View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
KimchiNinja

Joined: 01 May 2012 Location: Gangnam
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cabeza wrote: |
I don't want to fight Sister Ray's battle for him/her, but what's the problem with stating a fact. Everyone should just shut up and enjoy the headlong plunge into the abyss of environmental destruction?
Shit needs to change. Will it? Invaribly not. Most people have the same attitude as you. But why is it that people who choose to speak out about it are told to shut the *beep* up? That's pretty weird. |
Because it's not very well thought thru, and thus "silly hippy stuff".
How do you know the long-term impact to humans from shutting down the red meat industry won't be WORSE than the impact from environmental destruction?
Things are connected and cannot be changed without numerous, often unforeseen consequences. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
cabeza
Joined: 29 Sep 2012
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hang on. Aren't you talking about "what may be"?
I thought you didn't do that?
Have you ever looked into the environmental impacts of cattle grazing?
Or are you just talking out your ass? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
KimchiNinja

Joined: 01 May 2012 Location: Gangnam
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cabeza wrote: |
Hang on. Aren't you talking about "what may be"?
I thought you didn't do that? |
I'm an analyst, I forecast all the time. But not using silly hippy "logic". |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Enduro
Joined: 26 Apr 2014
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cabeza wrote: |
Enduro wrote: |
KimchiNinja wrote: |
Sister Ray wrote: |
I should be able to express my disapproval of an industry which is documented to be causing large scale harm to the global environment without being smeared as "stupid" and a babbling "liberal arts hippy". |
What is the brilliant solution though? Humans should stop eating red meat? |
Exactly. Nothing constructive, just incessant worn out rhetoric. |
I don't want to fight Sister Ray's battle for him/her, but what's the problem with stating a fact. Everyone should just shut up and enjoy the headlong plunge into the abyss of environmental destruction?
Shit needs to change. Will it? Invaribly not. Most people have the same attitude as you. But why is it that people who choose to speak out about it are told to shut the *beep* up? That's pretty weird.
How constructive can one be in the face of attitudes like yours?
"Cut down on beef. It's bad for the environment."
"Hahah shut up hippy fag lol". |
No one said 'fag' Perhaps you feel insecure about, polesmoker. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
cabeza
Joined: 29 Sep 2012
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Enduro wrote: |
cabeza wrote: |
Enduro wrote: |
KimchiNinja wrote: |
Sister Ray wrote: |
I should be able to express my disapproval of an industry which is documented to be causing large scale harm to the global environment without being smeared as "stupid" and a babbling "liberal arts hippy". |
What is the brilliant solution though? Humans should stop eating red meat? |
Exactly. Nothing constructive, just incessant worn out rhetoric. |
I don't want to fight Sister Ray's battle for him/her, but what's the problem with stating a fact. Everyone should just shut up and enjoy the headlong plunge into the abyss of environmental destruction?
Shit needs to change. Will it? Invaribly not. Most people have the same attitude as you. But why is it that people who choose to speak out about it are told to shut the *beep* up? That's pretty weird.
How constructive can one be in the face of attitudes like yours?
"Cut down on beef. It's bad for the environment."
"Hahah shut up hippy fag lol". |
No one said 'fag' Perhaps you feel insecure about, polesmoker. |
Good comeback. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
cabeza
Joined: 29 Sep 2012
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KimchiNinja wrote: |
cabeza wrote: |
Hang on. Aren't you talking about "what may be"?
I thought you didn't do that? |
I'm an analyst, I forecast all the time. But not using silly hippy "logic". |
Forecast me this, what negative environmental effects would there be from decreasing cattle farming? Let's see if you are worth your 60 million won bonus. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cabeza wrote: |
The beef industry has a massive impact on the environment.
In terms of tree felling to clear land for grazing, use and pollution of water, release of methane and over all degradation of land. |
Actually most farms where I'm from have been around for one or two hundred years. If anything, there are less farms than before and much of the land has either grown into housing developments but more often than not, it has become forest again. There's no massive forest destruction you speak of. There is Irving cutting down trees, though they do replant them, Only problem is some spraying and not replanting as many species I suppose. But, if anything, I think there's a lot less environmental degradation than there was 100 or even 50 years ago.
Most farmers nowadays want the land taken care of as sick cattle or folks dying from bad beef would shut their industry down. (Though, I'll agree I'd like to see less hormones and other injections used.) Point is man is part of the ecosystem not seperate from it as Greenpeace and these other groups would have you believe. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Weigookin74 wrote: |
cabeza wrote: |
The beef industry has a massive impact on the environment.
In terms of tree felling to clear land for grazing, use and pollution of water, release of methane and over all degradation of land. |
Actually most farms where I'm from have been around for one or two hundred years. If anything, there are less farms than before and much of the land has either grown into housing developments but more often than not, it has become forest again. There's no massive forest destruction you speak of. There is Irving cutting down trees, though they do replant them, Only problem is some spraying and not replanting as many species I suppose. But, if anything, I think there's a lot less environmental degradation than there was 100 or even 50 years ago.
Most farmers nowadays want the land taken care of as sick cattle or folks dying from bad beef would shut their industry down. (Though, I'll agree I'd like to see less hormones and other injections used.) Point is man is part of the ecosystem not seperate from it as Greenpeace and these other groups would have you believe. |
I'd add that the use of phosphates, potash, and other such things replenish the land thereby eliminating the need to cut down trees to get fresh land for crops. Don't lump in third world countries lack of caring with what we do in developed countries. It's intellectually dishonest to do so. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
KimchiNinja

Joined: 01 May 2012 Location: Gangnam
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cabeza wrote: |
KimchiNinja wrote: |
cabeza wrote: |
Hang on. Aren't you talking about "what may be"?
I thought you didn't do that? |
I'm an analyst, I forecast all the time. But not using silly hippy "logic". |
Forecast me this, what negative environmental effects would there be from decreasing cattle farming? Let's see if you are worth your 60 million won bonus. |
As I already stated the negative effects do not come from where you are focusing your attention (environment), they sneak up on you. The positive effects are environmental. The short-term negative effects would most likely be to human health, with long-term effects to how we continue to evolve.
Realistically you are not qualified to judge my analysis. And a correct analysis does not necessarily seem correct, the passing of time shows it to be correct. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
cabeza
Joined: 29 Sep 2012
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Weigookin74 wrote: |
cabeza wrote: |
The beef industry has a massive impact on the environment.
In terms of tree felling to clear land for grazing, use and pollution of water, release of methane and over all degradation of land. |
Actually most farms where I'm from have been around for one or two hundred years. If anything, there are less farms than before and much of the land has either grown into housing developments but more often than not, it has become forest again. There's no massive forest destruction you speak of. There is Irving cutting down trees, though they do replant them, Only problem is some spraying and not replanting as many species I suppose. But, if anything, I think there's a lot less environmental degradation than there was 100 or even 50 years ago.
Most farmers nowadays want the land taken care of as sick cattle or folks dying from bad beef would shut their industry down. (Though, I'll agree I'd like to see less hormones and other injections used.) Point is man is part of the ecosystem not seperate from it as Greenpeace and these other groups would have you believe. |
Yes. You raise valid points.
I'm not for the total elimination of all cattle farming. But certainly factory farms and other high intensity grazing situations.
The forest destruction I was talking about was more in the developing world, especially South America. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Sister Ray
Joined: 25 Mar 2006 Location: Fukuoka
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KimchiNinja wrote: |
What is the brilliant solution though? Humans should stop eating red meat? |
Enduro wrote: |
Exactly. Nothing constructive, just incessant worn out rhetoric. |
The obvious solution is to reduce red meat consumption per capita. Thereby reducing the need to run intensive cattle farming. That is why I criticised E-Mart for running a campaign to encourage beef consumption. That's about as socially responsible as campaigning for greater use of fossil fuels or increased plastic bag consumption.
To you, obviously this solution is unacceptable thus your knee jerk "stupid hippy" comments.
The facts remain though, cattle farming is hugely detrimental to the environment and contributes greatly to global poverty and hunger by increasing prices of basic grains used as feed. If you think objecting to this is "worn out hippy rhetoric" that's your prerogative. But, I would suggest the hostility comes from the discomfort of realising a cherished part of your lifestyle (those wonderful Canadian barbecues someone mentioned,) is actually a negative blight on the developing World. Writing it off as"stupid hippy talk" is disingenuous intellectually lazy buck passing. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
KimchiNinja

Joined: 01 May 2012 Location: Gangnam
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sister Ray wrote: |
The obvious solution is to reduce red meat consumption per capita. |
...this has already been happening in the USA since the 1950s. Where are the brilliant results?? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Sister Ray
Joined: 25 Mar 2006 Location: Fukuoka
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KimchiNinja wrote: |
...this has already been happening in the USA since the 1950s. Where are the brilliant results?? |
Ha ha, is that just a statistic you made up thinking it would be nice if it were true?
Meat consumption per capita US 1950: 138.2 Lbs
Meat consumption per capita US 2000: 195.2 Lbs
Source: http://www.usda.gov/factbook/chapter2.pdf
Come on man, you're an analyst? Really? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
KimchiNinja

Joined: 01 May 2012 Location: Gangnam
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sister Ray wrote: |
KimchiNinja wrote: |
...this has already been happening in the USA since the 1950s. Where are the brilliant results?? |
Ha ha, is that just a statistic you made up thinking it would be nice if it were true?
Meat consumption per capita US 1950: 138.2 Lbs
Meat consumption per capita US 2000: 195.2 Lbs
Source: http://www.usda.gov/factbook/chapter2.pdf
Come on man, you're an analyst? Really? |
You really shouldn't draw sword on the senior analyst and not expect to get your head chopped off.
Would you like to check your math first? I'm giving you a chance buddy. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not all cattle farming is equal. Clear-cutting rain forest acres to feed cattle is foolish. Limited grazing in pre-existing pastures or wild land instead of converting it to farmland or human living space has far less of an environmental impact, and results in fewer total animal deaths as well. Discouraging people from eating beef is somewhere between unreasonable and pointless; even if you brainwashed the entire first world into thinking beef consumption was unacceptable, a spike in third world demand -- the part of the world where the population's still on a serious rise, and probably the part of the world which cares least about the environment -- would make up for it soon enough. Instead, the first world should use its economic clout to ensure that beef production is less of an environmental liability. With a little will, it wouldn't be hard. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|