If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
On 6/17/2011 9:26 PM, Dutch wrote:
"Char" wrote in message news On 6/17/2011 9:20 AM, Mr.Smartypants wrote: Having said all that, all you and your friends are doing is repeating the same crap over and over again and not adding anything new to the debate so why do it?- We've spent YEARS trying to convince Goobs that NO cows are being raised for 12 years for the singular purpose of becoming pet food. Why don't YOU try convincing him? (he's very stupid and an extremely slow learner) I have a life, that's why. You should try it sometime. Why do you care what one person thinks? Does it really matter? All you are doing is feeding the troll. That's rather stupid. He *is* the troll. I don't know which of you is a troll, might be all of you but anyone that reads usenet knows not to post back to one. That alone has ruined many groups and this effects all the groups you post to. Turn the computer off, go outside and get some fresh air. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
On 6/20/2011 11:25 PM, dh@. wrote:
"Dutch" along with Goo believed, for years, that some cattle are raised for 12 years for no other reason than to become pet food. Mr. Smartypants and myself told them how absurd the idea was. They still have absurd ideas. One of them is that having appreciation for when decent animal welfare results in lives of positive value for millions of livestock animals, is somehow sophistry. They can't explain how, but they claim to believe it is. Why do you feel the need to repeat this for the 100th time? Don't you have anything new to bring to the discussion? Obviously not, which means you are trolling. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
dh@. wrote
Eliminationists want people to get the mistaken impression that the misnomer would provide rights for domestic and wild animals...for all animals. Which "eliminationists"? If you mean extreme ARAs as I think you do then your statement is false. Those ARAs hold the belief that "domestication" should cease to exist period, therefore they don't believe, nor do they intend, that AR would provide rights for domestic animals. If you mean moderate ARAs who are mainly concerned with animal welfare then you are also incorrect, those ARAs do in fact believe in and lobby for rights for domestic animals. As far as wild animals are concerned, all ARAs believe in some form of rights or protection for them as well. So you're wrong on all counts, as always. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 08:28:17 -0400, Char wrote:
On 6/16/2011 6:42 PM, dh@. wrote: On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:47:36 -0400, wrote: On 6/13/2011 3:39 PM, dh@. wrote: On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 21:09:16 -0400, wrote: On 6/9/2011 10:10 PM, AT DOT Gandalf wrote: On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:26:17 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote: Goo would like us to believe that what's on the label is what's in the can, because that's what he believes. Goo apparently thinks herds and flocks of livestock animals are raised for no other reason than to be used for pet food: "It's established: cattle and other animals are expressly raised to be pet food." - Goo "Cattle are specifically bred into existence to be pet food. There have been several citations to support this." - Goo and so believes labels saying things like the following really do represent what's inside: cheeseburger, turkey and bacon, lamb and rice, roasted turkey medley, porterhouse steak, smoked bacon and egg, top sirloin, rib-eye steak, steak florentine, oven roasted beef burgundy, steak tips sonoma, roast turkey, new york strip, filet mignon The poor Goober is still somewhat confused though, even though he feels certain animals are raised only to become pet food, he's very VERY much afraid to say what he thinks happens to the choice cuts of meat. We've narrowed it down to him pretty much having to believe they are used in pet food and the labels on the cans accurately represent what's inside. But why is Goo so afraid to say that's what he believes? After considering it for a while I've come to the conclusion that Goo's poor little brain is disturbed because it can't figure out why rib-eye for dogs is so much cheaper than it is for humans, and he also can't figure out why a can of rib-eye dog food isn't several times more expensive than a can of cheeseburger dog food, etc. LOL!!! Another GOD DAMNED Usenet TROLL. Please DO NOT FEED THIS CROSS POSTING TROLL!!!! You can start by not cross posting it. Duh! There's nothing wrong with cross posting. There is something wrong with cross posting troll posts. You don't appreciate the significance. Some eliminationists like to believe that animals live and die ONLY to become pet food, meaning that more animals experience life because of it which is incorrect. Even so they believe it and so they are opposed to it. There is no commercial pet food company anywhere that does that. Dog food is almost always made from leftovers from human foods, and that will sometimes include sawdust, roadkill, pea hulls, beet pulp, and worse! However, even if it were true why would anyone oppose it? They are opposed to all animals who live and die in human captivity, regardless of the quality of their lives. All they want humans to contribute to are the deaths of wildlife, but not to the lives of domestic animals. Goo believed that some cattle are raised for twelve years for no other reason than to become pet food. If there are any other people that clueless, they should learn the truth already. Animals used for food are used very young when they are tender. How could it be cost efficient to feed an animal for 12 years before you butcher it? It could not, which shows you how out of touch these people are. Just on the surface it makes no sense, then when you look at it in a little more detail it gets even more absurd. Mr. Smartypants asked Goo what he wants people to think happens to the choice cuts of meat from his pet food livestock and Goo is afraid to say. He is *very!!* afraid to say, yet we know he still believes such livestock are raised. Since Goo's afraid to say, we came to the concusion that he must believe they go in the cans and what the label says is what's realy in there. What else *could* he believe? That brings Goo to the problem of wondering why steak is the same price as burger in pet food, but so much more expensive in human food.... Your average chicken in a supermarket is only 8-10 weeks old. Having said all that, all you and your friends are doing is repeating the same crap over and over again and not adding anything new to the debate so why do it? I've been way past those people since before I ever got a computer. I was beyond where some of them will ever be when I was in grade school, and many kids still are today. One of these people claims to have a PhD in math, yet he also said: "I don't believe the distinction between "lives of positive value" and "lives of negative value" means anything." - Rupert The meaning of that distinction was understood by us when we were in grade school...fifth or sixth grade. Yet someone claiming to have a PhD can't comprehend it. That same person claims to lecture medical research students about not being speciesist when every single one of the people he claims to lecture knows far more about that subject than he ever will. That same person claims to also lecture college kids about piggeries, yet he doesn't know the value of using farrowing crates. Goo has lied to people that he has a PhD in economics, yet he's the one who came up with and believed the stupid 12 year pet food cattle idea. They are like children who never grew up and never will, but you sort of have hope. And there's always the hope that you could prevent other people from becoming misnomer addicts if they're considering it...at least you could hope that back in the days before everyone retreated to the safety of moderated forums. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
On 6/20/2011 11:25 PM, dh@. wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 21:00:36 -0400, wrote: On 6/17/2011 3:25 PM, Dutch wrote: wrote Having said all that, all you and your friends are doing is repeating the same crap over and over again and not adding anything new to the debate so why do it? It's the broken record tactic. If he makes the same meaningless sound often enough he believes eventually someone will have to listen to him. He's also working on the "last word wins" theory. It's the result of a bankrupt mind. So what? Why is it important to worry so much about one person and one idea? They don't want people to get the idea that it could be ethically equivalent or supior to provide lives of positive value for the animals we raise for food, instead of elimininating them entirely. The worst thing that could happen for eliminationists, would be for it to become popular for people to appreciate when animals raised for food get to enjoy decent lives of positive value. But that is already happening. Many of us buy eggs from chickens that haven't been factory farmed and lived wonderful lives running loose eating bugs and other good things. We also buy beef from cattle that were grass fed in huge fields living wonderful lives running around as cattle should, and killed in a humane fashion. Same story with pigs and other farm animals. Why do you care what "they" think? You think by trolling you will change someone's mind? Are you really that naive? |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 06:59:31 -0400, Char wrote:
On 6/17/2011 9:26 PM, Dutch wrote: "Char" wrote in message news On 6/17/2011 9:20 AM, Mr.Smartypants wrote: Having said all that, all you and your friends are doing is repeating the same crap over and over again and not adding anything new to the debate so why do it?- We've spent YEARS trying to convince Goobs that NO cows are being raised for 12 years for the singular purpose of becoming pet food. Why don't YOU try convincing him? (he's very stupid and an extremely slow learner) I have a life, that's why. You should try it sometime. Why do you care what one person thinks? Does it really matter? All you are doing is feeding the troll. That's rather stupid. He *is* the troll. I don't know which of you is a troll, might be all of you Everyone is a troll. Every thread is a troll. Every one of them. "Dutch" along with Goo believed, for years, that some cattle are raised for 12 years for no other reason than to become pet food. Mr. Smartypants and myself told them how absurd the idea was. They still have absurd ideas. One of them is that having appreciation for when decent animal welfare results in lives of positive value for millions of livestock animals, is somehow sophistry. They can't explain how, but they claim to believe it is. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 18:27:23 -0700, "Dutch" wrote:
"Char" wrote in message news On 6/17/2011 3:25 PM, Dutch wrote: "Char" wrote Having said all that, all you and your friends are doing is repeating the same crap over and over again and not adding anything new to the debate so why do it? It's the broken record tactic. If he makes the same meaningless sound often enough he believes eventually someone will have to listen to him. He's also working on the "last word wins" theory. It's the result of a bankrupt mind. So what? Why is it important to worry so much about one person and one idea? Turn the computer off, go outside and get some fresh air. Trying to be annoying to someone is the pinnacle of achievement for him Eliminationists want people to get the mistaken impression that the misnomer would provide rights for domestic and wild animals...for all animals. I point out that the misnomer would NOT provide rights for domestic animals, and also that afawk it wouldn't provide rights for many if any wild animals either. It most certainly would NOT provide rights for all animals, but only for some select few IF!!! any at all. Eliminationists are "annoyd" that I point out the truth but I feel it's worse for you/"them" to try to create the false impression, than it is for me to annoy eliminationists by pointing out the dishonesty they're trying to get away with. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 21:00:36 -0400, Char wrote:
On 6/17/2011 3:25 PM, Dutch wrote: "Char" wrote Having said all that, all you and your friends are doing is repeating the same crap over and over again and not adding anything new to the debate so why do it? It's the broken record tactic. If he makes the same meaningless sound often enough he believes eventually someone will have to listen to him. He's also working on the "last word wins" theory. It's the result of a bankrupt mind. So what? Why is it important to worry so much about one person and one idea? They don't want people to get the idea that it could be ethically equivalent or supior to provide lives of positive value for the animals we raise for food, instead of elimininating them entirely. The worst thing that could happen for eliminationists, would be for it to become popular for people to appreciate when animals raised for food get to enjoy decent lives of positive value. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
On 6/20/2011 11:20 PM, dh@. wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 08:28:17 -0400, wrote: On 6/16/2011 6:42 PM, dh@. wrote: On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:47:36 -0400, wrote: On 6/13/2011 3:39 PM, dh@. wrote: On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 21:09:16 -0400, wrote: On 6/9/2011 10:10 PM, AT DOT Gandalf wrote: On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:26:17 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote: Goo would like us to believe that what's on the label is what's in the can, because that's what he believes. Goo apparently thinks herds and flocks of livestock animals are raised for no other reason than to be used for pet food: "It's established: cattle and other animals are expressly raised to be pet food." - Goo "Cattle are specifically bred into existence to be pet food. There have been several citations to support this." - Goo and so believes labels saying things like the following really do represent what's inside: cheeseburger, turkey and bacon, lamb and rice, roasted turkey medley, porterhouse steak, smoked bacon and egg, top sirloin, rib-eye steak, steak florentine, oven roasted beef burgundy, steak tips sonoma, roast turkey, new york strip, filet mignon The poor Goober is still somewhat confused though, even though he feels certain animals are raised only to become pet food, he's very VERY much afraid to say what he thinks happens to the choice cuts of meat. We've narrowed it down to him pretty much having to believe they are used in pet food and the labels on the cans accurately represent what's inside. But why is Goo so afraid to say that's what he believes? After considering it for a while I've come to the conclusion that Goo's poor little brain is disturbed because it can't figure out why rib-eye for dogs is so much cheaper than it is for humans, and he also can't figure out why a can of rib-eye dog food isn't several times more expensive than a can of cheeseburger dog food, etc. LOL!!! Another GOD DAMNED Usenet TROLL. Please DO NOT FEED THIS CROSS POSTING TROLL!!!! You can start by not cross posting it. Duh! There's nothing wrong with cross posting. There is something wrong with cross posting troll posts. You don't appreciate the significance. Some eliminationists like to believe that animals live and die ONLY to become pet food, meaning that more animals experience life because of it which is incorrect. Even so they believe it and so they are opposed to it. There is no commercial pet food company anywhere that does that. Dog food is almost always made from leftovers from human foods, and that will sometimes include sawdust, roadkill, pea hulls, beet pulp, and worse! However, even if it were true why would anyone oppose it? They are opposed to all animals who live and die in human captivity, regardless of the quality of their lives. All they want humans to contribute to are the deaths of wildlife, but not to the lives of domestic animals. So what? |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
What's in pet food?
On 6/21/2011 2:11 PM, ****wit David Harrison lied:
[cracKKKer bull**** snipped] I point out facts. No, you do not. Your system time is ****ed up, ****wit. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Kitten food for an 8 month old cat or switch to adult food? | mike | Cat health & behaviour | 3 | June 1st 09 12:12 AM |
Cat food brands--Science Diet = cat equivalent of rich folk buyingtheir people food at Whole Foods and other boutique grocery stores? | mike | Cat health & behaviour | 9 | April 22nd 09 02:05 PM |
Making dry food look/smell/taste like wet food | Ray Ban | Cat health & behaviour | 20 | October 29th 03 11:17 PM |