I know its a nuclear reaction but back then if they just thought the were giant flaming balls of something would have been a huge step forward instead of thinking the earth and sun are the center of the universe. Those things came after people realized they were giant hot balls. Not to be confused with salty chocolate balls.
Fine fine understanding that the stars are giant balls of burning gas just like the sun and like the sun could have planets and like the planet earth some of them could have light was too complex for the people that wrote the new testament.
"Can disabled people ride it?
There are a few options for people who are unable to pedal themselves:
i. Sit in a standard pod and be escorted along the track by a pod behind.
ii. Sit as a passenger in a 2-seater pod.
iii. Shweeb can design hand-powered and/or electric-assisted (or fully powered) pods.
We have also had a number of blind people ride the Shweeb in Rotorua. The Shweeb offers them the unique opportunity to take control of and power a vehicle themselves."
Did you actually read anything else about it. Hell I would rather be moving at 20km using the same energy as walking at 5km. And besides it doesn't look uncomfortable. Though I do wonder how long it would be before the inside is covered like a bathroom wall.
My best friend is half black half spanish and gay. I bust his balls just as bad as any of my white friends. He on more than one occasion has thanked me for treating him like a regular old jackoff. My black friends laugh hard at n****r jokes I usually hear a lot of Daaaaamn and that's fucked up. But it all depends on the people. I wouldn't go up to a guy I didn't know b/c he might think I'm just a racist honky blue-eyed devil.
You don't want a hot water heater to last 20yrs they get coated in so much lime it cuts the capacity in half. I think there is a saving about it something like. It only takes one person to bring one in but two to remove one.
Ooo since we are using British curses I'll use my favorite fuckall. I think that the meteor hit the ground somewhere else and bounced to its current location.
Umm I don't think he ever said we completely understand insect flight just that we figured out why bees can fly. The part about it only taking 2 hours to notice that bees fly slow was to your
"Let's keep in mind it took a good 60 years for someone to improve upon our understanding of insect flight... Until that time, nobody could explain how bees were able to sustain flight."
line which taking in the context giving seems that you meant for 60 years there were scientists working on that problem. Which would be like me saying they knew the first cars weren't that safe and it took them 60 years to create the airbag. Also comparing noticing the bees fly slower than the speed in which it takes a airplane to gain lift to Einstein's Theory of General Relativity is a bit unfair. Also I do believe it took the advent of highspeed cameras to be able to actually see and understand what we know about how a bee flaps its wing to create the lift.
I personally like Fahrenheit over Celsius for non-scientific temps pretty much anything like body temp and the weather (on earth). That and using the foot and inches to measure how tall something is, are about the only things I like about our measurements in the USA. 5ft6 just sounds better than 171cm to me. We really need to let go of our distance measurements and work toward a universal system (i know its pretty much universal already)
Ok going down to singled cell organisms is quite a reach. If you eat meat your just a damn hypocrite. Now it there was anything wrong with my post please enlighten me.
I understand everything you say. Unfortunately its all contradicting to itself. We shouldn't eat meat unless needed. I point out even with meat people still starve making it a necessity right now and in the past. Your entire "humans claim to be moral and intelligent. If that was true, they'd realize that members of other species needn't be slaughtered for such selfish reasons other than actual survival" is void. Humans have been eating meat to survive. Sure some eat meat in regions that have a lot of fruits and stuff but whatever they don't eat will usually get shipped off to another place that doesn't have that. That's why living in Ohio I can eat a banana. So humans call themselves moral and intelligent b/c they eat meat to keep members of there species from dying. That is a smart and moral thing to do (the way we do it today with sustained livestock and humane treatment). And don't go trying to say that you said if there is an overabundance of food with your first post containing: "All humans have managed to do is delude themselves into believing that they are superior to every other species on the planet so that they can slaughter innocent animals in order to satisfy their taste buds" Right there you accuse humans of doing it to only satisfy their tastebuds which means you somehow think/thought just the plants we have could sustain us.
Its only delusional if it were not true. Humans do not think they are the fastest or strongest but the most intelligent and most lethal(when using our intelligence.) In fact the human species is the only one to expand to all 7 continents plus the oceans and even space. We are the only species that can craft our planet into what we want it to be (for better or worst) now I don't mean that we have control over nature but if humans want to live on a mountain side we carve the rock and make homes. If we want to explore the oceans we build crafts to let us. The surface of this planet has become our domain b/c of our superior intelligence. The fact is when we are gone our legacy will be far seen for millenia. Future sentient being will be finding our artifacts our art our inventions. The most any other animal will leave behind is some fossils and crude oil. You might not like it but its humans that are on top. For a long time it was a leisurely sport to go out to the jungles, savannas, plains, where ever and kill the biggest baddest thing living in themjust for fun. If we decide we don't like a large species or that it is getting in the way we destroy them its not pretty but its a fact. You don't even try to argue how humans are not the top predator instead you make factless claims that we are delusional in our way of thinking instead you say my argument is based on smugness when you are the smug one pointing your nose up at your own species. You are the one putting humans higher than animals by giving us different rules to live by. Its ok for a fox to sneak in a hen house for an easy meal but not ok for humans to have the hen house b/c somewhere down the line we stopped being animals and became something different with different rules in your eyes, something that needs to live up to some arbitrary standard in your head. Before you start saying that I'm acting superior to anything look at yourself. You have said many times that humans lack morality and intelligences for "slaughtering animals to satisfy their taste buds" and since you obviously are a vegetarian that makes you smarter and more moral then those who enjoy eating meat ie most people.
"All of that was said because humans usually consider themselves 'moral' and 'intelligent', and I merely said that if that was true, it seems to me that they wouldn't do such pointless things."
You still don't show explain how eating meat makes humans less intelligent than they claim to be. You show no facts only your opinion.
"I don't know how hard it is for you to understand that vegetarians exist and that if there is no other food available, like in the situations you describe, I have no problem with eating meat. The only time that I'm opposed to it is if there is an abundance of other food available and there's no need to slaughter another animal (even a human). I've been saying this the entire time."
There isn't an over abundance of food right now. Even with all the meat that is ate there still isn't enough to go around. If there was everyone would be fed there would be no starving children in Africa. What are you proposing we start the year eating only fruits and veggies then 6-8 months in when all of that is gone we switch to eating only meat (since all the other stuff would be gone)
The whole thing that made Goldeneye so fun on multiplayer was the fact that you are all there looking at the same screen peeking over at the other players screens laughing when you mess up their ambush. That and paintball mode. I mean all you needed was one friend with an N64 and a book bag and you had a party.
"Ha. I never claimed to be 'moral' myself, I'm far from that. That is a term that illogical idiots invented to describe 'good' humans. Personally, if I knew that the human race would soon be eliminated with nothing else on the planet going with it, I wouldn't be too sad. They cause far too much destruction for their own good, or for the good of anything else on the planet."
You might not have claimed to be moral but you have said all of this:
"Yet, humans claim to be moral and intelligent. If that was true, they'd realize that members of other species needn't be slaughtered for such selfish reasons other than actual survival (which doesn't happen often, as there's usually other kinds of food)."
"Why would a 'moral' being slaughter another being who suffers just as they do for no reason? Humans are supposedly 'intelligent', and they should start to show it."
"We're also supposedly 'moral' and 'intelligent'. If either of those were true, we'd show self control and not pointlessly slaughter other beings for no other reason than to satisfy our taste buds when there are alternate food sources"
"I've said time and time again that unless there is nothing else to eat *except* meat, there's no point in eating it. An intelligent being wouldn't mindlessly slaughter another being for no reason, unless they *have* to."
I don't know why it is so hard for you to understand that we can't go meatless. To do that would involve moving everyone that lives on fertile land to someplace desolate to use that land to grow plants on, we are talking about displacing billions of people. Also what humans claim to be doesn't mean shit. You can claim to be holy, you can claim to be straight you can claim anything you want and it doesn't mean anything, hell I'm an 8foot tall purple bird. Plus even if people claim they are moral or intelligent they are doing it by their definition you can't just come by and say you can't be that b/c if you were you wouldn't eat meat. An even bigger point is you say an intelligent species wouldn't slaughter lower animals for food? Why the hell not if its an efficient way to get the nutrition you need? I mean seriously I'm 1000 pound steer will give you about 750lbs of edible meat which if that was all a person ate would keep them fed I don't know 1 1/2 years. Assuming they ate 1Lb a day. How much land would it take to grow enough wheat or potatoes to do that? It really doesn't matter because you are on such a moral high horse you can't see past the fog you surround yourself with to see the facts which are without meat we would starve which when we started starving then to you it would be ok to eat meat until we are not starving anymore and new crops have grown in which case the cycle would then just repeat itself so how about we skip the starving part and just have a system to make sure the animals do not suffer for for what they give us.
"I've said time and time again that unless there is nothing else to eat *except* meat, there's no point in eating it. An intelligent being wouldn't mindlessly slaughter another being for no reason, unless they *have* to."
See your not understanding. Even with eating both meat and veggies/fruits we do not have enough to go around. So if you take meat out of the equation we would just have more people starving to death. In other words we are already at the point that we have to eat meat to keep people from dying. We don't eat meat just for the fun of it but to survive.
"Not really. There's cheap diets where you can still get your nutrition. Meat isn't exactly cheap, either. This would also a problem with our current capitalistic society."
Unfortunately we have to have a capitalistic society until we reach a point where there is enough of all basic needs to let all people live comfortably. So as soon as someone invents a Star Trek like replicator there will always be people on top and people on the bottom. Those kind of Marxist utopias cannot exist until everyone can live happy healthy lives.
"If everyone on earth said something incorrect, it would still be incorrect. What the majority says or thinks is irrelevant."
All that does is point out that you think your way is the right way no matter what. Your claiming the only way to be moral or intelligent is to stop eating meat. The fact is your views are totally skewed. Morality has nothing to do with eating food even if it is animals, but morality does have to do with the way the animal is treated when slaughtered. Over the years the quality of life the animals get and the way they are slaughtered has reflected our morals. And as far as intelligence goes we have used generations of breeding techniques and plenty of genetic science to make the animals larger and produce more so less need to be slaughtered hell we have used that to grow bigger better fruits and veggies that can stand up to disease and pests better.
"Have you read my comments at all? I said that *if someone is going to starve*, then that would be a reason to eat meat. If it's just to satisfy their taste buds (as it is in many cases in many countries), then there's no point."
Do you not understand they many humans die already from starvation and getting rid of meat will only further hunger?
"I think it would be best if that in vitro meat that you linked to was used, instead. As far as I read, there'd be no need to slaughter animals to make it or eat it."
That is still only done in the lab but you don't seem to understand that breakthroughs in science takes years to become commercial.
Eating is for survival. And as I pointed out that you failed to even comment on in order to eat an entirely meatless diet that has everything you need in it costs way too much for most people. And yes what we are typing on are merely toys and I think that's pretty good going from "Ooo fire hot" to we can travel to the moon in what 10,000 years? I mean just look at the advancements made in the last 200 years. I mean when have humans as a whole or even as a majority ever said its immoral to eat animals? I have never heard that except from a small % of the population. If the human race stopped eating meat we would starve. We can't even feed everyone on the planet right now with meat.
There most vegitarians are either sickly looking or have diets that are very expensive. Unless you eat tons of tofu or something else its hard to supplement the nutrition you get from meat. And as for moral and intelligent, Being moral is a completely worthless word. Morality to you is not to kill innocent animals morality to others is sacrificing animals to their god/s. Morality is completely in the eyes of the beholder. Our intelligence speaks for itself just look at the device you are typing on. The closest things animals have to inventions are a few tools and those usually are just common objects used as tools like a stick or rock. And it doesn't matter if you eat meat or not. B/c if your ancestors never ate meat there lives would have been completely different and the things that happened that had to happen for your existence to come into place never would have.
Why would a 'moral' being slaughter another being who suffers just as they do for no reason? Humans are supposedly 'intelligent', and they should start to show it.
I'm sure they would rather not exist if the sole purpose for their existence was to be given a cruel death for absolutely no reason, if they were able to comprehend that.
There's simply no need to do so. They would rather *not* be slaughtered, that much is certain. If they knew it was coming, they certainly would be afraid. There's simply no point in doing this unless it is absolutely needed (self defense, survival).
Living for a brief period before you're slaughtered sounds better than being free and living a normal life? I don't even want to know what your views on what actions the government should take are.
Yes, the alternative is leave them alone unless needed.
Unfortunately that's not how the world works until we can grow meat in a petri dish we will continue to slaughter animals. And hey look tat is humans beig smarter so we won't have to use live animals. It is human nature we are omnivores. If it wasn't for humans hunting animals we wouldn't be what we are today. Hell the reasons humans started spreading around the globe was by following the food, the migrating animals. And the fact is millions upon millions of cows sheep chickens and what not would never have a life at all its like asking an embryo if it would rather not be born and experience life or to be born be taken care of never having a care in the world but once they reached maturity they would be killed quickly and hardly any pain to serve an important need. You act like it isn't necessary but its the only cost effective way to feed billions hell your probably against fish farms too. Once you get a grip on reality and understand that eating meat is an ingrained part of human nature and human civilization and without becoming meat eaters you me everyone on/. would not exist.
You seem to forget that out of ALL the animals in the world humans are on top of the food chain. Your argument now has no basis on which to stand on. Have a nice day.
Slashdot Mirror
I know its a nuclear reaction but back then if they just thought the were giant flaming balls of something would have been a huge step forward instead of thinking the earth and sun are the center of the universe. Those things came after people realized they were giant hot balls. Not to be confused with salty chocolate balls.
That's just thinning the herd.
Fine fine understanding that the stars are giant balls of burning gas just like the sun and like the sun could have planets and like the planet earth some of them could have light was too complex for the people that wrote the new testament.
"Can disabled people ride it? There are a few options for people who are unable to pedal themselves: i. Sit in a standard pod and be escorted along the track by a pod behind. ii. Sit as a passenger in a 2-seater pod. iii. Shweeb can design hand-powered and/or electric-assisted (or fully powered) pods. We have also had a number of blind people ride the Shweeb in Rotorua. The Shweeb offers them the unique opportunity to take control of and power a vehicle themselves."
Still keeps it environmentally friendly. Expect to see this popping up in San Fran.
Did you actually read anything else about it. Hell I would rather be moving at 20km using the same energy as walking at 5km. And besides it doesn't look uncomfortable. Though I do wonder how long it would be before the inside is covered like a bathroom wall.
If she needed to be fake to get the interest of a geek.... that is a shame.
My best friend is half black half spanish and gay. I bust his balls just as bad as any of my white friends. He on more than one occasion has thanked me for treating him like a regular old jackoff. My black friends laugh hard at n****r jokes I usually hear a lot of Daaaaamn and that's fucked up. But it all depends on the people. I wouldn't go up to a guy I didn't know b/c he might think I'm just a racist honky blue-eyed devil.
You don't want a hot water heater to last 20yrs they get coated in so much lime it cuts the capacity in half. I think there is a saving about it something like. It only takes one person to bring one in but two to remove one.
Ooo since we are using British curses I'll use my favorite fuckall. I think that the meteor hit the ground somewhere else and bounced to its current location.
Well if the patent gets overturned wouldn't that invalidate the license? I have no clue thats why i'm asking
"Let's keep in mind it took a good 60 years for someone to improve upon our understanding of insect flight... Until that time, nobody could explain how bees were able to sustain flight."
line which taking in the context giving seems that you meant for 60 years there were scientists working on that problem. Which would be like me saying they knew the first cars weren't that safe and it took them 60 years to create the airbag. Also comparing noticing the bees fly slower than the speed in which it takes a airplane to gain lift to Einstein's Theory of General Relativity is a bit unfair. Also I do believe it took the advent of highspeed cameras to be able to actually see and understand what we know about how a bee flaps its wing to create the lift.
I personally like Fahrenheit over Celsius for non-scientific temps pretty much anything like body temp and the weather (on earth). That and using the foot and inches to measure how tall something is, are about the only things I like about our measurements in the USA. 5ft6 just sounds better than 171cm to me. We really need to let go of our distance measurements and work toward a universal system (i know its pretty much universal already)
Ok going down to singled cell organisms is quite a reach. If you eat meat your just a damn hypocrite. Now it there was anything wrong with my post please enlighten me.
I understand everything you say. Unfortunately its all contradicting to itself. We shouldn't eat meat unless needed. I point out even with meat people still starve making it a necessity right now and in the past. Your entire "humans claim to be moral and intelligent. If that was true, they'd realize that members of other species needn't be slaughtered for such selfish reasons other than actual survival" is void. Humans have been eating meat to survive. Sure some eat meat in regions that have a lot of fruits and stuff but whatever they don't eat will usually get shipped off to another place that doesn't have that. That's why living in Ohio I can eat a banana. So humans call themselves moral and intelligent b/c they eat meat to keep members of there species from dying. That is a smart and moral thing to do (the way we do it today with sustained livestock and humane treatment). And don't go trying to say that you said if there is an overabundance of food with your first post containing: "All humans have managed to do is delude themselves into believing that they are superior to every other species on the planet so that they can slaughter innocent animals in order to satisfy their taste buds" Right there you accuse humans of doing it to only satisfy their tastebuds which means you somehow think/thought just the plants we have could sustain us.
Its only delusional if it were not true. Humans do not think they are the fastest or strongest but the most intelligent and most lethal(when using our intelligence.) In fact the human species is the only one to expand to all 7 continents plus the oceans and even space. We are the only species that can craft our planet into what we want it to be (for better or worst) now I don't mean that we have control over nature but if humans want to live on a mountain side we carve the rock and make homes. If we want to explore the oceans we build crafts to let us. The surface of this planet has become our domain b/c of our superior intelligence. The fact is when we are gone our legacy will be far seen for millenia. Future sentient being will be finding our artifacts our art our inventions. The most any other animal will leave behind is some fossils and crude oil. You might not like it but its humans that are on top. For a long time it was a leisurely sport to go out to the jungles, savannas, plains, where ever and kill the biggest baddest thing living in themjust for fun. If we decide we don't like a large species or that it is getting in the way we destroy them its not pretty but its a fact. You don't even try to argue how humans are not the top predator instead you make factless claims that we are delusional in our way of thinking instead you say my argument is based on smugness when you are the smug one pointing your nose up at your own species. You are the one putting humans higher than animals by giving us different rules to live by. Its ok for a fox to sneak in a hen house for an easy meal but not ok for humans to have the hen house b/c somewhere down the line we stopped being animals and became something different with different rules in your eyes, something that needs to live up to some arbitrary standard in your head. Before you start saying that I'm acting superior to anything look at yourself. You have said many times that humans lack morality and intelligences for "slaughtering animals to satisfy their taste buds" and since you obviously are a vegetarian that makes you smarter and more moral then those who enjoy eating meat ie most people.
"All of that was said because humans usually consider themselves 'moral' and 'intelligent', and I merely said that if that was true, it seems to me that they wouldn't do such pointless things."
You still don't show explain how eating meat makes humans less intelligent than they claim to be. You show no facts only your opinion.
"I don't know how hard it is for you to understand that vegetarians exist and that if there is no other food available, like in the situations you describe, I have no problem with eating meat. The only time that I'm opposed to it is if there is an abundance of other food available and there's no need to slaughter another animal (even a human). I've been saying this the entire time."
There isn't an over abundance of food right now. Even with all the meat that is ate there still isn't enough to go around. If there was everyone would be fed there would be no starving children in Africa. What are you proposing we start the year eating only fruits and veggies then 6-8 months in when all of that is gone we switch to eating only meat (since all the other stuff would be gone)
If that is the case then all these CEOs should be for this not against it.
The whole thing that made Goldeneye so fun on multiplayer was the fact that you are all there looking at the same screen peeking over at the other players screens laughing when you mess up their ambush. That and paintball mode. I mean all you needed was one friend with an N64 and a book bag and you had a party.
You might not have claimed to be moral but you have said all of this:
"Yet, humans claim to be moral and intelligent. If that was true, they'd realize that members of other species needn't be slaughtered for such selfish reasons other than actual survival (which doesn't happen often, as there's usually other kinds of food)."
"Why would a 'moral' being slaughter another being who suffers just as they do for no reason? Humans are supposedly 'intelligent', and they should start to show it."
"We're also supposedly 'moral' and 'intelligent'. If either of those were true, we'd show self control and not pointlessly slaughter other beings for no other reason than to satisfy our taste buds when there are alternate food sources"
"I've said time and time again that unless there is nothing else to eat *except* meat, there's no point in eating it. An intelligent being wouldn't mindlessly slaughter another being for no reason, unless they *have* to."
I don't know why it is so hard for you to understand that we can't go meatless. To do that would involve moving everyone that lives on fertile land to someplace desolate to use that land to grow plants on, we are talking about displacing billions of people. Also what humans claim to be doesn't mean shit. You can claim to be holy, you can claim to be straight you can claim anything you want and it doesn't mean anything, hell I'm an 8foot tall purple bird. Plus even if people claim they are moral or intelligent they are doing it by their definition you can't just come by and say you can't be that b/c if you were you wouldn't eat meat. An even bigger point is you say an intelligent species wouldn't slaughter lower animals for food? Why the hell not if its an efficient way to get the nutrition you need? I mean seriously I'm 1000 pound steer will give you about 750lbs of edible meat which if that was all a person ate would keep them fed I don't know 1 1/2 years. Assuming they ate 1Lb a day. How much land would it take to grow enough wheat or potatoes to do that? It really doesn't matter because you are on such a moral high horse you can't see past the fog you surround yourself with to see the facts which are without meat we would starve which when we started starving then to you it would be ok to eat meat until we are not starving anymore and new crops have grown in which case the cycle would then just repeat itself so how about we skip the starving part and just have a system to make sure the animals do not suffer for for what they give us.
"I've said time and time again that unless there is nothing else to eat *except* meat, there's no point in eating it. An intelligent being wouldn't mindlessly slaughter another being for no reason, unless they *have* to."
See your not understanding. Even with eating both meat and veggies/fruits we do not have enough to go around. So if you take meat out of the equation we would just have more people starving to death. In other words we are already at the point that we have to eat meat to keep people from dying. We don't eat meat just for the fun of it but to survive.
"Not really. There's cheap diets where you can still get your nutrition. Meat isn't exactly cheap, either. This would also a problem with our current capitalistic society."
Unfortunately we have to have a capitalistic society until we reach a point where there is enough of all basic needs to let all people live comfortably. So as soon as someone invents a Star Trek like replicator there will always be people on top and people on the bottom. Those kind of Marxist utopias cannot exist until everyone can live happy healthy lives.
"If everyone on earth said something incorrect, it would still be incorrect. What the majority says or thinks is irrelevant."
All that does is point out that you think your way is the right way no matter what. Your claiming the only way to be moral or intelligent is to stop eating meat. The fact is your views are totally skewed. Morality has nothing to do with eating food even if it is animals, but morality does have to do with the way the animal is treated when slaughtered. Over the years the quality of life the animals get and the way they are slaughtered has reflected our morals. And as far as intelligence goes we have used generations of breeding techniques and plenty of genetic science to make the animals larger and produce more so less need to be slaughtered hell we have used that to grow bigger better fruits and veggies that can stand up to disease and pests better.
"Have you read my comments at all? I said that *if someone is going to starve*, then that would be a reason to eat meat. If it's just to satisfy their taste buds (as it is in many cases in many countries), then there's no point."
Do you not understand they many humans die already from starvation and getting rid of meat will only further hunger?
"I think it would be best if that in vitro meat that you linked to was used, instead. As far as I read, there'd be no need to slaughter animals to make it or eat it."
That is still only done in the lab but you don't seem to understand that breakthroughs in science takes years to become commercial.
Eating is for survival. And as I pointed out that you failed to even comment on in order to eat an entirely meatless diet that has everything you need in it costs way too much for most people. And yes what we are typing on are merely toys and I think that's pretty good going from "Ooo fire hot" to we can travel to the moon in what 10,000 years? I mean just look at the advancements made in the last 200 years. I mean when have humans as a whole or even as a majority ever said its immoral to eat animals? I have never heard that except from a small % of the population. If the human race stopped eating meat we would starve. We can't even feed everyone on the planet right now with meat.
There most vegitarians are either sickly looking or have diets that are very expensive. Unless you eat tons of tofu or something else its hard to supplement the nutrition you get from meat. And as for moral and intelligent, Being moral is a completely worthless word. Morality to you is not to kill innocent animals morality to others is sacrificing animals to their god/s. Morality is completely in the eyes of the beholder. Our intelligence speaks for itself just look at the device you are typing on. The closest things animals have to inventions are a few tools and those usually are just common objects used as tools like a stick or rock. And it doesn't matter if you eat meat or not. B/c if your ancestors never ate meat there lives would have been completely different and the things that happened that had to happen for your existence to come into place never would have.
Why would a 'moral' being slaughter another being who suffers just as they do for no reason? Humans are supposedly 'intelligent', and they should start to show it.
I'm sure they would rather not exist if the sole purpose for their existence was to be given a cruel death for absolutely no reason, if they were able to comprehend that.
There's simply no need to do so. They would rather *not* be slaughtered, that much is certain. If they knew it was coming, they certainly would be afraid. There's simply no point in doing this unless it is absolutely needed (self defense, survival).
Living for a brief period before you're slaughtered sounds better than being free and living a normal life? I don't even want to know what your views on what actions the government should take are.
Yes, the alternative is leave them alone unless needed.
Unfortunately that's not how the world works until we can grow meat in a petri dish we will continue to slaughter animals. And hey look tat is humans beig smarter so we won't have to use live animals. It is human nature we are omnivores. If it wasn't for humans hunting animals we wouldn't be what we are today. Hell the reasons humans started spreading around the globe was by following the food, the migrating animals. And the fact is millions upon millions of cows sheep chickens and what not would never have a life at all its like asking an embryo if it would rather not be born and experience life or to be born be taken care of never having a care in the world but once they reached maturity they would be killed quickly and hardly any pain to serve an important need. You act like it isn't necessary but its the only cost effective way to feed billions hell your probably against fish farms too. Once you get a grip on reality and understand that eating meat is an ingrained part of human nature and human civilization and without becoming meat eaters you me everyone on /. would not exist.
You seem to forget that out of ALL the animals in the world humans are on top of the food chain. Your argument now has no basis on which to stand on. Have a nice day.