EE_Bota
Elite Member
If you eat grass fed ruminants, you ate an animal that ate what humans cannot eat. Pork, on the other hand, competes directly with humans.
Global Warming?
- Thread starter Bird
- Start date
- Views: 364155
- Status
If you eat grass fed ruminants, you ate an animal that ate what humans cannot eat. Pork, on the other hand, competes directly with humans.
Short Game
Veteran Member
A One-Size-Fits-All system is not going to be an easy sell. We need to find the non-system which the most can live with peacefully. What other chance have we, considering the fix we are in, globally? Those whom are so dedicated to their systems, as to war for them, may insure a nearly complete failure of our, and with us, many another species. I will hope and trust a younger generation to achieve the proper rationality, as my own has shown such tendency toward failure on a massive scale.
EE_Bota
Elite Member
Rationality comes in many forms. One form would say that human population will be controlled in the same manner that population is controlled in other species; typically disease and starvation. That would make overpopulation brought out in the context of global warming seem arbitrary and directed.
Short Game
Veteran Member
After a few years of not eating the main ruminant my culture offers, I could no longer eat them without a couple of hours of being violently ill, in a manner very reminiscent of food poisoning. Could be my body was sending me a message. Pork, on the other hand, didn't do this. It does, however, give me very unsettling dreams, and so, I avoid that too. The difference is, if someone puts a little bacon in the beans, I don't get sick. If a beef bone went into the soup, I do get sick.
I'll be more careful in the future but I imagine I'm not the only one here who has an eraser on his pencil! I'll bet yours is not without wear.
Rob
EE_Bota
Elite Member
That's very unusual. I am not sure what is at the heart of that reaction. Does it tend to happen even with very small portions? Are both cooked "well?"
I am an engineer now, but I started out interested in pork production as a kid, but in Animal Science, I became more interested in cattle because of their rumen. I believe that cattle are a blessing to humans, and far more helpful overall than simple stomach creatures.
I think there's another aspect to it, man's destructiveness driven by his greed will very likely destroy ALL other species too.
Again GW isn't the issue it's pollution and environmental destruction. It's easy to shed doubt on GW and to associate that doubt with an unrealistic fear. The problem is that this planet is in real trouble, the "don't worry, their just alarmists and tree huggers" view is a clever way to lull people into a false perception of the problems big oil, gas and coal want people think are not real.
When will we run out of energy?
No one has that answer, shouldn't we be thinking about a solution to our energy problems that don't rely on consumables? Who doesn't want us to think about renewables?
Rob
Humans are not a blessing to cattle though!
Short Game
Veteran Member
Yes, beef, even in small portions, has done this. Yes, even in stews and soups that were cooked for long periods did I experience this. I have gotten to where I could eat beef again by starting out with very small portions and working slowly back into it, but then by simply not having any beef for a while, I found again that it made me sick. "Why eat such a thing," is what I asked myself. So, like building an immunity to any poison, I could again eat it. But, would I want to?
I am also dairy intolerant. It took me many decades to finally quit cheese, though I was fairly sure I should. The idea of no more pizza for life was very hard to accept. However, when I finally did, the eczema on my leg finally disappeared.
People joke about my dietary habits, saying that I "don't eat anything that has ingredients."
newbury
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2009
- Messages
- 14,842
- Location
- From Vt, in Va, retiring to MS
- Tractor
- Kubota's - B7610, M4700
What's this "we" stuff Kemosabe?
I and many others have taken steps to ensure that we and those dear to us will have water, energy, sunlight, medicine, the tools to exploit and the tools to defend us for decades, if not generations to come.
If the world goes to hades in a handbasket it will probably curtail my use of TBN, but we will still be able to get up in the morning to live another day. As things get "tighter" we'll stock up more on supplies that might be needed.
Global warming interests me because of what I perceive the increased need I will have for defenses against hordes of people "migrating" due to rising sea level, dust bowls, increased storm activity.
It's how people can deny scientific evidence because it does not fit what they want. It's how politicians can suppress science for years because the results might impact their big donors.
I worked for years with a group of people that STAUNCHLY rejected the concept of global warming (regardless of cause), and every time the weather was a little cool they were sure to comment. And they KNEW this because someone said so.
They were also people that KNEW ****** had weapons of mass destruction and financed Al-Quadea, because someone said so.
These people liked buying houses bigger than they needed far from work (and properties to flip) because home prices were ALWAYS going to go up, because someone said so.
These people bought nice shiny humongous SUV's for their 100 mile daily commute because they were promised gas prices would be low, because someone said so.
I stuck by my mantra "Use it up, wear it out, make it do or do without".
So this "we run out of energy" to me means when the unthinking, lemming-like vast public all of a sudden realizes that they didn't plan ahead and they can't afford gas for their 120 mile daily commute because China will pay more for it.
And the someone who said it wasn't going to be that way has walked away.
If you've noticed the US is EXPORTING oil.
Oil boomlet sweeps U.S. as exports rise ? USATODAY.com
Has it lowered our price at the pump?
What's going to happen to the Amish when the "we runs out of energy"?
Somebody is going to have to go knock on their door and tell them because they might not notice.
From another thread:
EE_Bota
Elite Member
Many allergies are run of the mill, but you could have an allergy to some of the things in beef, or the beef itself I suppose. I don't eat much meat and when I do eat meat, I eat only small portions such as 4 oz. A 16oz steak would be too huge, and I don't waste, so I'd have to spread that over several meals. But there are reasons I eat very little, and I have to eat like I am solving a nutritional problem given the small amount I eat.
Going to a restaurant what specialized in large meals is not a treat for me. One small plate of food is a gracious plenty. I just feel better that way, and have less problem with my crohn's disease.
SPYDERLK
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2006
- Messages
- 12,536
- Location
- VA
- Tractor
- JD2010, Kubota3450,2550, Mahindra 7520 w FEL w Skid Steer QC w/Tilt Tatch, & BH, BX1500
Regulation would be the failure to find prevalent rationality and therefore spawn the need to artificially generate it. A real worrisome scenario.
...I cant think of a single rational example of rationality not being complete in itself. ... Maybe you can. :confused3:
larry
powerpace
Veteran Member
That's right. The Jewish and Muslim dietary rules are based on this. Pork is unclean because God said so. What was actually intended was pigs competed for resources in a resource poor part of the world. Pigs need water and will forage in crops and waste produced by people. Instead of telling people about the sanitary and food habits of pigs they were told God did not want them to eat unclean animals.
powerpace
Veteran Member
I try not to hang out publicly with known Republicans.
The Amish would survive unless strong armed by people that depend on others for every survival needs and thought process.
The Northwest has several regions that draw people to a simple standard of living. Southern OR., Northern ID, and many other areas have people that keep things simple in their lives. Whether they would survive in a crisis is another story.
patrick_g
Elite Member
Modern Humans under environmental pressure evolved over millennia. Basically evolution selects for "what works", whatever is more successful at surviving the extant environment. If eating veggies only or meat only was more likely to have been higher in survival value then that trait would have been selected for naturally and we would be born a carnivore or a herbivore. We aren't. We are omnivores. It is natures way. To do otherwise for any reason except life threatening food allergies is to go against nature.
Eating only red or yellow colored food, eating only food that is a fruit and not eating the plant itself (green beans-OK Asparagus or celery-nope) , eating eggs but not chickens, drinking cow's milk but not eating the cow, and on and on are artificial strictures placed on diet and not naturally acquired. Often unnatural dietary practices are cult based, OK religion make you feel better?
All through grade school I got fish on Friday so as to not antagonize Roman Catholics while the Jews got no consideration. (We had no Muslims) Ham is a wide spread Easter tradition, some sort of backlash, no doubt.
Nutritionally speaking, a natural diet rich in lesser processed foods that supplies whole grains, vegetables, meat in moderation and so forth IS a naturalistic diet and in the vast majority of cases is the best choice. It should come as no surprise that eating what your body is literally designed to eat is a good thing.
Food fads or avoiding foods or food groups because of some religious conviction, cult belief, or unwarranted feelings of dietary supremacy through extremism are not criminal acts unless forced on your children then child endangerment might come to play.
For the most part food faddists are essentially harmless unless you let their continual prattling about their supposed but non existent philosophical superiority elevate your blood pressure. There are exceptions like Susan Sarandon and other denizens of Holyweird who want animals declared sentient beings and therefore illegal to harm or to eat. They need to undergo a psych exam and get treatment.
We are what we are and got this way by a rather difficult series of tests and challenges which honed us to flourish as omnivores.
Of course there are excepttions like blue food. Blue food is just the best. Anyone eating blue food exclusively is certainly a superior being.
Hopefully humankind can and will adapt somehow to whatever climatic changes may occur. Will blue food eaters have an edge?
Pat
Eating only red or yellow colored food, eating only food that is a fruit and not eating the plant itself (green beans-OK Asparagus or celery-nope) , eating eggs but not chickens, drinking cow's milk but not eating the cow, and on and on are artificial strictures placed on diet and not naturally acquired. Often unnatural dietary practices are cult based, OK religion make you feel better?
All through grade school I got fish on Friday so as to not antagonize Roman Catholics while the Jews got no consideration. (We had no Muslims) Ham is a wide spread Easter tradition, some sort of backlash, no doubt.
Nutritionally speaking, a natural diet rich in lesser processed foods that supplies whole grains, vegetables, meat in moderation and so forth IS a naturalistic diet and in the vast majority of cases is the best choice. It should come as no surprise that eating what your body is literally designed to eat is a good thing.
Food fads or avoiding foods or food groups because of some religious conviction, cult belief, or unwarranted feelings of dietary supremacy through extremism are not criminal acts unless forced on your children then child endangerment might come to play.
For the most part food faddists are essentially harmless unless you let their continual prattling about their supposed but non existent philosophical superiority elevate your blood pressure. There are exceptions like Susan Sarandon and other denizens of Holyweird who want animals declared sentient beings and therefore illegal to harm or to eat. They need to undergo a psych exam and get treatment.
We are what we are and got this way by a rather difficult series of tests and challenges which honed us to flourish as omnivores.
Of course there are excepttions like blue food. Blue food is just the best. Anyone eating blue food exclusively is certainly a superior being.
Hopefully humankind can and will adapt somehow to whatever climatic changes may occur. Will blue food eaters have an edge?
Pat
Short Game
Veteran Member
Susan Sarandon can move in here if she wants, but I'm not about to fight Tim Robbins for her.
schweizer
Gold Member
patrick_g: The way you think the body is "designed" through evolution, and how others think the body is designed are quite at odds, but religion is not the point of this thread.
If you have land enough to raise cattle for beef, that's fine. But if you research, you will find a host of physicians (myself included) and dietitians who strongly disagree with your assertion that meat in moderation is the best choice of diet. People just don't want to hear that a predominantly vegetarian diet (incl. less dairy and eggs) is quite beneficial for the human body, along with exercise, no smoking, meditation/faith, etc. There's not a lot of money in keeping people healthy, though. On the other hand, there is a lot of money in various industries such as meat, dairy, pharmaceuticals, bioengineering, etc. etc.
If you have land enough to raise cattle for beef, that's fine. But if you research, you will find a host of physicians (myself included) and dietitians who strongly disagree with your assertion that meat in moderation is the best choice of diet. People just don't want to hear that a predominantly vegetarian diet (incl. less dairy and eggs) is quite beneficial for the human body, along with exercise, no smoking, meditation/faith, etc. There's not a lot of money in keeping people healthy, though. On the other hand, there is a lot of money in various industries such as meat, dairy, pharmaceuticals, bioengineering, etc. etc.
Egon
Epic Contributor
Pigs:
They require a lot of water which may not be available in arid regions. They can also carry Trichinosous which isn't good for humans. Makes them undesirable in hot arid places.
Pigs have excellent sanitary habits!:thumbsup:
Now how about Goats??
They can compete with humans on the veggie bit! So why are they not considered not Clean??Less meat, less egg, less dairy would have meant hard times for many of the people of the past.
Consider food as fuel and physical movement as burning fuel. Any imbalance between the two lead to overweight or starvation!
Well Newbury I'd say we are in the same boat. In fact this year we have substantially increased our garden area. I have orchards and of course, as I've said before here, I'm off the grid. I keep telling people that land is power and if you know how to utilize land efficiently you will be like the Amish. The difference between us and the Amish is that I'm using 21st century technology. There is no reason to shun science but it does have to be used wisely.
Speaking of wisely, not building a big house was very prudent of you.
With that said, I posed the question "When will oil run out?" as a metaphor, no one has any idea when it will run out, or when the grid will go down or if terrorism will change our lives in an instant.
Rob
ps:
Storms have little or no effect here beyond a tree limb hitting the house.
- Status
