rot while passing through. All meat eaters have very short intestinal tracts, a fraction of the length of ours. Why? Because meat takes a long time to pass through your intestines and meat rots quickly at body temperature. Meat eaters intestines are built for fast passage through the body before they are poisoned by this rotting meat in their bodies. It takes twelve hours for meat to pass through a cats digestive tract and out because it has a very short intestine. For humans it takes 48 to 72 hours for meat to pass through the digestive tract. By this time, the meat has fully fermented and rancidified in your body and is well underway poisoning you.
Then the eyes, we have frontal eyes like all predators BUT we could never have evolved like we have if we didn't have frontal eyes. We would have no language, etc. so is it just a part of an evolving brain for us to have frontal eyes or a combination of humans being weak animals and needing to use all resources to survive? Why our brains, why we are SMART enough to hunt, because we do not have the physiology to support the use of our canine teeth like other predators do, do we ? No. (We only have the frontal eyes.) These teeth are to use when running down an animal and biting through it's neck and dragging it to the ground. (nor could we run down any animal) We are not these predators, but we have historically been scavengers after other animals prey like vultures coming in and taking marrow out of the bones to eat, biting through left overs of carcass after an other animal is done. Again, our brains and using all resources so I would say that we are not only natural herbivores or only predators but we certainly have the ability to survive on only plants or only meat or both, again, evolved scavengers, taught hunters, is what we really are.
Of course these were people eating healty animals, wild.

The bottom line is, industrial farming of animals is bad for everyone all around , animals , the ecosystem and especially us. Why Europe does not want to be pushed into buying our shitty sewage of beef supply.
Overpopulation of humans and imbalance of food supplies in the world call for a more vegetarian diet, everyone could be fed if cattle were not being fed our grains that we need to eat and feed people with. It can go a long way feeding humans and nowhere feeding cattle. So who would you rather feed, humans or cows? I'm just not sure what good it does feeding all these too many humans here already. It's just not fair that economically only poor people in the world will be destined to extinction, but that is the way it is going. Nothing is going to change this, we have no real control over anything as citizens of where ever we are. (We can't even get countries to get their populations under control to begin with, even here, and people are to selfish to make these sacrifices for the future. They certainly aren't going to be thinking about how many people we could be feeding instead of stuffing another greasy burger in our fat mouths to make us feel full and comfortable because we feel hollow elsewhere in our lives.) And don't say you do have control over your politics because you know the U.S. does whatever it wants with y'all. That is, 'till you all stand up and stop us from dicking you over economically if you can. But you really can't.
Sorry if you already went over this, Ol' dirty B. I didn't read everything.
 
there was the veggie lad at school when i was 14 years old and he was sick the whole year through. oh and later he turned out to be gay too.

EAT MEAT!
 
trona said:
The bottom line is, industrial farming of animals is bad for everyone all around , animals , the ecosystem and especially us.
Click to expand...

you have loads of valid points about the meat topic right, but you know every industry is bad for the world somehow, be it th cars, the computers, clothes, the cd players, the medicine, etc. are you all that concerned about all of that? why just meat and not cd-players or cars? is it because its more glamour?
 
thats not really glamour. you cant say that to your mates and get them all going 'oooh man thats cool'. no offence tho ;)
 
That's true, but your mate won't go crazy for Vitamin C either, just to go back to your original question.

TF-65.jpg


Everybody say WOOOW now, ffs!
 
I just bid on someting in my minced meat and it hurts :erk: , I'll testify out teeth aren't for meat, I think I'll strongly be considering vegetarian life for the next couple of hours.
 
Old Dirty you are sounding like a preacher haha.

I think the trend towards vegetarianism is a reflection of our changing western culture, people no longer are looking for authoritarian methods towards religion and spirituality, and instead are going for individualistic quests for spirituality. For whatever reason, many think that by not eating meat, they are bettering the world in their own little way- like recycling. Yet they really are not accomplishing anything, I will eat meat, the majority will eat meat, animals will be slaughtered as they are now.

This is misdirected idealism, lets worry about humans, millions die from starvation every year for christ sake. If one wants to sacrifice, sacrifice for humanity, not for ones own ideals or supposed improvement.

Oh, one last thing, none other than Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian.

So in conclusion, I really dont care if people are vegetarians, but dont force feed me your fucking morality story of the sin of eating meat, becuase it means nothing to me, or humanity.
 
speed said:
Old Dirty you are sounding like a preacher haha.

I think the trend towards vegetarianism is a reflection of our changing western culture, people no longer are looking for authoritarian methods towards religion and spirituality, and instead are going for individualistic quests for spirituality. For whatever reason, many think that by not eating meat, they are bettering the world in their own little way- like recycling. Yet they really are not accomplishing anything, I will eat meat, the majority will eat meat, animals will be slaughtered as they are now.

This is misdirected idealism, lets worry about humans, millions die from starvation every year for christ sake. If one wants to sacrifice, sacrifice for humanity, not for ones own ideals or supposed improvement.

Oh, one last thing, none other than Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian.

So in conclusion, I really dont care if people are vegetarians, but dont force feed me your fucking morality story of the sin of eating meat, becuase it means nothing to me, or humanity.
Click to expand...
If you had perhaps glanced over one of the last links I gave (or trona's post), you'd see reasons why becoming a vegetarian DOES help other people. Stop giving me this baseless rhetoric on how vegetarians don't care about other humans. It's become very redundant and annoying. Next thing I'll see you rambling about "survival of the fittest" or some other romantic idea without foundation.

Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian. He was also half Jewish and had parents. What exactly is your point, or don't you have one?

Also, we'll stop "force feeding" our beliefs as soon as everyone else stops force feeding us such things as immediately attacking a vegetarian for their beliefs, the four foodgroups, the food pyramid, Got Milk? campaigns, McDonalds commercials that brainwash children, and everything else that denies the truth.
 
Mariner said:
there was the veggie lad at school when i was 14 years old and he was sick the whole year through. oh and later he turned out to be gay too.

EAT MEAT!
Click to expand...
Oh, I've heard these stories before. Sound like he didn't have a clue about what he was doing. You can't just cut out meat, eat a bunch of junk food, declare yourself a vegetarian and be completely healthy. I suppose that had he only eaten meat he'd have been totally healthy, right? Or perhaps it had nothing to do with his diet and he had a chronic illness.

Anyway, I rarely get sick. If I do it's only a mild cold that lasts a day or two. I haven't missed a day of work due to illness in over 6 years (Metalfests on the other hand cost me a bit). Also, all of my friends that are also vegetarians are the same way. Never visibly ill. On the other hand, the majority of my friends who do eat meat get the flu every winter and come down with severe colds (the kind that last like 2 weeks and I have to listen to them cough and snort and bitch for that 2 fucking weeks) at least 2 or 3 times a year. Perhaps it's all just a coincidence.

I don't know any vegetarian homosexuals. Must be a Euro thing.
 
trona said:
I've gone back and forth on this myself over the years. I was vegetarian, now am not, but am trying to get back to it. Humans have dual evolutionary traces of vegetarianism and predatory psysiology. We have long intestinal tracts that only herbivores have. Plant material goes through the intestines much quicker than meat, 24 hour digestion from mouth to out the ass. It does not ferment and rot while passing through. All meat eaters have very short intestinal tracts, a fraction of the length of ours. Why? Because meat takes a long time to pass through your intestines and meat rots quickly at body temperature. Meat eaters intestines are built for fast passage through the body before they are poisoned by this rotting meat in their bodies. It takes twelve hours for meat to pass through a cats digestive tract and out because it has a very short intestine. For humans it takes 48 to 72 hours for meat to pass through the digestive tract. By this time, the meat has fully fermented and rancidified in your body and is well underway poisoning you.
Then the eyes, we have frontal eyes like all predators BUT we could never have evolved like we have if we didn't have frontal eyes. We would have no language, etc. so is it just a part of an evolving brain for us to have frontal eyes or a combination of humans being weak animals and needing to use all resources to survive? Why our brains, why we are SMART enough to hunt, because we do not have the physiology to support the use of our canine teeth like other predators do, do we ? No. (We only have the frontal eyes.) These teeth are to use when running down an animal and biting through it's neck and dragging it to the ground. (nor could we run down any animal) We are not these predators, but we have historically been scavengers after other animals prey like vultures coming in and taking marrow out of the bones to eat, biting through left overs of carcass after an other animal is done. Again, our brains and using all resources so I would say that we are not only natural herbivores or only predators but we certainly have the ability to survive on only plants or only meat or both, again, evolved scavengers, taught hunters, is what we really are.
Of course these were people eating healty animals, wild.

The bottom line is, industrial farming of animals is bad for everyone all around , animals , the ecosystem and especially us. Why Europe does not want to be pushed into buying our shitty sewage of beef supply.
Overpopulation of humans and imbalance of food supplies in the world call for a more vegetarian diet, everyone could be fed if cattle were not being fed our grains that we need to eat and feed people with. It can go a long way feeding humans and nowhere feeding cattle. So who would you rather feed, humans or cows? I'm just not sure what good it does feeding all these too many humans here already. It's just not fair that economically only poor people in the world will be destined to extinction, but that is the way it is going. Nothing is going to change this, we have no real control over anything as citizens of where ever we are. (We can't even get countries to get their populations under control to begin with, even here, and people are to selfish to make these sacrifices for the future. They certainly aren't going to be thinking about how many people we could be feeding instead of stuffing another greasy burger in our fat mouths to make us feel full and comfortable because we feel hollow elsewhere in our lives.) And don't say you do have control over your politics because you know the U.S. does whatever it wants with y'all. That is, 'till you all stand up and stop us from dicking you over economically if you can. But you really can't.
Sorry if you already went over this, Ol' dirty B. I didn't read everything.
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
mehdi.i.e.e.e said:
you have loads of valid points about the meat topic right, but you know every industry is bad for the world somehow, be it th cars, the computers, clothes, the cd players, the medicine, etc. are you all that concerned about all of that? why just meat and not cd-players or cars? is it because its more glamour?
Click to expand...

All these other things are important as well. There is a new growing technology based on recycling synthetics at a molecular level and creating these synthetics to combine and NOT shed toxins. That is vs. how synthetics are recycled now, degrading each time they are reprocessed and shedding toxins in the process let alone shedding toxins in form. These new synthetics do not. We NEED synthetics now because we need our technology. Plus, we need synthetics so that we can stop using up natural resources. This is not good environmentalism, using natural everything.
Some large chemical companies like Dupont, have already recognized that this is our only future, and have and are investing large amounts of money in developing this technology, that is without ANY incentives from any source but the fact that they will be way ahead and have it to offer and make the big bucks on it when the time comes.

I recommend this book :

Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things
William McDonough, Michael Braungart

Here are some reviews:



From the Publisher
Guided by this principle, McDonough and Braungart explain how products can be designed from the outset so that, after their useful lives, they will provide nourishment for something new. They can be conceived as "biological nutrients" that will easily reenter the water or soil without depositing synthetic materials and toxins. Or they can be "technical nutrients" that will continually circulate as pure and valuable materials within closed-loop industrial cycles, rather than being "recycled" -- really, downcycled -- into low-grade materials and uses. Drawing on their experience in (re)designing everything from carpeting to corporate campuses, McDonough and Braungart make an exciting and viable case for putting eco-effectiveness into practice, and show how anyone involved with making anything can begin to do so as well.


From The Critics
Publisher's Weekly
Environmentalists are normally the last people to be called shortsighted, yet that's essentially what architect McDonough and chemist Braungart contend in this clarion call for a new kind of ecological consciousness. The authors are partners in an industrial design firm that devises environmentally sound buildings, equipment and products. They argue that conventional, expensive eco-efficiency measures things like recycling or emissions reduction are inadequate for protecting the long-term health of the planet. Our industrial products are simply not designed with environmental safety in mind; there's no way to reclaim the natural resources they use or fully prevent ecosystem damage, and mitigating the damage is at best a stop-gap measure. What the authors propose in this clear, accessible manifesto is a new approach they've dubbed "eco-effectiveness": designing from the ground up for both eco-safety and cost efficiency. They cite examples from their own work, like rooftops covered with soil and plants that serve as natural insulation; nontoxic dyes and fabrics; their current overhaul of Ford's legendary River Rouge factory; and the book itself, which will be printed on a synthetic "paper" that doesn't use trees. Because profitability is a requirement of the designs, the thinking goes, they appeal to business owners and obviate the need for regulatory apparatus. These shimmery visions can sound too good to be true, and the book is sometimes frustratingly short on specifics, particularly when it comes to questions of public policy and the political interests that might oppose widespread implementation of these designs. Still, the authors' original concepts are an inspiring reminder that humans are capable of much more elegant environmental solutions than the ones we've settled for in the last half-century. (Apr.) Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information.

Booknews
Architect McDonough and chemist Braungart use this little book with its curved corners and strangely smooth paper to embody and represent one of two kinds of engineering which they advocate: development of materials that can be perpetually reused in technology (the authors claim the material can be continually remade into other books and recycled). The other heralded mode of engineering promises the elimination of anthropogenic waste which is not biodegradable into food. In sum, the two maker-thinkers promote the manufacture of objects that usefully die by means of processes and objects that usefully never die. One of the more memorable phrases, "less bad is no good," relates to their envisioned industrial re-revolution, one in which reduction, reuse, and recycling pale in comparison to upcycling, where products nourish or help nourish the planet. No index and few bibliographic notes. Annotation c. Book News, Inc., Portland, OR (booknews.com)

Kirkus Reviews
Noted eco-designers suggest a paradigm shift in human habits of manufacture and consumption. American architect/industrial engineer McDonough and German chemist Braungart collaborated at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit on a proposal for eliminating the concept of waste in industrial design. Here, they elaborate on their theory, explaining that even environment-friendly policies such as recycling and waste-reduction still fall short of achieving for humankind the kind of balance and harmony that other living entities have employed for millennia. The authors, who now run a design consulting firm, examine reigning industrial design practices and our basic misconceptions about waste, arguing against the idea that "less bad is good" and offering several points for future thought about putting their principles of "eco-effectiveness" to work. The emphasis here is on moving beyond traditional thinking about the relationship between nature and humanity to consider instead how to make humanity itself a better-functioning natural system. Despite the awakening of environmentalism over the past three decades, McDonough and Braungart assert, we are still largely stuck with the Industrial Revolution precept of "cradle to grave" consumer goods that become waste. They offer several examples of how industrial processes and thoughtful changes in the design of habitat and work environment might create true self-nourishing systems. Environmental regulations, the authors believe, are needed stopgaps but ultimately exemplify a major design flaw in the way we think about making things. For instance, instead of a more fuel-efficient car, why not a mode of transportation that would not simply be less polluting but wouldactually nourish the atmosphere? Moving past both the planned obsolescence that is the cornerstone of much industry, as well as the control and command structure of environmental regulation, McDonough and Braungart encourage humanity to begin thinking of itself as a self-sustaining entity that does not necessarily need to take a toll on its surroundings. A readable, provocative treatise that "gets outside the box" in a huge way. Timely and inspiring.
 
Well its obvious we are both too stubborn for this conversation to go any further.

I will tell you I dislike all my fellow Americans who refuse to eat the variety meats if you will. A meat eater should like liver, tripe, bone marrow etc. I dont get that many americans wont even eat veal. Especially if they travel to Europe- its a shame so many americans will only eat bland boring sanitized meat.

Another little opinion of mine: As a man, not eating meat emasculates you even further, if we dont hunt, show off our strength, go to war, and eat meat - just what kind of men are we?

Hitler was fucked up in many ways, but there is no evidence he had any jewish blood, however, as we all know a jewish shop owner fed him for a year or so while he was truly a starving artist.
 
speed said:
Another little opinion of mine: As a man, not eating meat emasculates you even further, if we dont hunt, show off our strength, go to war, and eat meat - just what kind of men are we?
Click to expand...
I'm afraid I don't understand this argument. You're arguing on the behalf of reverse evolution, or at the very least, stagnation. Shouldn't we be trying to move away from things like violence, hunting for "sport" (before we wipe out more endangered species) and war? You also seem to have contridicted yourself in a few ways. Earlier you were arguing that we should care more about other people than animals. Now you're supporting the mass slaughter of human life that goes along with war. You also used Hitler as an example of a vegetarian that doesn't care about humans (or so it seemed) and now you're saying that vegetarians are too effeminate to be violent. So which is it? Also I don't find people like Andreas Cahling, Bill Pearl, Woody Harrelson, Benjamin Franklin, Bill Manetti, Keenan Ivory Wayens, Bob Barker, Steve Vai, Bill Manetti, Charles Darwin, David Duchovny, Geoff Tate, Eddie Jackson, Carcass, Hank Aaron, Carl Lewis, Joe Namath, Brendan Brazier, Killer Kowalski, Ted Danson, Richard Gere, Russell Simmons and Tomas Lindburg to be effeminate. I don't consider myself to be effeminate either, so whatever.

I may be wrong about Hitler having Jewish blood. It was something in a book I read when I was in grade school. I'm not a Hitler expert or anything though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mick Moss
Ive been a vegetarian for 4 days now
Replies
129
Views
3K
Antimatter
Susie
S
Tee
I have four sharks in my fridge at the moment
Replies
39
Views
826
Nevermore
AsModEe
A
Ermz
Healthy Eating/Workout Recipes
Replies
10
Views
878
Bar
Harry Hughes
H
angelofdeath9308
Happy Thanksgiving
Replies
20
Views
701
Opeth (Archived)
Luz
L
witch
Recipes :grin:
Replies
50
Views
3K
Asgaroth
Melancholia
M
Top Bottom
Back