Vegans

[Creepy Lurker]

What I don't like is the fact that it's typically socially acceptable to be a vegetarian but the opposite isn't true for carnivores. If you're not a big fan of eating what is essentially plants and leaves, then you're a weirdo.

 

 

What are you even on about? People don't bat an eyelid if you choose to eat meat.

 

Unless you're on about a diet consisting of 100% meat. If that's the case, you would be a bit of a weirdo in all honesty and wouldn't live very long.

 

Ah, okay.

 

I hadn't realised that going to someones house and demanding they cater for your beliefs was cool now.

 

Your argument here is totally idiotic. Why invite someone with different beliefs to your own round if you're only going to moan about their beliefs?

 

This is the most patronising comment I've read and the reason most people don't like veggies. If you genuinely believe that a meatless dish tastes better than meat then you're sadly mistaken.

 

This is the most stupid comment I've read and is the reason most people don't like arseholes. Firstly - as I've stated several times in this thread - I'm not even veggie. I probably eat more meat, fish and dairy than the majority of people on this site. It's not unknown for me to have steak for breakfast. Secondly, your last sentence is exactly the kind of nonsense that I've been on about all thread:

 

'If you genuinely believe that a meatless dish tastes better than meat then you're sadly mistaken.'

Do I believe that? I'm not even sure what it's supposed to mean, largely because food can't really be lumped into two groups of 'things which contain meat' and 'things which don't contain meat'. I do think that some things which don't contain meat are nicer than some things that do, but then again some things which contain meat taste better than some things that don't, and that whether or not a dish contains meat isn't the crucial factor in determining whether or not it'll taste nice. Then again, maybe I take the fact that I wasn't brought up on a diet consisting solely of chicken nuggets and potato fritters for granted a bit.

 

Slightly off topic rant:

 

Quorn isn't vegan. It contains eggs and sometimes milk too.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Creepy Lurker

[frankblack]

You are denying that humans have eaten meat through the latter stages of our evolution? You know, the part where we became the dominant life force on the planet?

 

Now, I'm not saying that eating meat made us a better species. But let's face it, it made us a better species.

 

I'm not going to claim to be an expert in biology or archaeology here, but I'm not going to deny that humans can eat meat. Some do not, in fact huge areas of India are vegetarian, for example.

 

Indian food is my favourite.

 

Here's a link in return:

 

http://rense.com/general20/meant.htm

 

"the idea that humans are natural vegetarians has "no scientific basis in fact," argues anatomist and primatologist John McArdle. Alarmed by this growing belief, McArdle, a vegetarian, says the human anatomy proves that people are omnivores.

 

"We obviously are not carnivores, but we are equally obviously not strict vegetarians, if you carefully examine the anatomical, physiological and fossil evidence," says McArdle, executive director of the Alternatives Research and Development Foundation in Eden Prairie, Minnesota.

 

According to a 1999 article in the journal The Ecologist, several of our physiological features "clearly indicate a design" for eating meat, including "our stomach's production of hydrochloric acid, something not found in herbivores. Furthermore, the human pancreas manufactures a full range of digestive enzymes to handle a wide variety of foods, both animal and vegetable."

 

Seems to be a difference of opinion between scientists (shock horror), with a number of the items in the article I linked contradicting some of the above.

[Bindy Badgy]

Quorn isn't vegan. It contains eggs and sometimes milk too.

 

The product I linked to is. It's a fairly new addition to their range.

[Ray Gin]

Seems to be a difference of opinion between scientists (shock horror), with a number of the items in the article I linked contradicting some of the above.

 

Given that your link was to a website with the title banner of "Original Christianity and Original Yoga", I say tish and fipsy.

 

Christians aren't exactly renowned for basing their beliefs on facts and scientific evidence.

[frankblack]

Given that your link was to a website with the title banner of "Original Christianity and Original Yoga", I say tish and fipsy.

 

Christians aren't exactly renowned for basing their beliefs on facts and scientific evidence.

 

Thats not what I saw when I looked at it at lunchtime, and it was the first item on the google search I did. In any case the facts listed are still valid.

 

Anyway, you claim that eating meat transformed us from apes into intelligent human beings, which I don't think you came anywhere close to proving. Its you that made that bold claim, and I'm just saying its bullshit, and it could be argued that eating meat is more damaging to your health in terms of cancer risk.

[Doctor FinnBarr]

 

What are you even on about? People don't bat an eyelid if you choose to eat meat.

 

Unless you're on about a diet consisting of 100% meat. If that's the case, you would be a bit of a weirdo in all honesty and wouldn't live very long.

 

 

 

Your argument here is totally idiotic. Why invite someone with different beliefs to your own round if you're only going to moan about their beliefs?

 

 

 

This is the most stupid comment I've read and is the reason most people don't like arseholes. Firstly - as I've stated several times in this thread - I'm not even veggie. I probably eat more meat, fish and dairy than the majority of people on this site. It's not unknown for me to have steak for breakfast. Secondly, your last sentence is exactly the kind of nonsense that I've been on about all thread:

 

'If you genuinely believe that a meatless dish tastes better than meat then you're sadly mistaken.'

Do I believe that? I'm not even sure what it's supposed to mean, largely because food can't really be lumped into two groups of 'things which contain meat' and 'things which don't contain meat'. I do think that some things which don't contain meat are nicer than some things that do, but then again some things which contain meat taste better than some things that don't, and that whether or not a dish contains meat isn't the crucial factor in determining whether or not it'll taste nice. Then again, maybe I take the fact that I wasn't brought up on a diet consisting solely of chicken nuggets and potato fritters for granted a bit.

 

 

 

Quorn isn't vegan. It contains eggs and sometimes milk too.

 

You don't eat nowt, your built like a feckin racing snake

 

[Jambothump]

Friends of my ex-wife were vegetarian, they thought it was too expensive buying meat. Other friends I have, who are vegetarian and also vegan ones, it's never an issue.

jt

[Norm]

 

Your argument here is totally idiotic. Why invite someone with different beliefs to your own round if you're only going to moan about their beliefs?

 

 

I don't. My wife does. She's also been told that it's annoying.

 

This is the most stupid comment I've read and is the reason most people don't like arseholes. Firstly - as I've stated several times in this thread - I'm not even veggie. I probably eat more meat, fish and dairy than the majority of people on this site. It's not unknown for me to have steak for breakfast. Secondly, your last sentence is exactly the kind of nonsense that I've been on about all thread:

 

'If you genuinely believe that a meatless dish tastes better than meat then you're sadly mistaken.'

Do I believe that? I'm not even sure what it's supposed to mean, largely because food can't really be lumped into two groups of 'things which contain meat' and 'things which don't contain meat'. I do think that some things which don't contain meat are nicer than some things that do, but then again some things which contain meat taste better than some things that don't, and that whether or not a dish contains meat isn't the crucial factor in determining whether or not it'll taste nice. Then again, maybe I take the fact that I wasn't brought up on a diet consisting solely of chicken nuggets and potato fritters for granted a bit.

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure it's piss easy to list foods into have meat and not have meat. After all, the food dish either has meat or it doesn't.

 

And I've never had a meal consisting of nuggets and fritters. I'm not sure why you even mentioned it unless you're stupidly insinuating that people who don't eat vegetarian meals live off junkfood.

[ToadKiller Dog]

I think the evidence is well shown that eating meat helped Humans evolve the larger brain to get us where we are .

Learning to hunt increased the need to communicate and develop tools which needed a bigger brain.

Meat diet also made it more possible to wean children earlier making it more possible to have more children over there life span in so increasing the spread of human population .

A recent study

My link

 

To me the period where early humans changed to a more meat based diet was the catalyst to the development of the bigger brain .

You cant have a big Brain and a big gut in evolutionary terms the earliest humans would not have got enough nutrients from a veg only diet to develop the big brain needed to get to where we are today .

 

Lots of good articles out in the interweb thing .

 

It would be interesting to see if a long term vegan diet through generations would have changes on the structure of the human body ,but clearly the time to see such possible change is way way beyond any life span .

Dont have a problem with a vegan or Veggie lifestyle its just not for me . I try to have as balanced a diet as possible .

 

I expect the large are in India and other areas where vegetarian lifestyle is the main is more to do with necessity of availability and demand incorporated into the religion rather than a great wish for a vegetarian diet .

[Governor Tarkin]

It's feck-all to do with health or morality. It's all about them feeling more self important than other people. Twats.

 

I don't need to be veggie to feel more self important than other people. So much so in fact that I refuse to lower myself to calling them twats.

Edited August 18, 2012 by Mark Brandon Read

[Creepy Lurker]

The product I linked to is. It's a fairly new addition to their range.

 

Ah right, my mistake. Apologies.

 

I wasn't really disagreeing with the main point anyway: it's actually very difficult to make genuinely ethical food purchases for a variety of reasons.

 

I don't. My wife does. She's also been told that it's annoying.

 

Maybe you shouldn't accept the invitation to eat at this other person's house, then, if having to do without meat for one evening is such an issue to you? You still haven't explained how serving things which you don't have an ethical objection to eating is going against your beliefs, but if it annoys you as much as this then the time could probably be more profitably spent with a psychiatrist anyway.

 

I'm pretty sure it's piss easy to list foods into have meat and not have meat. After all, the food dish either has meat or it doesn't. <br style="font-family: arial, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250); "><br style="font-family: arial, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250); ">And I've never had a meal consisting of nuggets and fritters. I'm not sure why you even mentioned it unless you're stupidly insinuating that people who don't eat vegetarian meals live off junkfood.

 

You're missing my point, which is unsurprising given the level of idiocy displayed in your posts so far on this topic.

 

You can group foods into 'dishes with meat' and 'dishes without meat', but it'd be a stupid thing to do; like grouping dishes into 'dishes with rice' and 'dishes without rice'. It isn't a decisive factor in whether or not something tastes good.

 

What I'm insinuating here is that people who think that food which doesn't contain meat can't taste good are suffering from having been brought up on a boring, unimaginative diet.

 

Here is a picture which sums up my current mental image of you at your wife's friend's house:

 

 

[dobmisterdobster]

Loving the hypocrisy in this thread.

A lot of people here are just as intolerant as the militant vegetarians they are complaining about.

[BoJack Horseman]

The more I think about it, the more I do see vegetarianism (for moral reasons) in the same way I see religion. Completely human concepts that stem from us over-thinking things just a bit too much. We're a predatory species. An apex predatory species at that. Do you think any other predators in the animal kingdom stop to think of the morality of what they're doing when chowing down on their prey? Or thank their god just before it?

[2NaFish]

The more I think about it, the more I do see vegetarianism (for moral reasons) in the same way I see religion. Completely human concepts that stem from us over-thinking things just a bit too much. We're a predatory species. An apex predatory species at that. Do you think any other predators in the animal kingdom stop to think of the morality of what they're doing when chowing down on their prey? Or thank their god just before it?

 

I'm sending you this message over a wireless internet connection which will then travel along a fibre optic cable at 2/3s the speed of light, i think any explanation of human behaviour being centred totally upon the animal kingdom is missing the point.

[moogsy]

I'm actually struggling to comprehend some of the posts on this thread.

 

What difference does it make if someone eats meat or not? Absolutely ridiculous thing to get worked up about

[Ray Gin]

Thats not what I saw when I looked at it at lunchtime, and it was the first item on the google search I did. In any case the facts listed are still valid.

 

Anyway, you claim that eating meat transformed us from apes into intelligent human beings, which I don't think you came anywhere close to proving. Its you that made that bold claim, and I'm just saying its bullshit, and it could be argued that eating meat is more damaging to your health in terms of cancer risk.

 

High protein diets allowed us to form larger brains. It also allowed us to survive through conditions where our sources of fruit and veg dried up.

 

Basically we got better.

[Ray Gin]

I think the evidence is well shown that eating meat helped Humans evolve the larger brain to get us where we are .

Learning to hunt increased the need to communicate and develop tools which needed a bigger brain.

Meat diet also made it more possible to wean children earlier making it more possible to have more children over there life span in so increasing the spread of human population .

A recent study

My link

 

To me the period where early humans changed to a more meat based diet was the catalyst to the development of the bigger brain .

You cant have a big Brain and a big gut in evolutionary terms the earliest humans would not have got enough nutrients from a veg only diet to develop the big brain needed to get to where we are today .

 

Lots of good articles out in the interweb thing .

 

It would be interesting to see if a long term vegan diet through generations would have changes on the structure of the human body ,but clearly the time to see such possible change is way way beyond any life span .

Dont have a problem with a vegan or Veggie lifestyle its just not for me . I try to have as balanced a diet as possible .

 

I expect the large are in India and other areas where vegetarian lifestyle is the main is more to do with necessity of availability and demand incorporated into the religion rather than a great wish for a vegetarian diet .

 

 

Exactly.

 

Denying that meat is a fundamental part of the evolution of our species is a bit like denying the holocaust to be honest.

[BoJack Horseman]

I'm sending you this message over a wireless internet connection which will then travel along a fibre optic cable at 2/3s the speed of light, i think any explanation of human behaviour being centred totally upon the animal kingdom is missing the point.

 

And you can only do that because we ate meat.

[moogsy]

And you can only do that because we ate meat.

 

So if someone now chooses to not eat meat what impact does that have on your life? Have you actually ever been hassled by a vegetarian for eating meat?

[frankblack]

High protein diets allowed us to form larger brains. It also allowed us to survive through conditions where our sources of fruit and veg dried up.

 

Basically we got better.

 

Again, do you have any proof of those statements or have you made it up again to dress up your agenda?

 

The basic fact is that there is little known by scientists about prehistoric man and our evolution from apes other than fairly recent remains found in caves, and views are changing constantly amongst archaeologists for example over Neanderthals. However, I bow to your superior knowledge, as you clearly think you are an expert in this subject.

[Creepy Lurker]

The more I think about it, the more I do see vegetarianism (for moral reasons) in the same way I see religion. Completely human concepts that stem from us over-thinking things just a bit too much. We're a predatory species. An apex predatory species at that. Do you think any other predators in the animal kingdom stop to think of the morality of what they're doing when chowing down on their prey? Or thank their god just before it?

 

Hang on, you're coming out with this utter hogwash and then accusing other people of 'over-thinking things a bit too much' (presumably as opposed to over-thinking things just the right amount)?

 

Just to humour what is a totally specious argument, what you're saying could be applied to any moral choice at all; morality is a man-made concept. Assuming that you don't believe in objective morality, are you arguing that all moral choices are the same as religion and that we shouldn't bother with them because animals don't?

 

Before I get accused of being a vegan again, I should probably point out that I'm eating a chicken breast wrapped in bacon and stuffed with cheese as I type this.

Edited August 18, 2012 by Creepy Lurker

[2NaFish]

And you can only do that because we ate meat.

 

no, not only. we did eat meat and it did happen but its not the only way it could've happened.

 

but that's not the point, it doesn't change what happened tens of thousands of years ago what we do today. time's arrow and all that. much like Charles green's etymology of bigotry defence - it matters not what it meant, only what it means. In the same vein, the fact that human development was aided by meat it makes no difference how we get our sustainence now. the two situations aren't comparable for a myriad of reasons.

[Ray Gin]

Again, do you have any proof of those statements or have you made it up again to dress up your agenda?

 

The basic fact is that there is little known by scientists about prehistoric man and our evolution from apes other than fairly recent remains found in caves, and views are changing constantly amongst archaeologists for example over Neanderthals. However, I bow to your superior knowledge, as you clearly think you are an expert in this subject.

 

Of course I have supporting links. My opinions are always backed up by facts. I don't believe in stuff that doesn't have supporting evidence.

 

Here's just a few out of hundreds to be found on the interweb:

 

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/99legacy/6-14-1999a.html

 

http://www.npr.org/2010/08/02/128849908/food-for-thought-meat-based-diet-made-us-smarter

 

http://www.nasw.org/eating-meat-drove-evolution-our-big-powerful-brain

[Norm]

[ quote name=Creepy Lurker' timestamp='1345284538' post='3105127]

 

Maybe you shouldn't accept the invitation to eat at this other person's house, then, if having to do without meat for one evening is such an issue to you? You still haven't explained how serving things which you don't have an ethical objection to eating is going against your beliefs, but if it annoys you as much as this then the time could probably be more profitably spent with a psychiatrist anyway.

 

 

One, I already refuse to eat at theirs. Two, I don't recall saying it did go against my beliefs. Can you point out where I did and I'll retract it? It might take you a while.

 

 

 

You're missing my point, which is unsurprising given the level of idiocy displayed in your posts so far on this topic.

 

You can group foods into 'dishes with meat' and 'dishes without meat', but it'd be a stupid thing to do; like grouping dishes into 'dishes with rice' and 'dishes without rice'. It isn't a decisive factor in whether or not something tastes good.

 

What I'm insinuating here is that people who think that food which doesn't contain meat can't taste good are suffering from having been brought up on a boring, unimaginative diet.

 

In your opinion. In my opinion, I've yet to have a vegetarian meal that tastes better than a comparable meal containing meat. So in my experience, yes, meat can be a deciding factor on whether a meal tastes good or not.

 

It's not a matter of an unimaginative diet, but a matter of taste. By your logic, those vegetarians who refuse meat due to the taste are also having an unimaginative diet. I've tried vegetarian dishes. In my experience, I've not enjoyed any of them ( pasta with a cheese sauce excluded).

Edited August 18, 2012 by Normthebarman

[frankblack]

Of course I have supporting links. My opinions are always backed up by facts. I don't believe in stuff that doesn't have supporting evidence.

 

Here's just a few out of hundreds to be found on the interweb:

 

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/99legacy/6-14-1999a.html

 

http://www.npr.org/2010/08/02/128849908/food-for-thought-meat-based-diet-made-us-smarter

 

http://www.nasw.org/eating-meat-drove-evolution-our-big-powerful-brain

 

Had a quick skim of those links and they are all theories as expected since I don't believe scientists have evidence anywhere near back 2.5m years ago for human evolution.

 

In fact, one of those articles actually said that human brains having evolved to what we have now, means that vegetarian lifestyle is perfectly healthy. Eating meat may in fact increase your risk of cancer or heart disease.

[Bindy Badgy]

Had a quick skim of those links and they are all theories as expected since I don't believe scientists have evidence anywhere near back 2.5m years ago for human evolution.

 

Do you know what theory means?

 

For something to be considered a theory there needs to be a great deal of supporting evidence.

Edited August 18, 2012 by Stokesy

[frankblack]

Do you know what theory means?

 

For something to be considered a theory it needs to have a great deal of supporting evidence.

 

A theory is not a fact (as the other poster claimed), but merely an educated guess.

 

The one true fact is that there isn't enough evidence to say how humans evolved, and that renders the linked articles irrelevant to their argument.

Edited August 18, 2012 by frankblack

[Bindy Badgy]

A theory is not a fact (as the other poster claimed), but merely an educated guess.

 

You don't know what theory means, in the scientific context at least.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

 

Going way off topic here though so I'll leave it at that.

Edited August 18, 2012 by Stokesy

[ToadKiller Dog]

Do you know what theory means?

 

For something to be considered a theory there needs to be a great deal of supporting evidence.

 

And in that there is plenty of evidence from bones which were clearly butchered by early tools ,the human tape worm and it links to dogs and Hyenas , the teeth/bones of rare early humanoids(not sure if thats the right term ) . Evidence from watching current day Primates and other animals ,its well known that predators need to be cleverer than the prey ie one step ahead to survive . Experimentation in labs .

I would say the evidence clearly points to the fact that the discovery of eating meat allowed our Brains to grow , developed communication , made it possible to wean offspring an produce larger families quicker .The Human race could not have evolved by just foraging on nuts ,shoots and berries . You cant have a big brain and a big stomach

My link

We have archaeology , anthropology ,Zoology ,scientific evidence to back up this theory .

There is enough evidence at this time to accept this as fact .

 

This doesnt mean that modern man cant survive on a vegetarian or Vegan diet (though a lot i know do take supplements )we have the knowledge and infer-structure to do so . Though i imagine a full shift to a vegan/veg society would create problems of its own in a longer term ,though its not likely .

Its a lifestyle choice and in some ways a healthy one compared with our current western dietary practices .

[2NaFish]

A theory is not a fact (as the other poster claimed), but merely an educated guess.

 

The one true fact is that there isn't enough evidence to say how humans evolved, and that renders the linked articles irrelevant to their argument.

 

ahahahaha.

 

IT'S ONLY A THEORY!

 

There's no such thing as gravity - its only a theory.

[frankblack]

You don't know what theory means, in the scientific context at least.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

 

Going way off topic here though so I'll leave it at that.

 

I'm well aware of what Scientific Theory is which is why my claim that using theories based on substantially incomplete data is flawed and ineligible to use as fact. The theories in question fill in the huge gaps of missing evidence with assumptions. The more assumptions you add the less tangible the theory is.

 

As we say in my field, Software Development, assumptions are the mother of all ****-ups.

[frankblack]

ahahahaha.

 

IT'S ONLY A THEORY!

 

There's no such thing as gravity - its only a theory.

 

Shite example, taking this thread completely off topic. Well done.

 

We can see gravity and prove it as its all around us, yet our ancestors from 2.5 million years ago are not and neither is the evidence of their existence - lifestyle, and largely human remains.

 

To link my earlier statements, the scientists are still in dispute over the evolution of man in terms of Neanderthals and modern man. Where is the evidence of why Neanderthals were wiped out or did they inter-breed with modern humans to live on today as Hibs fans, for example?

 

If they can't prove something as relatively modern in human history, how can they prove the development of humans from apes?

Edited August 18, 2012 by frankblack

[milky_26]

Shite example, taking this thread completely off topic. Well done.

 

We can see gravity and prove it as its all around us, yet our ancestors from 2.5 million years ago are not and neither is the evidence of their existence - lifestyle, and largely human remains.

 

To link my earlier statements, the scientists are still in dispute over the evolution of man in terms of Neanderthals and modern man. Where is the evidence of why Neanderthals were wiped out or did they inter-breed with modern humans to live on today as Hibs fans, for example?

 

If they can't prove something as relatively modern in human history, how can they prove the development of humans from apes?

the definitely was inter-breeding as our DNA is between 1-3% neanderthal

[ToadKiller Dog]

We can see gravity and prove it as its all around us, yet our ancestors from 2.5 million years ago are not and neither is the evidence of their existence - lifestyle, and largely human remains.

 

Homo habilis (est between 23 and 14 million years ago , earliest evidence of tool use and butchering of carrion .

Yes there is there is plenty documented evidence such as skulls teeth,bones and flint shavings .

Science differs on many understanding and the linage but its pretty firm that we developed the use of tools through eating meat and meat developed the brain . I think that this theory is as good as fact .

[john brownlee]

no, not only. we did eat meat and it did happen but its not the only way it could've happened.

 

but that's not the point, it doesn't change what happened tens of thousands of years ago what we do today. time's arrow and all that. much like Charles green's etymology of bigotry defence - it matters not what it meant, only what it means. In the same vein, the fact that human development was aided by meat it makes no difference how we get our sustainence now. the two situations aren't comparable for a myriad of reasons.

so what you are saying is because we use cars we should lose our legs stupid arrugment meat is good for you and so are veg but lose one and the balance has gone thats why we are human. If you watch nature programmes they will tell you that we as humans progressed because we eat meat,and had a vary and diverse diet which in turn developed our bigger brain. but it was the change to meat that made the difference, the next two animals in the intellectual scale are chimps and dolphins both are meat eaters, just like us if fact some say it was the change to sea food that made the difference

[2NaFish]

so what you are saying is because we use cars we should lose our legs

 

no, no I'm not. thanks.

[2NaFish]

Shite example, taking this thread completely off topic. Well done.

 

We can see gravity and prove it as its all around us, yet our ancestors from 2.5 million years ago are not and neither is the evidence of their existence - lifestyle, and largely human remains.

 

To link my earlier statements, the scientists are still in dispute over the evolution of man in terms of Neanderthals and modern man. Where is the evidence of why Neanderthals were wiped out or did they inter-breed with modern humans to live on today as Hibs fans, for example?

 

If they can't prove something as relatively modern in human history, how can they prove the development of humans from apes?

 

we can see gravity? go on then, show me gravity. not its effects, but gravity. the effects you are talking about is actually invisible unicorns.

 

newton's is just a theory. (the reason I picked a shite example is because your point is inane)

[john brownlee]

the trouble with vegies and vegans they are very blinkered people in my time on this planet i have had the missfortuone to meat some them and they are the mosst selfish people I have ever meat they expect me or the misses to alter our way of life for an evening and demand that no meat is served and on one or two ocassion would not sit at the table even though we thought it was oK to have fish, egg and chesse and make alternative arrangements, but give them only food they wanted which in that case was salad and carrotts. whereas when we go to their house we have no choice but to eat their rabbit food yea but it was allnright for them to smoke pot all night... fleckin wa***ers

[john brownlee]

no, no I'm not. thanks.

so what are you saying

 

 

we develop and naturally change or are we in some sort of time bubble before apes when we only at friut and veg ask yourself why are our teeth like they are, should if we were veggis have teeth like cows or elephants

 

al the veggies I know are stuck in the past and socialists, and basically thick as mince and won't move on. so as I've said before never argue with an idiot as you cant win because they ware you down

[2NaFish]

they ware you down

 

Wear.

 

I'm saying our evolution in to the dominant species on earth could have happened another way. Walter said it could only have happened that way. Not true. Beyond that, i'm saying that if you want to be a vegetarian, it's not going to harm the past, as that's impossible. And since we can know how it may affect future evolution, there's no point discussing it; beyond that, there's no reason in the modern world for a vegetarian to be nutritionally deficient, so it's a moot point.

[Governor Tarkin]

Cracking thread guys. Good work OP

 

no, not only. we did eat meat and it did happen but its not the only way it could've happened.

 

but that's not the point, it doesn't change what happened tens of thousands of years ago what we do today. time's arrow and all that. much like Charles green's etymology of bigotry defence - it matters not what it meant, only what it means. In the same vein, the fact that human development was aided by meat it makes no difference how we get our sustainence now. the two situations aren't comparable for a myriad of reasons.

 

2Na', that's a right good post man

[Juan Rom?n Riquelme]

What I don't like is the fact that it's typically socially acceptable to be a vegetarian but the opposite isn't true for carnivores. If you're not a big fan of eating what is essentially plants and leaves, then you're a weirdo.

Edited August 19, 2012 by Captain Haddock

[Governor Tarkin]

so what are you saying

 

 

we develop and naturally change or are we in some sort of time bubble before apes when we only at friut and veg ask yourself why are our teeth like they are, should if we were veggis have teeth like cows or elephants

 

al the veggies I know are stuck in the past and socialists, and basically thick as mince and won't move on. so as I've said before never argue with an idiot as you cant win because they ware you down

 

Now, John, I'm only going to quote one of your posts here to save space, but going on the evidence both of the above provide - you are either an incredibly unimaginative troll, or a gibbering semi-literate ignoramus.

Edited August 19, 2012 by Mark Brandon Read

[frankblack]

we can see gravity? go on then, show me gravity. not its effects, but gravity. the effects you are talking about is actually invisible unicorns.

 

newton's is just a theory. (the reason I picked a shite example is because your point is inane)

 

We can see the effects of gravity and its theories can be proved, so yet again a shite example.

 

My point on many theories being subjective is perfectly valid if they lack enough evidence to prove them. Something that is subjective cannot be taken as fact.

 

As for skeletal remains etc, we still haven't got the missing links that show how humans developed from apes. Perhaps we never will as we are going back so far in history and don't know what to look for.

 

I'm not sure using teeth as evidence of us being carnivore is accurate as other primates have similar teeth to ours and they don't eat meat. Carnivores teeth are typically sharp whereas our front teeth are not. If you think the term omnivore is more appropriate then our teeth fit both this and herbivore characteristics, so the debate goes back to brain capacity.

 

I think this thread has gone waay off topic but this side-debate is going to end in stalemate.

[2NaFish]

We can see the effects of gravity and its theories can be proved, so yet again a shite example.

 

to do so is to assume that the theory is correct before its proven; its just a circular argument. show me gravity; you say its perfectly obvious (surely that's just your subject (and in this case ignorant) opinion).

 

by the same token I can say that we can see the effects of the invisible unicorns and through that the theory can be proved.

[Creepy Lurker]

One, I already refuse to eat at theirs. Two, I don't recall saying it did go against my beliefs. Can you point out where I did and I'll retract it? It might take you a while.

 

If it doesn't go against your beliefs, why is it such a big deal for you? Eating meat does go against theirs, which is my whole point.

 

In your opinion. In my opinion, I've yet to have a vegetarian meal that tastes better than a comparable meal containing meat. So in my experience, yes, meat can be a deciding factor on whether a meal tastes good or not.

 

It's not a matter of an unimaginative diet, but a matter of taste. By your logic, those vegetarians who refuse meat due to the taste are also having an unimaginative diet. I've tried vegetarian dishes. In my experience, I've not enjoyed any of them ( pasta with a cheese sauce excluded).

 

Given the general tone of your posts throughout this thread, I genuinely don't believe that you've ever given 'vegetarian' food a real chance (inverted commas because I think it's a stupid distinction to make). Like the majority of boneheads who spout these opinions, you've probably eaten the few that you have tried having already assumed that you weren't going to like it.

 

Is this patronising? Probably. Then again, I genuinely do think you seem like a total idiot and deserve to be spoken to as such.

 

What makes you think that I don't think that vegetarians who say that they don't eat meat because they don't like the taste are also unimaginative? I don't remember having said that, so - and this turn of phrase may be familiar to you - can you point out where I did and I'll retract it? It might take a while.

[JKBMod 3]

Let's lower the abuse on this thread please. I realise it's an emotive topic but let's cool it a bit.

 

M3

[Beverley]

So if someone now chooses to not eat meat what impact does that have on your life? Have you actually ever been hassled by a vegetarian for eating meat?

 

actually i sort of was once

 

a girl i was at college with, hippy family, called herself sky blue and never confirmed if that was her real name or not, so you can see the type of person we're dealing with already

 

 

few of us went to the pub after a class for a few sherries... some of us had scoff. i wet for the burger and was subjected to a rant about how wrong it was, animals have feelings, it was cruel, do you know how they slaughter etc... she went on and on, the rest of us struggling not to laugh at her. she left the pub after one of the guys turned round and pointed out her boots were leather.

[Ray Gin]

Had a quick skim of those links and they are all theories as expected since I don't believe scientists have evidence anywhere near back 2.5m years ago for human evolution.

 

In fact, one of those articles actually said that human brains having evolved to what we have now, means that vegetarian lifestyle is perfectly healthy. Eating meat may in fact increase your risk of cancer or heart disease.

 

I haven't disputed that eating strictly a veg only diet now could be healthy.

 

We have purely been debating as to whether eating meat can be considered a part of human nature and whether it aided our development as a species. Are you willing to now accept that the answer to both of these is yes?

[J.C 7]

I knew a vegan once.

 

Arsehole.