Joey carbstrong

Green&Red

Just wondering what the vegan view is on this lad? He seems to be everywhere this week.

Full disclosure, I'm a farmer, keep suckler cows, so this guys opinions are completely alien to me but I'd like to think I respect other peoples right to a differing world view to mine. Something which I haven't seen from this guy.

His sense of timing regarding whats going on the with the Ulster Rugby lads is outstanding. The clip I saw had him denouncing AI as rape and sexual assault. To me categorizing together the rape of someone and AIing a cow is completely wrong.

JimmiesRustled

Green&Red wrote: »

Just wondering what the vegan view is on this lad? He seems to be everywhere this week.

Full disclosure, I'm a farmer, keep suckler cows, so this guys opinions are completely alien to me but I'd like to think I respect other peoples right to a differing world view to mine. Something which I haven't seen from this guy.

His sense of timing regarding whats going on the with the Ulster Rugby lads is outstanding. The clip I saw had him denouncing AI as rape and sexual assault. To me categorizing together the rape of someone and AIing a cow is completely wrong.

Been vegan for a few years and never agreed with how these lads went about doing things. Having said that, I didn’t go vegan due to the treatment of animals. I’d be more concerned with the kids dying in Syria or starving in Africa than farmed animals if I’m completely honest. I don’t get how people expect others to be kind, caring etc towards livestock when we can’t even do so with other humans.

I may well be in the minority of users here.

Dakota Dan

Moncreiff didn't take any nonsense from him, why do idiots like him get air time?
Being in a gang and dealing and taking drugs and spending time in prison doesn't do him any favours.

JimmiesRustled

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Moncreiff didn't take any nonsense from him, why do idiots like him get air time?
Being in a gang and dealing and taking drugs and spending time in prison doesn't do him any favours.

I don’t mean any offence Dan but you’re not Vegan (which is fine). OP asked what vegans think of him and what he was saying.

Dakota Dan

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

I don’t mean any offence Dan but you’re not Vegan (which is fine). OP asked what vegans think of him and what he was saying.

No offence taken, are you vegan? If yes why haven't you answered the op?

Green&Red

Ah, open to all!

JimmiesRustled

Dakota Dan wrote: »

No offence taken, are you vegan? If yes why haven't you answered the op?

I am vegan and have answered.

Dakota Dan

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

I am vegan and have answered.

My apologies, so you did.

Klinkhammer

Comparing cows to slaves isn't really on either.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

It's a pure act, I'd say, though I really only heard of him last week. Playing up to and legitimising people's prejudices against vegans and making a tidy living from it.

Preaching to a rather small choir, and alienating everyone else.

Fcuk that guy, basically.

lukegjpotter

Not hating on you, but in favour of Joey and other activists.

Green&Red wrote: »

Just wondering what the vegan view is on this lad? He seems to be everywhere this week.

Joey is a pretty cool guy, I admire his passion.

Green&Red wrote: »

Full disclosure, I'm a farmer, keep suckler cows, so this guys opinions are completely alien to me but I'd like to think I respect other peoples right to a differing world view to mine. Something which I haven't seen from this guy.

My Dad is a suckler farmer, with my view of not being thinking of the stock as property, but as beings, it makes me sad to see them in sheds and getting sold off to someone who might treat them worse.

The crux of his (Earthling Ed's and the third guy's) arguments are "Where do you draw the line with Speciesism?" Then the follow up question is a variation of "What gives you the right to determine where you draw the line? Why are you so special? Because you were lucky enough for your conscious to be in the superior species? What's the difference between dogs and pigs. Why can you push the speciesism line a bit further in the direction of favouring Animals, and a little further, and further." It's the same deal with the Progressive Left, you cannot be Progressive enough.

Green&Red wrote: »

His sense of timing regarding whats going on the with the Ulster Rugby lads is outstanding. The clip I saw had him denouncing AI as rape and sexual assault. To me categorizing together the rape of someone and AIing a cow is completely wrong.

Rapes unfortunately happen frequently, so the trial of public figures is not part of the timing, and should not be highlighted as a point against Animal Activists.

You have not explained why you don't consider AI as Rape with logic and reasoning. If you watched a full video from his channel, and you tried to answer the questions that he asked the people on the street with logic and reasoning.

I reckon that most people would not be able to reason that they like animal products for reasons other than taste.

By subscribing to that logic, of ethics and morals not applying to the oppressors and their fancies being the deciding factor, we must all get on the BBQ when the Aliens show up.

JimmiesRustled

lukegjpotter wrote: »

Not hating on you, but in favour of Joey and other activists.




Joey is a pretty cool guy, I admire his passion.




My Dad is a suckler farmer, with my view of not being thinking of the stock as property, but as beings, it makes me sad to see them in sheds and getting sold off to someone who might treat them worse.

The crux of his (Earthling Ed's and the third guy's) arguments are "Where do you draw the line with Speciesism?" Then the follow up question is a variation of "What gives you the right to determine where you draw the line? Why are you so special? Because you were lucky enough for your conscious to be in the superior species? What's the difference between dogs and pigs. Why can you push the speciesism line a bit further in the direction of favouring Animals, and a little further, and further." It's the same deal with the Progressive Left, you cannot be Progressive enough.




Rapes unfortunately happen frequently, so the trial of public figures is not part of the timing, and should not be highlighted as a point against Animal Activists.

You have not explained why you don't consider AI as Rape with logic and reasoning. If you watched a full video from his channel, and you tried to answer the questions that he asked the people on the street with logic and reasoning.

I reckon that most people would not be able to reason that they like animal products for reasons other than taste.

By subscribing to that logic, of ethics and morals not applying to the oppressors and their fancies being the deciding factor, we must all get on the BBQ when the Aliens show up.

Maybe I should consider myself plant based as opposed to vegan. I’d agree that in my view at least we shouldn’t eat meat for some of the reasons you’ve outlined above but what I don’t understand is how can we/you expect people to take all of this seriously when racism, sexism and xenophobia as well as untold numbers of murders, killing in the name of religion and starvation are still rife throughout the world today?

On the starvation point I still personally think there’s enough food for everyone if we did away with livestock argriculture but you still then have capitalism to contend with.

How can you expect people to care about an animal if they don’t care or care very little about their own kind?

Klinkhammer

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

On the starvation point I still personally think there’s enough food for everyone if we did away with livestock argriculture but you still then have capitalism to contend with.

How can you expect people to care about an animal if they don’t care or care very little about their own kind?

I live in the Middle East. The idea of not eating meat is unfathomable there. Obviously they don't have the same agricultural capabilities as us in the west with rich farmland. Take away their meat and there would be major problems.

Its easy for westerners to strive towards an animal free diet but its not an ideal the majority if the world can realistically afford.

People live in a microcosm and are really in the dark about how the rest of society functions. Having lived on 3 different continents the more I move the more I realise how ignorant I am.

Dakota Dan

lukegjpotter wrote: »

Not hating on you, but in favour of Joey and other activists.




Joey is a pretty cool guy, I admire his passion.




My Dad is a suckler farmer, with my view of not being thinking of the stock as property, but as beings, it makes me sad to see them in sheds and getting sold off to someone who might treat them worse.

The crux of his (Earthling Ed's and the third guy's) arguments are "Where do you draw the line with Speciesism?" Then the follow up question is a variation of "What gives you the right to determine where you draw the line? Why are you so special? Because you were lucky enough for your conscious to be in the superior species? What's the difference between dogs and pigs. Why can you push the speciesism line a bit further in the direction of favouring Animals, and a little further, and further." It's the same deal with the Progressive Left, you cannot be Progressive enough.




Rapes unfortunately happen frequently, so the trial of public figures is not part of the timing, and should not be highlighted as a point against Animal Activists.

You have not explained why you don't consider AI as Rape with logic and reasoning. If you watched a full video from his channel, and you tried to answer the questions that he asked the people on the street with logic and reasoning.

I reckon that most people would not be able to reason that they like animal products for reasons other than taste.

By subscribing to that logic, of ethics and morals not applying to the oppressors and their fancies being the deciding factor, we must all get on the BBQ when the Aliens show up.

Maybe you can explain how you think the AI technician rapes cows? He doesn't have sex with them that's for sure. I'm sure your father lets a bull off with his cows like many other farmers and the cows stand for the bull but of course there's no drama shock tatics in that suitable for the vegan cult. When cows are AI'd they come on heat first leaving other cows mount them, do you not think they don't want to be served? In sucklers as I'm sure you know calves are left with the cows until weaned but you'll never hear vegans mention that, why's that?

lukegjpotter

I'd consider myself Plant Based too. I'm just adding opposing view points, so this is not a circlejerk.

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

I don’t understand is how can we/you expect people to take all of this seriously when racism, sexism and xenophobia as well as untold numbers of murders, killing in the name of religion and starvation are still rife throughout the world today?

Humans should strive to have higher morals than the lowest common denominators in the world. The examples you have given are, by any reasonable person's standards, immoral and pointless in the grand scheme of the universe. For any injustice, you have to feel that "we are better than this".

The main driving force in all things, is to be on the right side of history. If anyone believes that eating animals will be frowned upon in the future, then they have the onus to start the change.

Take Abraham Lincoln, for example, most westerners know who he is for his role in abolishing slavery. How many slave owners do you know? How many people now proudly boast that their families had slaves?

Micheal Che (on SNL's Weekend Update) had a great line this week "He stutters worse that Colin (Jost) when I ask him if his family had slaves."

It might be the same in the future with animals.

"We have to put ourselves in the victim's shoes" - Joey Carbstrong (and ****loads of other people throughout history)

lukegjpotter

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Maybe you can explain how you think the AI technician rapes cows? He doesn't have sex with them that's for sure.

Rape is more than just P-in-V. Perhaps "Sexual Assault" is a more applicable term then to describe Head in a pin, arm up anus, semen injected into womb.

Dakota Dan wrote: »

I'm sure your father lets a bull off with his cows like many other farmers and the cows stand for the bull but of course there's no drama shock tatics in that suitable for the vegan cult. When cows are AI'd they come on heat first leaving other cows mount them, do you not think they don't want to be served?

You're using the "In Nature X happens" argument to apply to a civilised society.

Dakota Dan wrote: »

In sucklers as I'm sure you know calves are left with the cows until weaned but you'll never hear vegans mention that, why's that?

You're half correct, from my experience. The cow has a calf, then we get an orphan calf (from another farmer's Fresian cow, who needs 100% of the milk for business, €80 is the going rate) to also suckle on the cow too. The cows have been bred to produce lots of milk, so the calves and cows need to be seperated so the calf doesn't over feed and die from scower (diarrhea).


Starbucks are very visibly promoting their Dairy-free Latte Macchiatto, options are Almond, Coconut and Oat. So the clock is ticking on the Dairy Industry, as Starbucks have the big-data on the types of milks being consumed and can market accordingly. Retail chains will follow suit, as it plant milks are a better product logistically (longer sell-by dates, don't require cold storage, don't smell). It's not just milks, spreads are moving away from butter and cheese. Almond Butter and Avocados are making a come-up. Start growing some almond trees.

"We raised the tastiest beef on our soil, now we're using the same soil for real Irish Almonds™️®️©️" - National Almond Council

Dakota Dan

lukegjpotter wrote: »

I'd consider myself Plant Based too. I'm just adding opposing view points, so this is not a circlejerk.




Humans should strive to have higher morals than the lowest common denominators in the world. The examples you have given are, by any reasonable person's standards, immoral and pointless in the grand scheme of the universe. For any injustice, you have to feel that "we are better than this".

The main driving force in all things, is to be on the right side of history. If anyone believes that eating animals will be frowned upon in the future, then they have the onus to start the change.

Take Abraham Lincoln, for example, most westerners know who he is for his role in abolishing slavery. How many slave owners do you know? How many people now proudly boast that their families had slaves?

Micheal Che (on SNL's Weekend Update) had a great line this week "He stutters worse that Colin (Jost) when I ask him if his family had slaves."

It might be the same in the future with animals.

"We have to put ourselves in the victim's shoes" - Joey Carbstrong (and ****loads of other people throughout history)

You do know that slavery still exists today?

Dakota Dan

lukegjpotter wrote: »

Rape is more than just P-in-V. Perhaps "Sexual Assault" is a more applicable term then to describe Head in a pin, arm up anus, semen injected into womb.



You're using the "In Nature X happens" argument to apply to a civilised society.




You're half correct, from my experience. The cow has a calf, then we get an orphan calf (from another farmer's Fresian cow, who needs 100% of the milk for business, €80 is the going rate) to also suckle on the cow too. The cows have been bred to produce lots of milk, so the calves and cows need to be seperated so the calf doesn't over feed and die from scower (diarrhea).


Starbucks are very visibly promoting their Dairy-free Latte Macchiatto, options are Almond, Coconut and Oat. So the clock is ticking on the Dairy Industry, as Starbucks have the big-data on the types of milks being consumed and can market accordingly. Retail chains will follow suit, as it plant milks are a better product logistically (longer sell-by dates, don't require cold storage, don't smell). It's not just milks, spreads are moving away from butter and cheese. Almond Butter and Avocados are making a come-up. Start growing some almond trees.

"We raised the tastiest beef on our soil, now we're using the same soil for real Irish Almonds™️®️©️" - National Almond Council

Nice roundabout answers. Not many farmers do double suckling in Ireland but it suits your argument to throw it in there.

Tar.Aldarion

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

Maybe I should consider myself plant based as opposed to vegan. I’d agree that in my view at least we shouldn’t eat meat for some of the reasons you’ve outlined above but what I don’t understand is how can we/you expect people to take all of this seriously when racism, sexism and xenophobia as well as untold numbers of murders, killing in the name of religion and starvation are still rife throughout the world today?

On the starvation point I still personally think there’s enough food for everyone if we did away with livestock argriculture but you still then have capitalism to contend with.

How can you expect people to care about an animal if they don’t care or care very little about their own kind?

This is often a thing people say but it's not how the world works, we don't work on the most serious problem then when that is done move on to the next. Who cares about drink driving when there are children starving in Africa etc. The real solution is people work on everything they can, to do better and be a better person to others.

It's called the Fallacy of Relative Privation ("not as bad as"):

Dismissing an argument or complaint due to the existence of more important problems in the world, regardless of whether those problems bear relevance to the initial argument. For example, First World problem.

Klinkhammer wrote: »

I live in the Middle East. The idea of not eating meat is unfathomable there. Obviously they don't have the same agricultural capabilities as us in the west with rich farmland. Take away their meat and there would be major problems.

Its easy for westerners to strive towards an animal free diet but its not an ideal the majority if the world can realistically afford.

People live in a microcosm and are really in the dark about how the rest of society functions. Having lived on 3 different continents the more I move the more I realise how ignorant I am.

Things can change quite fast. In the middle East for example, in Israel there were practically no vegans, now in a few short years it has the most vegans as a percentage of any country, and mostly spurred by one talk on youtube by someone who many (including me) think of as an ass. He's probably similar to this Joey person as he talks about rape and all that, unfortunately I have no idea who Joey Carbstrong is to talk about him. That surname has to be fake right.

Traditionally a lot of people are vegan in poor countries, because they can't afford meat. It's a very cheap diet. That might be true if you're buying a lot of meat substitutes and vegan cheese, but otherwise you can get plenty of calories and nutrition cheaply.

eviltwin

I'm a vegan and I think he's a fcuking idiot. I've made a choice to follow a certain diet and I don't think I'm any better than those who follow a different one. No problem with farmers or people in the industry. I'm happily married to a raging carnivore and live with a vegetarian...theres room for all.

Klinkhammer

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Things can change quite fast. In the middle East for example, in Israel there were practically no vegans, now in a few short years it has the most vegans as a percentage of any country,l

Israelis aren't relevant in this discussion.They're
painfully not from the Middle East.

For the record I was vegetarian for 14 years. Never vegan but maybe we should be but tell people that are barely existing to do it and you're having a laugh.

gozunda

lukegjpotter wrote: »

Not hating on you, but in favour of Joey and other activists.
Joey is a pretty cool guy, I admire his passion.

Imo Joey comes across as a bit of an egotist who after a life of crime and drugs had a moment of 'revelation. He appears to be living a good lifestyle out of the change...

As a student I ended up living with a bunch of born again young evangelical people. All similar stories and backgrounds to Joey. All seriousley messed up though

lukegjpotter wrote: »

My Dad is a suckler farmer, with my view of not being thinking of the stock as property, but as beings, it makes me sad to see them in sheds and getting sold off to someone who might treat them worse.

No farmer with any cop on delibertly treats stock 'worse'. If would make no sense when the objectives is to produce quality animals for the market. Its just as plausible they might treat them better- and it is better to help improve standards than wring our collective hands because something "might happen"

lukegjpotter wrote: »

The crux of his (Earthling Ed's and the third guy's) arguments are "Where do you draw the line with Speciesism?"

Whoa there ...

As far as I can work out "Speciesism" in its present format is a relatively recent and artificial construct. And it is clear that some vegans are clearly drawing that line at farmed and domestic animals. However this by definition ignores a whole cohort of other organisms which are routinely destroyed through cultivation and in various situations by humans just being humans - insects, earthworms, flies, mice rats etc etc etc. It is disingenuous to give attention only to the pretty ones and ignore the rest of the planet's biota just because it does not suit parts relevant parts of the story. It has been said that the only environmentally friendly human is a dead human - and whilst that is a very extreme sentiment it holds an important element of truth in that everything we do effects some part of the planet's ecosystem negatively.

lukegjpotter wrote: »

Then the follow up question is a variation of "What gives you the right to determine where you draw the line? Why are you so special? Because you were lucky enough for your conscious to be in the superior species?

At the end of the day - animals have been eating other animals since the first multicellular organism crawled from the primordial ooze in search of breakfast. Humans are animals - evolution has not changed that. Some of us may choose not to eat meat - that's fine imo - others do - that's a choice. There are other animals that eat meat both obligate and non obligate - there is no inherent superiority in that. It simply is.

lukegjpotter wrote: »

What's the difference between dogs and pigs. Why can you push the speciesism line a bit further in the direction of favouring Animals, and a little further, and further." It's the same deal with the Progressive Left, you cannot be Progressive enough.

First things first - difference between dogs and pigs? Well at one basic level relates to the fact that dogs are carnivores and as a rule humans traditionally dont eat carnivores as this carries some risk with regard to disease transference between species. Yes and I do know dogs are eaten in certain parts of the world- but the majority of humans do not as a rule.

Yes pigs will scavenge and can eat carrion/ offal. Wild pigs tend to have a more herbivorous type diet. but again in western society - domestic pigs are not fed these kind of diets for the same reason. Here pigs have been part of our diet for milenia. They are easy to keep and were the 'gentleman in the parlour' in Irish tradition who's sale paid the yearly rent for the farm

I do not agree that it is not possible to be "progressive enough". Progressive does not always mean good. China's great leap(s) forward meant misery for its people for decades after the revolution.

lukegjpotter wrote: »

Rapes unfortunately happen frequently, so the trial of public figures is not part of the timing, and should not be highlighted as a point against Animal Activists

You have not explained why you don't consider AI as Rape with logic and reasoning. If you watched a full video from his channel, and you tried to answer the questions that he asked the people on the street with logic and reasoning.

The use of such language is clearly sensationalist. The following is taken from a vegan work guide to promoting and creating a narrative for veganism

For the Vegan Toolkit

*Create a feeling of social responsibility
*Focus on Nonhuman Animals as unable to help themselves
*Use descriptions of suffering to garner sympathy
*Counter negative stereotypes about other animal

http://abolitionist76.rssing.com/chan-34033563/all_p3.html

AI is not "rape" by any 're imagining of the process where a cow is inseminated. It is clearly the projecting of human sentiment onto animals ie 'raped" - see the "vegan toolkit" detailed above.

lukegjpotter wrote: »

I reckon that most people would not be able to reason that they like animal products for reasons other than taste.

By subscribing to that logic, of ethics and morals not applying to the oppressors and their fancies being the deciding factor, we must all get on the BBQ when the Aliens show up.

As to the first point- I believe you are incorrect. People eat meat as a source of food- some pastoral and artic communities because it is the main food source available to them . On our own Island our climate and topography have made livestock farming the most suitable option in many areas of marginal soils and high watertables. Traditionally animals were killed at the end of the summer because fodder was in short supply. Meat in various amounts continues to be an intrinsic and healthy part of many people's diet.

Your final fallacy of the false comparison with the aliens and the bbq holds no water imo. Again humans have evolved with animals on this planet. Some aninals eat other animals and that is unlikely to change unless the suggestion by some of the more extreme idealists come through with the bioengineering of carnivores so that they stop eating meat. Progressive Utopia? No I really dont think so

Dakota Dan

Going by lukegjpotters logic it would make all gynecologists rapists.

JimmiesRustled

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Going by lukegjpotters logic it would make all gynacoligists rapists.

The correct spelling is gynecologists. Maybe lay off the meat next time Dan

Dakota Dan

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

The correct spelling is gynecologists. Maybe lay off the meat next time Dan

Have you any better argument other than a spell checker nazi?

JimmiesRustled

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Have you any better argument other than a spell checker nazi?

Better argument for what? Your jumps in “logic” know no bounds Dan. It doesn’t matter what I say or tell you I’m simply not going to change your mind. You likened what Luke mentioned about AI of a cow being rape to a gynecologist raping women and the fact that if one is rape then the other must. That’s not what he was saying at all nor what he meant. Whether I agree with Luke or not on this point, women opt to go to a gynecologist to be examined. I don’t believe a cow opts in on AI.

Dakota Dan

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

Better argument for what? Your jumps in “logic” know no bounds Dan. It doesn’t matter what I say or tell you I’m simply not going to change your mind. You likened what Luke mentioned about AI of a cow being rape to a gynecologist raping women and the fact that if one is rape then the other must. That’s not what he was saying at all nor what he meant. Whether I agree with Luke or not on this point, women opt to go to a gynecologist to be examined. I don’t believe a cow opts in on AI.

If you read my earlier post you'll see where I explained it, when a cow comes in heat she stands to be mounted by other cows and if there is a bull around she'll stand for him, do you not think that is enough proof that the cow wants to go back incalf like she would out in the wild?

JimmiesRustled

Dakota Dan wrote: »

If you read my earlier post you'll see where I explained it, when a cow comes in heat she stands to be mounted by other cows and if there is a bull around she'll stand for him, do you not think that is enough proof that the cow wants to go back incalf like she would out in the wild?

Dan, I was explaining his point of view. I stated in my reply that I don’t agree with Luke on this point but the point he was trying to make was as per my reply.

Dakota Dan

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

Dan, I was explaining his point of view. I stated in my reply that I don’t agree with Luke on this point but the point he was trying to make was as per my reply.

No need to explain his point of view, unless maybe you have 2 accounts here. The fact of the matter is cattle aren't human they don't have emotions. If you have an animal that becomes sick in a herd guess what the rest will do to them, they'll bully them around, if one of their herd mates dies they'll walk over them. These animal rights crowds will tell people that the rest of the herd will gather around the dead animal mourning for them which is complete bullsh1t, pardon the pun.

JimmiesRustled

Dakota Dan wrote: »

No need to explain his point of view, unless maybe you have 2 accounts here. The fact of the matter is cattle aren't human they don't have emotions. If you have an animal that becomes sick in a herd guess what the rest will do to them, they'll bully them around, if one of their herd mates dies they'll walk over them. These animal rights crowds will tell people that the rest of the herd will gather around the dead animal mourning for them which is complete bullsh1t, pardon the pun.

Wouldn’t have the patience for two accounts. I’m agreeing with you on many of your points so I don’t think you’re argument is necessarily with me. I made it clear before that I didn’t go vegan based on animal welfare so perhaps that means I’m not vegan I just eat like one, I’m not sure. My father keeps/kept chickens for a good number of years so I’m well aware what happens to the weakest member of the flock. I’m under no illusions here. The idea that they’d all live merrily in a meadow somewhere without farming is not something I subscribe to.

Dakota Dan

Dakota Dan wrote: »

No need to explain his point of view, unless maybe you have 2 accounts here. The fact of the matter is cattle aren't human they don't have emotions. If you have an animal that becomes sick in a herd guess what the rest will do to them, they'll bully them around, if one of their herd mates dies they'll walk over them. These animal rights crowds will tell people that the rest of the herd will gather around the dead animal mourning for them which is complete bullsh1t, pardon the pun.

This is mind blowing.

Mtx

Joey carbstrong is a troll, he is a militant vegan who loves the attention from news and radio . He knows he can make a career out of it and is doing well financially out of being provocative. Don't feed the troll.

Dakota Dan

Mtx wrote: »

Joey carbstrong is a troll, he is a militant vegan who loves the attention from news and radio . He knows he can make a career out of it and is doing well financially out of being provocative. Don't feed the troll.

The same as that gob****e earthling Ed, coming across as mild mannered in his videos that have actors playing the part of farmers, livestock auctioneers, meat factory workers etc. Does he honestly think people are that stupid.

Tar.Aldarion

Deleted User wrote: »

This is mind blowing.

The best bit is "animals don't have emotions"

Dakota Dan

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

The best bit is "animals don't have emotions"

I said bovines not all animals :rolleyes:

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

They most certainly do have emotions. You're saying you've never seen a frightened cow, a happy calf, a cow grieving for her calf when it's taken away? Those are all emotions.

gozunda

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

Better argument for what? Your jumps in “logic” know no bounds Dan. It doesn’t matter what I say or tell you I’m simply not going to change your mind. You likened what Luke mentioned about AI of a cow being rape to a gynecologist raping women and the fact that if one is rape then the other must. That’s not what he was saying at all nor what he meant. Whether I agree with Luke or not on this point, women opt to go to a gynecologist to be examined. I don’t believe a cow opts in on AI.

The equivalence to gynecology stands imo. Do any animals opt for any type of veterinary treatment? Should we not provide health care to animals - wild - domestic or otherwise because they can't consent or "opt in"?

Some extraordinary points of view in this thread.

The chasm is surprising me to the point that I don’t believe some people fully believe what they are writing.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Some extraordinary points of view in this thread.

The chasm is surprising me to the point that I don’t believe some people fully believe what they are writing.

That could be said of both sides of the debate tbh. It would be helpful if you could be more specific ...

Dakota Dan

Darwin Modern Gingersnap wrote: »

They most certainly do have emotions. You're saying you've never seen a frightened cow, a happy calf, a cow grieving for her calf when it's taken away? Those are all emotions.

A cow grieving for her calf, I've seen on a few occasions where cows had twin calves and the cow purposely lie down on one of her calves to kill it, not much grieving there. I managed to save one calf after the cow had the wind knocked out of him. Frightened cows are just doing what a lot of animals do in nature fight or flight.

gozunda

Darwin Modern Gingersnap wrote: »

They most certainly do have emotions. You're saying you've never seen a frightened cow, a happy calf, a cow grieving for her calf when it's taken away? Those are all emotions.

The examples given by Dakota Dan described empathetic emotions where one being exhibits empathy towards another in this case - cattle. I would agree with Dan that cattle will bully sick herd members to the point of death. Cattle will also trample other sick animals to death such as wild birds in my experience.

This behaviour also happens in populations of wild cattle. A survival of the fittest reaction possibly or perhaps territorial behaviour.

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

That could be said of both sides of the debate tbh. It would be helpful if you could be more specific ...

What debate ? There isn’t one.

Whatever chance I have engaging with someone when we broadly share the same opinion/idea but disagree and discuss the finer points but there is no chance of that here.

I genuinely think some of the comments on this thread are complete wind-up and if they’re not then I find them very worrying as they show a complete lack of what I’d consider to be a basic and innate intelligence.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What debate ? There isn’t one.

Whatever chance I have engaging with someone when we broadly share the same opinion/idea but disagree and discuss the finer points but there is no chance of that here.

I genuinely think some of the comments on this thread are complete wind-up and if they’re not then I find them very worrying as they show a complete lack of what I’d consider to be a basic and innate intelligence.

Thats not overtly helpful imo.

A debate / exchange of points of view if you will. A good idea in my opinion as long as the exchange / debate stays civilised and insults etc are not exchanged regarding other posters intelligence etc

As far as I'm aware many of what you would class as 'wind up comments' are put forward by posters who have real and daily interactions with cattle etc and are providing their experience to counter some of the other points of view posted.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Dakota Dan wrote: »

A cow grieving for her calf, I've seen on a few occasions where cows had twin calves and the cow purposely lie down on one of her calves to kill it, not much grieving there. I managed to save one calf after the cow had the wind knocked out of him. Frightened cows are just doing what a lot of animals do in nature fight or flight.

And I've seen a man punch a woman in the face, and a cat that a dog had torn to shreds, it doesn't mean people and dogs don't have emotions. You're thinking of morality or a high degree of empathy, but cattle certainly have emotions.

gozunda

Darwin Modern Gingersnap wrote: »

And I've seen a man punch a woman in the face, and a cat that a dog had torn to shreds, it doesn't mean people and dogs don't have emotions. You're thinking of morality or a high degree of empathy, but cattle certainly have emotions.

I posted this above which I think covers that ...

The examples given by Dakota Dan described empathetic emotions where one being exhibits empathy towards another in this case - cattle. I would agree with Dan that cattle will bully sick herd members to the point of death. Cattle will also trample other sick animals to death such as wild birds in my experience.

This behaviour also happens in populations of wild cattle. A survival of the fittest reaction possibly or perhaps territorial behaviour.

Dakota Dan

Darwin Modern Gingersnap wrote: »

And I've seen a man punch a woman in the face, and a cat that a dog had torn to shreds, it doesn't mean people and dogs don't have emotions. You're thinking of morality or a high degree of empathy, but cattle certainly have emotions.

You seem to be mixing up maternal instincts with emotions in cattle. Cows also reject calves, it might be a surprise to someone that doesn't be around cows but it happens.


http://www.beefmagazine.com/health/calving/understanding-maternal-behavior-helps-bonding-0201

Tar.Aldarion

At this point I don't think you know what emotions are. This is hugely studied, don't go around saying nonsense like cows don't have emotions, how would anybody take you seriously?

Dakota Dan

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

At this point I don't think you know what emotions are. This is hugely studied, don't go around saying nonsense like cows don't have emotions, how would anybody take you seriously?

So how long have you been working around cattle?

endacl

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Some extraordinary points of view in this thread.

The chasm is surprising me to the point that I don’t believe some people fully believe what they are writing.

If you always believe what you post you run the risk of losing the Internet. Nothing's worse than being wrong online. Even being artificially inseminated by a cow. You do what you gotta. Like the 'baby cows' thing. I know nobody really thinks of calves as 'baby cows', but, y'know, ya gotta win the internet!

jive

Dakota Dan wrote: »

So how long have you been working around cattle?

Not really relevant though is it? Or are you the only person qualified to comment on cattle behaviour/thoughts/emotions/etc. because you’re a farmer?

Tar.Aldarion

Dakota Dan wrote: »

So how long have you been working around cattle?

Since I was a child for years, worked in a dairy too. My whole family are/were farmers on both sides.

Anyway, have a read instead of employing fallacies.