You're just *FUCKED*, rupie (was: THE MEAT EATING HABIT WASTES OUR RESOURCES)
in [Vegetarian]
|
Prev: You're just *FUCKED*, rupie (was: THE MEAT EATING HABIT WASTES OUR RESOURCES)
Next: Racism and sexism and rupie's accommodation of his dog-eating skank girlfriend
From: Rudy Canoza on 27 Aug 2008 07:16 On Aug 26, 11:45 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Aug 26, 9:12 pm, Rudy Canoza <notgen...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Aug 26, 5:22 pm, use...(a)mantra.com and/orwww.mantra.com/jai(Dr. > > > Jai Maharaj) wrote: > > > Fact City 19 > > > > Eating Meat Wastes Our Resources > > > > When it comes to resource and energy wastage, meat products > > > are a class by themselves. > > > > Scientists compute the energy costs of foods by the value > > > of the raw materials consumed in the production of that > > > food. Frances Moore Lappe reports: > > > > A detailed 1978 study sponsored by the Department of > > > Interior and Commerce produced startling figures showing > > > that the value of raw materials consumed to produce food > > > from livestock is greater than the value of all oil, > > > gas, and coal consumed in this country. > > > > The same study revealed the equally startling fact that the > > > production of meats, dairy products and eggs accounts for > > > one-third of the total amount of all raw materials used for > > > all purposes in the United States. > > > > In contrast, growing grains, vegetables and fruits for > > > direct human consumprion is a model of efficiency, using > > > less than 5% the raw material consumption as does the > > > production of meat. > > > > Another way scientists compute the energy costs of various > > > foods is to assess the amount of fossil fuel needed to > > > produce them. An American scientist, David Pimental, > > > Not a scientist, of course. > > > > calculates that if the whole world were to eat according to > > > wasteful U.S. agricultural practices, the planet's entire > > > petroleum reserves would be exhausted in 13 years. > > > So, rupie, once *AGAIN*, we see that the bogus "inefficiency" argument > > is *not* about environmental concerns, but is, as I have always > > maintained, a *BOGUS* argument about resource allocation, and a > > complete *misperception* of the notion of value.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > I already conceded everything that needed to be conceded on that > point. No, you fudged and qualified that. It was an insincere and phony concession - typical of your intellectual dishonesty. > Could you answer my question in the other thread, please? > > Your decision to take up the hobby of trying to annoy people and waste > their time on the internet: No such hobby.
From: Rupert on 1 Sep 2008 22:07
On Aug 27, 4:16 am, Rudy Canoza <notgen...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Aug 26, 11:45 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 26, 9:12 pm, Rudy Canoza <notgen...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Aug 26, 5:22 pm, use...(a)mantra.com and/orwww.mantra.com/jai(Dr. > > > > Jai Maharaj) wrote: > > > > Fact City 19 > > > > > Eating Meat Wastes Our Resources > > > > > When it comes to resource and energy wastage, meat products > > > > are a class by themselves. > > > > > Scientists compute the energy costs of foods by the value > > > > of the raw materials consumed in the production of that > > > > food. Frances Moore Lappe reports: > > > > > A detailed 1978 study sponsored by the Department of > > > > Interior and Commerce produced startling figures showing > > > > that the value of raw materials consumed to produce food > > > > from livestock is greater than the value of all oil, > > > > gas, and coal consumed in this country. > > > > > The same study revealed the equally startling fact that the > > > > production of meats, dairy products and eggs accounts for > > > > one-third of the total amount of all raw materials used for > > > > all purposes in the United States. > > > > > In contrast, growing grains, vegetables and fruits for > > > > direct human consumprion is a model of efficiency, using > > > > less than 5% the raw material consumption as does the > > > > production of meat. > > > > > Another way scientists compute the energy costs of various > > > > foods is to assess the amount of fossil fuel needed to > > > > produce them. An American scientist, David Pimental, > > > > Not a scientist, of course. > > > > > calculates that if the whole world were to eat according to > > > > wasteful U.S. agricultural practices, the planet's entire > > > > petroleum reserves would be exhausted in 13 years. > > > > So, rupie, once *AGAIN*, we see that the bogus "inefficiency" argument > > > is *not* about environmental concerns, but is, as I have always > > > maintained, a *BOGUS* argument about resource allocation, and a > > > complete *misperception* of the notion of value.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > I already conceded everything that needed to be conceded on that > > point. > > No, you fudged and qualified that. It was an insincere and phony > concession - typical of your intellectual dishonesty. > Absolute rubbish. I gave a frank and forthright concession immediately, and repeated it a number of times in response to your inane ranting. You are a pitiful liar. > > Could you answer my question in the other thread, please? > > > Your decision to take up the hobby of trying to annoy people and waste > > their time on the internet: > > No such hobby. You actually think you're doing something constructive and worthwhile? That's kind of sad. |