Discussion
... It will cut down on hot air which, I think, is contributing to global warming.
http://www.peta.org.uk/blog/new-report-tax-meat-to...
http://www.peta.org.uk/blog/new-report-tax-meat-to...
Strange you chose to pick on PETA rather than address the content of the article which was largely taken from the telegraph link on the PETA website and the report by Chatham House.
There's not much to be debated here really, the meat industry is a massive contributor to energy waste and inefficiency and pollution and in general (especially in the western world) eating a bit less meat would be beneficial on lots of different levels - that's not really news is it?
There's not much to be debated here really, the meat industry is a massive contributor to energy waste and inefficiency and pollution and in general (especially in the western world) eating a bit less meat would be beneficial on lots of different levels - that's not really news is it?
FredClogs said:
Strange you chose to pick on PETA rather than address the content of the article which was largely taken from the telegraph link on the PETA website and the report by Chatham House.
No mention of PETA in OP; I merely linked to their site on the page that referred to the Chatham House 'report'.FredClogs said:
There's not much to be debated here really, the meat industry is a massive contributor to energy waste and inefficiency and pollution and in general (especially in the western world) eating a bit less meat would be beneficial on lots of different levels - that's not really news is it?
It is news when social engineering interest groups, Like Chav House, are given airtime in the media to quote their 'findings' as fact (which is a long, long way from, the truth) in their simpering whining tones. Their mouthpiece on the radio last night sounded like she;d only just finished crying about it. Utterly imbecilic to publish crap like this and call it science.And, furthermore, if 'they' come for meat-eaters, it really will get nasty.
FredClogs said:
There's not much to be debated here really, the meat industry is a massive contributor to energy waste and inefficiency and pollution and in general (especially in the western world) eating a bit less meat would be beneficial on lots of different levels - that's not really news is it?
I knew that was Fred before I even looked at the poster.No mealy mouthed, sanctimonious veggies are going to stop me eating meat. They'd be too weak anyway, as a result of their ridiculous faddy diet.
FredClogs said:
There's not much to be debated here really, the meat industry is a massive contributor to energy waste and inefficiency and pollution and in general (especially in the western world) eating a bit less meat would be beneficial on lots of different levels - that's not really news is it?
Typical veggie lefty statement which has no connection with anything but self delusion.The facts are much more complex.
For example much animal grazing land is simply not capable of sustaining any form of arable production. In the UK for example sheep are mainly raised on hill farms. While in the UK pigs and cows do generally graze on land which could be used for arable land pigs are often feed on waste so land usage is minimal. As for cows outside the this is not the case where many cows are grow on low quality land and wander to find sufficient food. again even.
Further reducing animal use will change habit much of which is dependant on its use. For example the are different on grazed land than arable,
Dog Star said:
No mealy mouthed, sanctimonious veggies are going to stop me eating meat. They'd be too weak anyway, as a result of their ridiculous faddy diet.
My word you sound so brave and masculine, can you post up a picture with your shirt off?Mention the word 'Veggie' on any PH thread and watch the impotent and insecure try to outdo each others chest beating.
Yeah, all veggies are weaker than you and you'll show 'em by god!
We probably don;t need to eat near as much meat as we do. That said, you can farm animals where you can't farm crops, much of Wales for instance is too wet and high and only good for sheep. You can also feed animals on by products from the human food chain, like the 12 tonnes of out grade potatoes I am going to deliver tomorrow. Animals do well on small fields that big machines aren't very efficient in.
Willy Nilly said:
We probably don;t need to eat near as much meat as we do.
It is true that we could eat less meat. But it isn't necessarily good for us to do so. Our ancestors were carnivores, and though we have lost some of the bacterial resistance we used to have, we still have the digestive system of a carnivore and we can eat all flesh raw. Vegetables can be poisonous to us until soaked or cooked or both, some are not digestible even then, and much of the rest is sugar and cereals which are giving us obesity and diabetes. It is, however, massively profitable to sell us these things and the mainstream media is overwhelmingly funded by adverts. So we are encouraged to think bad things about eating meat with little factual basis, and to believe that vegetarians are "shiny, happy people" despite visible evidence to the contrary(*).
* "pasty, weak people", obviously.
grumbledoak said:
Our ancestors were carnivores
Were they? Do you have whisker and claws? Talons and a beak? f
k me? Better ring Anthropology Weekly and file your paper. If you ever needed any more indication that Al Murray Pub Landlord has replicated and controls the discussions at PH HQ this thread is it...
What would Morrisey say?
FredClogs said:
Were they? Do you have whisker and claws? Talons and a beak? fk me? Better ring Anthropology Weekly and file your paper.
Two words: canine, teeth.k me? Better ring Anthropology Weekly and file your paper.FredClogs said:
What would Morrisey say?
Frankly, really, even among those who actually like his music; does anyone honestly care?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff