U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-26-2009, 04:54 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,391 posts, read 37,724,158 times
Reputation: 22529

Advertisements

Interesting, I don't even listen to Fox News. International Herald Tribune, Arts & Letters Daily, CNN, NPR, with a soupcon of others sprinkled throughout is more my speed. Not wanting to read is NOT my problem - having the time to read everything I'd like to is.

I'm a researcher by inclination. Thus, I do my deadlevel best to avoid clearly biased sources on either side of an issue, and most especially I give them a thorough going over if they support what I'd like to believe, because I've learned that's when we're most likely to give a source a pass. Sound familiar?

Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming

Last edited by vec101; 04-27-2009 at 09:44 AM..

 
Old 04-26-2009, 09:01 PM
 
Location: I think my user name clarifies that.
8,293 posts, read 23,118,431 times
Reputation: 3889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xpat View Post
LOL again!

She cites several sources which were then provided in links
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming


Several sources have been provided in addition to back up these claims (from scientists, government, etc)
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming
I've provided lots of sources -
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming
.
Hey -
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming
, why not respond to the FACTS presented in post #73?

Last edited by vec101; 04-27-2009 at 09:45 AM..
 
Old 04-26-2009, 09:26 PM
 
Location: Brusssels
1,933 posts, read 3,413,625 times
Reputation: 1895
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming

Post # 73? You mean the one which does not address the environmental impacts of the meat industry but rather throws out factoids about lawn watering then citing a pro-dairy industry source on another non-related facet? You were presented with quite a few additional sources confirming the land use issues, etc but decided to ignore them. If you disagree, fine. If you simply disagree with what is being said, fair enough. If you instead just try to discredit it by name calling, you discredit yourself in the process. Until then, perhaps we can agree to disagree.

@ TexasHorseLady
I read those same things and more.
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming
If you simply disagree with what is being said, fair enough. If you instead just try to discredit it by name calling, you discredit yourself in the process. Until then, perhaps we can agree to disagree.

Last edited by vec101; 04-27-2009 at 09:46 AM..
 
Old 04-26-2009, 10:03 PM
 
Location: I think my user name clarifies that.
8,293 posts, read 23,118,431 times
Reputation: 3889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xpat View Post
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming

Post # 73? You mean the one which does not address the environmental impacts of the meat industry but rather throws out factoids about lawn watering then citing a pro-dairy industry source on another non-related facet? You were presented with quite a few additional sources confirming the land use issues, etc but decided to ignore them. If you disagree, fine. If you simply disagree with what is being said, fair enough.
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming
Until then, perhaps we can agree to disagree.

Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming

One of that goof-ball's assertions is that the livestock industry uses more water than everything else combined. So I post a link that proves that's false. 56% (that's over half, by the way) of water used is human consumption, and 57% of that water is used to water lawns.

So right there, Kathy Freston's assertions are absolutely annihilated. Everything else she claims is equally absurd and easily disproven.
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming
.


Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming

Last edited by vec101; 04-27-2009 at 09:48 AM..
 
Old 04-27-2009, 03:58 AM
 
1,297 posts, read 3,120,938 times
Reputation: 1506
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueshire View Post
Gee folks, sorry to "burst your bubble" about me. I am not some "dumb" hick farmer wannabe raisin' a few "nannies & billies" from my sheep/goat herd of scrungy misfit genetic freaks! Quite the contrary.
I know that there is a BIG difference in sheep and goats. I have raised QUALITY Purebred dairy goats for over 20 years, with some of my does holding title to BDIS and various milk titles. I also understand genetic traits that I would and do cull for! I cull very heavily and also keep records of said problems in my small, but quality, herd of dairy goats. I also trace extensively lineage on my animals and their ancestors. As understanding and knowing and eliminating problems helps in building quality. As I said before, I strongly suspect it was something that the does ingested while pregnant, as the 2 animals in questions' pedigrees and ancestors have been questioned and studied. The second non-related kid was born with the defect even MORE pronounced! My main intent with my farm is health and quality, as natural as possible, without chemicals, hybrids, etc... being forced upon me! This is America and we do have a right to question a problem that arises... Oh and for the record, YES, the 2 kids in my herd were done in humanely, not passed on as a "real good billy goat, gurunteeeeeed to eat every tin can he can get his chompers on!
Well I am a dumb hick farmer and darn proud of it. What I know comes from 34 years of being deeply engrossed in a family that has three dairy farms, with three different methodologies on how to make money at farming. Because I work on all 3 farms at times, as well as taking care of my own sheep farm, I would say I actually am privy to a wealth of information. Heck while other families have easter dinner and chat about the rumors of the weekly world news, we talk farming. Still I tell everyone that I am "just a dumb farmer" and its true.

I actually meant no ill-contempt towards you at all, but you must first realize you are a homestead and not a a farm. Big difference.

The other difference is that the genetic requirements for production farming are far different then that of raising show quality sheep and goats. There is nothing wrong with the later, but the virtues of cross-bred vigor are well renowned. By your own admission you took two pure-breed breeds and mixed them together...you are hoping to get the best of both breeds to gain traits that are productive. BUT it will take a few years of cross-breeding to get the exact traits you want. On your first trial you got parrot-mouth...no big deal you cull them and try again until the traits begin to get more favorable. I have no issue with this, but you cannot blame GM Corn seed for this abnormality.

One of the biggest reasons for that is because the plecenta of of a sheep and goat is much, much thicker than that of a human. I have some concerns here with White Muscle Disease due to the lack of selenium in my feed. In talking with my sheep nutritionist, he informed me that treating a lamb post-birth was the only way to deliver selenium to the lamb as the plencta is too thick so increasing the ewes selenium intake while pregnant is futile. Therefore I think it is silly to think that you would change the genetics of a herd of goats by feeding them GM Corn due to this thickened plecenta.

Furthermore, I have always fed my sheep GM Corn and do so at pretty high levels. I give my sheep a ration of 60% haylage/ 40% corn silage and give the sheep a salt/mineral suppliment per day with 2 feedings per day during our 150 day winter feeding season. My lambs have always been very robust and incredibly healthy as verified by the New England USDA Vet, the Maine State Vet and everyone else that has been here.

These are real-world situations based on feeding GM Corn that included the entire stalk at high tonnage levels on a higher number of animals...it stands to reason that if GM Corn indeed changed genetics, it would have done so here.

Don't change what you are doing my friend, just change what you are blaming.
 
Old 04-27-2009, 06:21 AM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,178 posts, read 9,394,785 times
Reputation: 9552
Is it 'research' to read blogs instead of actual news sources?

Sorry, but I can cite blogs that predict the end of the world in 2012, so all of this doesn't matter anyway; or blogs that promote that stockpiling guns and ammo is the only way to survive; or blogs that say that the government is purposely poisoning our water, food, air, to kill off 80% of the population so that the rest can live in a wonderful healthy world and take advantage of all of the advances while paying none of the costs. All of them can cite links that "prove" their contentions. Someone who has no certification, no experience, or no intrinsic knowledge in the subjects that they discuss can post anything on the internet or even on the editorial page of a newspaper - and scores will believe it.

Opinion doesn't count for beans unless there is a strong citing of actual hands on research to prove contentions. Sort of like Al Gore 'testifying' in front of Congress about global warming - the Dems refused to allow a scientist with provable facts to come in and refute him, even though he was scheduled and flew from England to do so. It's all about what people want to believe any more, not what facts can be presented on both sides, or on many. Me, I prefer facts to emotion, to read all sides, to ask questions, and then to make up my own mind, not have it made up for me on the basis of a handful of emotional scat.

When my daughter was in college, she and some others raised heck because they were in fields (computers and bio science) that require lab work and testing of theories in controlled conditions, and were frequently taught by some 'educators' who expected them to swallow untested presumption as fact. So not all 'facts' are even facts, even in the universities. Some are just promoted by professors with agendas.
 
Old 04-27-2009, 06:27 AM
 
Location: I think my user name clarifies that.
8,293 posts, read 23,118,431 times
Reputation: 3889
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCGranny View Post
Is it 'research' to read blogs instead of actual news sources?

Sorry, but I can cite blogs that predict the end of the world in 2012, so all of this doesn't matter anyway; or blogs that promote that stockpiling guns and ammo is the only way to survive; or blogs that say that the government is purposely poisoning our water, food, air, to kill off 80% of the population so that the rest can live in a wonderful healthy world and take advantage of all of the advances while paying none of the costs. Someone who has no certification, no experience, or no intrinsic knowledge in the subjects that they discuss can post anything on the internet or even on the editorial page of a newspaper - and scores will believe it.

Opinion doesn't count for beans unless there is a strong citing of actual hands on research to prove contentions. Sort of like Al Gore 'testifying' in front of Congress about global warming - the Dems refused to allow a scientist with provable facts to come in and refute him, even though he was scheduled and flew from England to do so. It's all about what people want to believe any more, not what facts can be presented on both sides, or on many. Me, I prefer facts to emotion.
Exactly!

The global warming & environmental alarmists are their own worst enemies. And the presence of the internet, where all manner of irresponsible writing can be thought of as well-researched journalism, spreads it like prairie grass fires.
 
Old 04-28-2009, 09:06 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
134 posts, read 281,595 times
Reputation: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omaha Rocks View Post
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming

One of that goof-ball's assertions is that the livestock industry uses more water than everything else combined. So I post a link that proves that's false. 56% (that's over half, by the way) of water used is human consumption, and 57% of that water is used to water lawns.

So right there, Kathy Freston's assertions are absolutely annihilated. Everything else she claims is equally absurd and easily disproven.
Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming
.


Moderator cut: No personal attacks, insults, or flaming
I looked and you produced regional numbers in an attempt to disprove national numbers provided by someone else. Sorry but wishful extrapolation won't fly.

I understand that you vehemently disagree with the idea that meat production has a disproportionate effect on the environment but you have yet to convince me of anything nor refute the points in the OP.
 
Old 04-28-2009, 09:08 PM
 
Location: I think my user name clarifies that.
8,293 posts, read 23,118,431 times
Reputation: 3889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoonman View Post
I looked and you produced regional numbers in an attempt to disprove national numbers provided by someone else. Sorry but wishful extrapolation won't fly.

I understand that you vehemently disagree with the idea that meat production has a disproportionate effect on the environment but you have yet to convince me of anything nor refute the points in the OP.
...and nobody ever will.
 
Old 04-28-2009, 09:10 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
134 posts, read 281,595 times
Reputation: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omaha Rocks View Post
...and nobody ever will.

Prime example of projection - see above.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:34 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top