The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

That's like saying you don't trust a single person that's overweight, because they do not acknowledge that their diet is causing them to be unhealthy, and this means they're stupid. Most fat people know what they're doing to their bodies, they just think the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.

Same for Scientists who eat meat. A Scientist is allowed to do whatever the hell he wants. If I met a dentist, qualified doctor etc, and he had 30 years of dentistry experience, I'm not going to ignore his advice because his teeth aren't perfect. Just because he knows something, doesn't mean he has to follow the facts, he can do whatever the hell he wants.
Original post by redferry
That ain't going to save any elephants though :wink:


Some of the other charities I listed will. Personally, I think it's more important to focus on buying up land and protecting that as wild habitats (as you go on to discuss below).

Actually elephant conservation is bloody rolling in dosh, wish we had that much for wild dogs and cheetahs :frown: They're endangered as well, not just bloody 'vulnerable', pssshh

I always say the best thing anyone can do for conservation is to get filthy stinking rich and buy up land and protect it/donate to world land trust. Wish I had done it, I'd be having far more of an impact than I do now...


I totally agree with you there, it's important to give all endangered living things a fighting chance. Protecting habitat is the way to do it.

Did you ever read about the multi millionaire publisher, Felix Dennis? When he died he bought an entire forest for exactly this reason. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/gardenstovisit/10976303/Felix-Dennis-and-his-forest-of-good-fortune.html
Original post by Roving Fish
Glad to see that you got a nice looking theme finally! :smile:


Do you like it? I'm still not sure. I think it needs to be more magaziney on the homepage.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Yes. :five:

Also, if you have any actual nature under your control, look after it, care for it, think about how it can be pro-wildlife. This can be anything from a patch of grass outside your back door to a park you regularly visit or a patch of countryside you care about and be part of. There are an awful lot of humans, but the more we all think and care about what we do and our surroundings, the better things will get.


Exactly. Recycle, give nature a helping hand. Doesn't take much but really helps.

One thing I learnt is to be organic as a gardener, and never use compost with peat in.
What a dumb thing to say.

People are not allowed to care for the planet but eat meat? What a pile of rubbish.
This saddens me greatly. It never sits well in my stomach but the arguments for and against are still there and I cannot deny that. Personally it sickens me that an animal whether it be a dog or elephant is killed for nothing more than fun, yet I still eat meat for pleasure of taste, so do I have any right to berate someone else?

I do agree it is a little sadistic to get so much joy from the process of taking a life, I see it as no different to taking a human life in all honesty. But I've actually been part of the process so perhaps seeing life leave an animal has scarred me.

The fact that we choose whether or not this animal deserves to live or die has never sat well for me either, sure I understand we will know better but to so casually say this living thing should lose it's life for the better or others is just.. I have no words. Imagine a scenario where you learn that your life will be taken to 'preserve nature'.
(edited 8 years ago)
Have you ever studied, well anything at all?

Your arguments seem way too similar to that of a year 7 religious studies teacher who failed their education and became a teacher.

My arguments were perfectly valid and related - they related a profession, to what they know against how they actually act. Just like you did, and I proved how ridiculous you're being.

Just because they're a little bad for the planet, doesn't mean we should stop it all together. There are too many things that we do that are much worse for the planet than eating meat, but I bet you wouldn't give them up.
No they're not. A hypocrite would be someone who campaigns to stop eating meat for environments sake, but then eats meat themselves.

Someone is not a hypocrite if they simply acknowledge a primary/ secondary effect of their actions, but still choose to do them regardless, because they feel the positives outweight the negatives. That's called choice, not hypocrisy.

How can you even compare picking up something from a supermarket against physically raping or torturing an animal. Lmaooo
Original post by Captain Jack
Some of the other charities I listed will. Personally, I think it's more important to focus on buying up land and protecting that as wild habitats (as you go on to discuss below).



I totally agree with you there, it's important to give all endangered living things a fighting chance. Protecting habitat is the way to do it.

Did you ever read about the multi millionaire publisher, Felix Dennis? When he died he bought an entire forest for exactly this reason. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/gardenstovisit/10976303/Felix-Dennis-and-his-forest-of-good-fortune.html


Yeah he's such a legend. I wish more rich people were that cool.
I don't understand the point of trophy hunting or fun hunting. Why would you kill a live animal for fun?

I understand how sometimes you feel the urge to play a gun or something, wouldn't a shooting range be enough? Isn't this is why video games exist?

Poor elephant :frown:
Original post by redferry
Yeah he's such a legend. I wish more rich people were that cool.


Isn't extinction at like it's highest rates ever at the moment? Not sure, just remember reading about it.
Reply 151
You sound like the kinda guy to watch Cowspiracy and then talk about it to a bunch of uninterested people at a party.

I just bought a new cookbook with a fantastic recipe for five spice duck. I share the same sentiment as @DiddyDec. I will cook this duck in your honour. I will name my slaughtered duck rock climber86 and it will be beautiful and crispy, just like you.
It's not my remit to talk about those things - I study the effect of climate change on one species, which has massiveley benefitted from cattle ranching in my study site so it'd be pretty hypocritical to knock it.

I'm not really sure you understand how science works to be honest.

You refused to acknowledge my argument ok killing deer at all so why bring it back up? I'm a conservationist, of course I think killing deer to protect biodiversity is important and right. Unlike you, who'd rather see them as the only species left in the UK countryside as long as no animal dies by human hands.
so not eating meat because of its impact on climate change is the same as not acknowledging diet as one of the biggest contributors to climate change now.


Riiiiiight
Original post by ComputerMaths97
Isn't extinction at like it's highest rates ever at the moment? Not sure, just remember reading about it.


Probably not ever, but it is believed we are undergoing a 6th mass extinction event yes.
Reply 155
If somebody offered to season me in aromatic five spice and fry me on a medium-high heat I'd happily oblidge.

Would you stop wild animals from eating eachother?

Savage? I'm the kind of guy to snort cocaine off a chicken breast. You're damn f***ing right i'm savage. I'm the Wolf of Vegan Street, baby.
(edited 8 years ago)
But without biodiversity most animals would die? Your logic is so twisted :/ you'd rather deer suffered a long slow starvation than a quick bullet to the head...

Of course culling people would be more beneficial but obviously that isn't an option, not that is want it to be, there are better more ethical ways to bring the human population down that unfortunateley aren't available in animals (education, contraception)
Original post by redferry
But without biodiversity most animals would die? Your logic is so twisted :/ you'd rather deer suffered a long slow starvation than a quick bullet to the head...

Of course culling people would be more beneficial but obviously that isn't an option, not that is want it to be, there are better more ethical ways to bring the human population down that unfortunateley aren't available in animals (education, contraception)


What if the next holocaust is committed by conservationist extremists :eek:
Reply 158
If they could, they probably would though....
Original post by redferry
Yeah he's such a legend. I wish more rich people were that cool.


Such a useful inheritance to leave.

I think probably a lot of rich people would like to be more like that and some good-natured and friendly nudging would produce more. It isn't all a picture of greedy bastards wrecking the planet to build bigger and bigger yachts, although that's also part of the picture.

Latest

Trending

Trending