It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by timeless test
Yum yum.
If it's all the same to you I think I'll do my bit by just commitiing suicide
It should and can be a basic human right to eat. According to John Robbins, a renowned author and spokesperson on sustainable environments, if Americans were to eat only 10 percent less meat, it would free enough land and resources to grow over twelve million tons of grain annually for human consumption, "more than enough to adequately feed every one of the 40 to 60 million human beings who will starve to death on the planet this year.
Nearly half of the grains from world harvests are fed to "livestock." According to Robbins, it takes sixteen times more resources to produce a pound of food from livestock than it does to produce a pound of food without raising animals as "livestock." It takes only one pound of grain to produce a pound of bread. In his book May All Be Fed, Mr. John Robbins wrote: "By cycling our grain through livestock and into beef, we end up with 6 percent as much food to feed human beings as we would have if we ate the grain directly."
Originally posted by greenfruit
Some vegetarian groups claim that since humans possess grinding teeth, like herbivorous animals, and longer intestines than carnivorous animals, this proves the human body is better suited for vegetarianism. This argument fails to note several human physiological features which clearly indicate a design for animal product consumption.
First and foremost is our stomach's production of hydrochloric acid, something not found in herbivores. Hydrochloric acid activates protein-splitting enzymes. Further, the human pancreas manufactures a full range of digestive enzymes to handle a wide variety of foods, both animal and vegetable.
Dr Walter Voegtlin's in-depth comparison of the human digestive system with that of the dog (a carnivore)
and the sheep (a herbivore) clearly shows that we are closer in anatomy to the carnivorous dog than the herbivorous sheep.
While humans may have longer intestines than animal carnivores, they are not as long as herbivores; nor do we possess multiple stomachs like many herbivores; nor do we chew cud.
Our physiology definitely indicates a mixed feeder or an omnivore--much the same as our relatives the mountain gorilla and chimpanzee, who have all been observed eating small animals and in some cases other primates.
Originally posted by Dragon12
Hey what about we ban all cars -
Originally posted by spacedoubt
Compromise.
Become a part-time vegetarian.
Save some fat calories.
My wife and I do this. Twice a week, no meat.
You might end up being a little healthier, might lose a little weight, save a little money. And as an aside, if this methane theory is correct, you may save a glacier.
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by timeless test
Yum yum.
If it's all the same to you I think I'll do my bit by just commitiing suicide
So what is the point of your post? As usual a thread that makes ppl think gets filled with stupid comments that have nothing to do with the topic.
Sry but it's just ignorant,
Originally posted by timeless test
No, it's not ignorant it was just a poor attempt at a humourous way of saying that whilst I am prepared to accept that some individuals find a vegetarian lifestyle preferable I certainly do not.
What is particularly irritating is that it appears perfectly acceptable for vegetarians to frequently criticise those of us who enjoy eating all forms of meat for being cruel to animals, having no compassion for them, ("meat is murder" anyone?)
Originally posted by ANOKYes I know it was a poor attempt at humour, you get at least one in every thread about vegetarianism, that's why I jumped on it.
And as far as being vile, again that's just an ignorant opinion cause you obviously have never tried it.
I couldn't care less about what you eat or don't eat.
Originally posted by Arcane Demesne
But you're missing the point of the article. If man didn't FARM animals, green house gases would drop drastcially. That's the entire point of this thread.
Originally posted by Dragon12
Hey what about we ban all cars - got to decrease global warming, and while we are at it, why dont we shut down all power stations. Thats got to decrease global warming. Me I vote for all the vegitarians to start. I mean they are the ones who think that us meat eaters are all the problem so show us, go on get rid of all your cars and turn off the electricity - what, you wont? seems that the vegitarians are the problem now!
Originally posted by Essan
But if we all stopped farming animals we'd have to slaughter hundreds of million of them - which in turn would produce even more carbon emissions through decomposition and/or burning of the bodies
Of course, there's one way we could cut greenhouse gas emission even more dramatically. Stop chopping down rain forests.
About time palm oil products were banned perhaps?