|
chicken farming is really bad too though guys don't think white meat gets you off the hook.
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
I only eat long pork.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Things can be less bad than other things
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:08
|
|
EccoRaven posted:chicken farming is really bad too though guys don't think white meat gets you off the hook. By my understanding, chicken farming is bad for the chicken, but doesn't involve massively boosting greenhouse gases in the atmosphere or clear-cutting forest to make for grazing room. I will concede defeat with regards to fish, though.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Who cares? Consume whatever you can before you die and leave the mess for the next generation to clean up. (Thats capitalism right? Did i do it right?)
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
I only eat gemstones and naturally occurring metals
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:13
|
|
CapitalistPig posted:Who cares? Consume whatever you can before you die and leave the mess for the next generation to clean up. Yay! Capitalism!
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:chicken farming is really bad too though guys don't think white meat gets you off the hook. It's no worse than general agriculture iirc
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
The sad truth is right now we're eating too much food as a species for the planet to continue to sustain us and that farming, both plant and animal, are destroying everything. We need to learn to photosynthesize is what I'm saying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Meinberg posted:By my understanding, chicken farming is bad for the chicken, but doesn't involve massively boosting greenhouse gases in the atmosphere or clear-cutting forest to make for grazing room. it's bad for the chicken (unsanitary/inhumane conditions), it's bad for the local environment (the chesapeake bay watershed comes to mind), it's bad for the farmers (good old john oliver), and it's bad for the consumer (salmonella as a result of the aforementioned unsanitary and inhumane conditions). yeah it won't destroy the world but it'll make large parts of it a lot less nice. GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:The sad truth is right now we're eating too much food as a species for the planet to continue to sustain us and that farming, both plant and animal, are destroying everything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Population control is the answer once again
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:for the splittest of seconds I was incredibly jealous. No you're right to be, Ecco, this all takes place in the hit musical 'Hamilton'. Our production takes a lot of creative license.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Tremendous Taste posted:Population control is the answer once again What this world needs is a good old conventional war. Or a massive outbreak of disease. That would thin out the herd.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
Well I mean we've had a lot of war and disease within the past year or two
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Randomized executions
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:it's bad for the chicken (unsanitary/inhumane conditions), it's bad for the local environment (the chesapeake bay watershed comes to mind), it's bad for the farmers (good old john oliver), and it's bad for the consumer (salmonella as a result of the aforementioned unsanitary and inhumane conditions). Look into the impact of farming on the environment. A good chunk of how we get our plant foods is done in unsustainable and damaging ways. Sorry to burst your hippie bubble.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Tremendous Taste posted:Population control is the answer once again nah. the planet currently right now literally today produces enough food for everyone to not be hungry. that is strictly a distribution issue. if we switched the infrastructure currently in place to sustain meat production to producing food for human consumption (which is a buttload), it'd be even more generous of a window. gradually switching over to less-intensive means of production that produce lower yields but also minimize the environmental impact would be hard but far from impossible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
I think the cockroach will be earths main export to the universe, not the human
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
We're overreaping our fair planet. Just because we *can* produce enough for our 7 billion vermin doesn't mean we *should*.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Also I grew up on a chicken farm but we don't kill them and also the ones that can be are free range, the others are kept in pens with a few other chickens in their brood, with lots of leg-space and little perches and nest holes and things. We also keep ducks in a gigantic pen with a bunch of little shelters and stuff like containers for them to swim in. We eat the ducks sometimes though, because duck is really delicious and actually worth the effort of de-feathering and everything. Hobby farms are cool, imo in an ideal world instead of industrial farms everyone would just have a little personal farm or be involved in a larger community farm where they could produce enough food to sustain their own family. There's also a lot less food waste when you're producing food yourself because you stop worrying about a bruise or spot here or there when it comes to plants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:Look into the impact of farming on the environment. A good chunk of how we get our plant foods is done in unsustainable and damaging ways. Sorry to burst your hippie bubble. I mean yeah but the impact from meat consumption compared to vegetable consumption is laughable. Just saying "oh it's all terrible!" and then followed by "and so nothing can be done because nothing is perfect!" is both not a very good thought and also distorts the real consequences of our behavior as a society.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
I've killed chickens before you just need a sharp knife. Defeathering is easy after you've soaked the dead chicken in warm water. Did you know you can use ants as a pesticide
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:I mean yeah but the impact from meat consumption compared to vegetable consumption is laughable. Just saying "oh it's all terrible!" and then followed by "and so nothing can be done because nothing is perfect!" is both not a very good thought and also distorts the real consequences of our behavior as a society. Depends on the plant and the meat. Broccoli, tomatoes and potatoes are worse in terms of omissions than chicken and pork. Lamb, beef, and Turkey are, on the other hand, pure disaster. Things can be done better in general and we need to scale back our meat consumption for sure but you've gotta also realize that the scale on which we produce food is simply damaging to the environment. Switching your diet up isn't going to help too much but it'd be wise to avoid the three meats I mentioned and fish. If we all switched to rice, beans, and lentils, though? Well, that'd be huge. I just don't know what their water consumption is like.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
There's some Anthony Bourdain clip where he defeathers some bird and eats an organ raw Even the salt of the earth farmer is appalled
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
There are two solutions to the problems facing Earth. A) We institute some means of population control and take on a dramatically reduced standard of living. B) We get the gently caress off of the planet. If we don't choose Option B, then Option A is going to be chosen for us, sooner or later.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
well I'm about to go out for lunch and now I'm going to be depressed and guilty whatever I get. thanks a lot assholes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Engineers will save the day, probably. You assholes are welcome.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:Broccoli, tomatoes and potatoes are worse in terms of omissions than chicken and pork. this seemed very strange so I looked into it. that estimate refers to "per calorie" emissions, which means you'd need to eat 6.7 kilograms of broccoli to make up the calorie loss from 1kg of beef. which is insane, nobody expects anyone would eat 3 pounds of broccoli whenever they'd normally eat a pound of beef. a well-rounded vegetarian diet with a mix of vegetables and grains is more than enough to make up any calorie loss. GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:Switching your diet up isn't going to help too much http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/food-carbon-footprint-diet Meinberg posted:There are two solutions to the problems facing Earth. population control is neither ethical nor a necessary answer to our current environmental problems. I am going to go eat food now bbl EccoRaven fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Oct 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Ethics are a self-indulgent construct that people use to justify why they're superior to others, c'mon
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:14
|
|
Tremendous Taste posted:Ethics are a self-indulgent construct that people use to justify why they're superior to others, c'mon Incorrect.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:15
|
|
EccoRaven posted:population control is neither ethical nor a necessary answer to our current environmental problems. This is why I'm pro Option B! There's so many resources just waiting to be gathered, waiting in Near Earth Asteroids. If we could build the proper infrastructure, it'd even be profitable!
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Meinberg posted:This is why I'm pro Option B! There's so many resources just waiting to be gathered, waiting in Near Earth Asteroids. If we could build the proper infrastructure, it'd even be profitable! that's so much work though
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
Meinberg posted:This is why I'm pro Option B! There's so many resources just waiting to be gathered, waiting in Near Earth Asteroids. If we could build the proper infrastructure, it'd even be profitable! Wouldn't they need to construct the space elevator to make that viable or something? Also, since we've never done it and it'd involve precise and forceful things from far, far away, one would think the enterprise would be fraught with issues for a while.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Meinberg posted:Incorrect. You don't start healing right until you drop the crutch, Michael.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:27
|
|
GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:Wouldn't they need to construct the space elevator to make that viable or something? Also, since we've never done it and it'd involve precise and forceful things from far, far away, one would think the enterprise would be fraught with issues for a while. A space elevator would make things easier, no doubt, but they're pretty much science fiction at the moment. Sending stuff down to Earth is fairly simple, fortunately, so it's just a matter of making extraplanetary life sustainable, which it isn't now. It's a more achievable goal, though.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:33
|
|
Tremendous Taste posted:You don't start healing right until you drop the crutch, Michael. Also incorrect.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
I think the first step would be outlawing people who think fish are tasty.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
If you took away the fact you consider yourself a "good" person, would you be happy with your life in any capacity? Would you be satisfied with what you are, in trying to achieve goodness? Or is it a comfort you provide yourself? This isn't directed to any individual, to be clear.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Tremendous Taste posted:If you took away the fact you consider yourself a "good" person, would you be happy with your life in any capacity? Would you be satisfied with what you are, in trying to achieve goodness? Or is it a comfort you provide yourself? I would be. I don't think you have to be a good person to be happy, it just helps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
GUISSEPPE PIZZAPIE posted:I would be. I don't think you have to be a good person to be happy, it just helps. I'm glad you can honestly say that. There are so many that probably couldn't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2015 19:41
|
|