XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, rec.food.veg, sci.econ   
   XPost: alt.philosophy   
   From: rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com   
      
   Dutch wrote   
   > Rod Speed  wrote   
   >> Dutch wrote   
   >>> Rod Speed  wrote   
   >>>> Dutch wrote   
   >>>>> Rod Speed  wrote   
   >>>>>> Immortalist wrote   
      
   >>>>>>> New Studies expose the destructive history of   
   >>>>>>> agriculture-causing the devastation of prairies and forests,   
   >>>>>>> driving countless species extinct, altering the climate, and   
   >>>>>>> destroying the topsoil.   
      
   >>>>>> None of that is any news, no 'new studys' are needed to work that out.   
      
   >>>>>> What matter is what the alternative is. Hunting and   
   >>>>>> gathering is a vastly less viable approach, stupid.   
      
   >>>>>>> In order to save the planet,   
      
   >>>>>> The planet is doing fine.   
      
   >>>>> The rock flying around in space is all right, but he means the rich   
   ecosystem of earth, that is NOT doing fine,   
      
   >>>> Corse it is. Its doing a hell of a lot better than it did   
   >>>> during the worst excesses of the industrial revolution.   
      
   >>> No, it's not.   
      
   >> Corse it is, right thruout the entire modern first world.   
      
   > Wrong.   
      
   Right.   
      
   > The population is 10x what it was then.   
      
   Still MUCH less pollution than we saw in the 19th century in the first world.   
      
   > China was medieval, it is now a modern industrialized country.   
      
   And they never did just shit in the ground like they STILL do in india.   
      
   I actually lived in places where they didnt even have poper sewers in   
   the 50s, you dont see that anywhere in the modern first world anymore.   
      
   >>> First, the effects are cumulative,   
      
   >> Wrong, there are plenty of areas   
      
   > That doesn't relate to my point, *cumulative*   
      
   Your claim about cumulative is just plain wrong. That didnt happen with   
   say London or any of the worst pollution of the industrial revolution either.   
      
   >> that were once much worse pollution wise than they are now, most obviously   
   with the London smog etc etc etc.   
      
   > There are urban areas that were more severe,   
      
   Like hell there are than London at its worst.   
      
   > but the total effect is much greater today with the vast industrial parks   
   and all the fossil fuel burning.   
      
   Yes, the CO2 levels are certainly higher than they were, but thats not   
   pollution, much higher levels than there are now were universal once.   
      
   > You know about the dangers of oil drilling, oil sands extraction.   
      
   I also know about the worst of the pollution the industrial revolution brought   
   with it and know that we arent stupid enough to do it like that anymore.   
      
   >>> second there many, many more sources of pollution today than then, like   
   cars, trucks, planes, tankers.   
      
   >> The previous approach to transport was MUCH more   
   >> polluting, all that horse shit in the streets etc etc etc.   
      
   >> Many places even make you pick up your pet's shit from the streets now.   
      
   > Oh ffs, pull your head out of your ass Rod.   
      
   Wota stunning line in rational arguement you have there, gutless.   
      
   >>> The oils spills of the past couple of decades were not possible then.   
      
   >> Yes, but they had MUCH worse pollution from burning   
   >> coal in their houses for heating alone like in London etc.   
      
   > A lot of the power generation in the US is coal-fired.   
      
   Yes, but thats burnt MUCH more cleanly than when its used in coal fires in   
   houses like in London and that produced levels of pollution that killed lots of   
   people. Nothing like that happens with modern coal fired power stations today.   
      
   > Natural gas extraction is deadly.   
      
   Another pig ignorant lie.   
      
   >>> The destruction of the environment through the extraction of   
   >>> natural gas, tar sands, or the mass production of agricultural   
   >>> products were not possible then.   
      
   >> Yes, but they had their own massive pollution, most obviously with   
   >> coal burning in their houses, and all that horse shit etc etc etc.   
      
   > You're an idiot.   
      
   You're a fuckwit.   
      
   >> And you are just plain wrong with agriculture. Western   
   >> europe was once quite heavily forested and that was   
   >> mostly gone even before the industrial revolution.   
      
   > So what?   
      
   So your stupid pig ignorant claim about what wasnt possible then is just plain   
   wrong.   
      
   >>>>> it is being systematically destroyed   
      
   >>>> Just another silly little pig ignorant fantasy.   
      
   >>>>> and polluted beyond recognition by man.   
      
   >>>> Just another silly little pig ignorant fantasy.   
      
   >>> I've seen your work before Speed, you epitomize the absolute lowest   
   >>> common denominator of head-in-the-sand Usenet blockheads. You serve   
   >>> no useful purpose on this earth.   
      
   >> And you never ever could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.   
      
   > Unlike you I am not *trying* to bullshit.   
      
   Everyone can see for themselves that you are lying, as always.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)