Unless of course you're using an Oozi (inaccuracy, probability and all) ...


(B.T.W. Is it the case that you have to have an 'M' at the start of your name to 'Troll' on SPCR these days... or can the rest of us join in?... )


Pete

*cough* net launcher *cough*



I think so, Magentafront gets accused of trolling a lot.

It has to begin with a bilabial sound, so you're in.

I don't know about the topic of turning vermin into tasty processed food, but after watching some shows on TV I think that we need to find a way to make insects more palatable. It's a lot more efficent than rearing animals and they offer more nutrition too. The tricky part is the word "palatable"....

More on topic, I heard raising animals creates a lot of by-product pollution and wast though.... which is unfortunate since I love my beef!

The day they can grow a prime rib in a vat and sell it without waste - I'm in!

How about turning them into pate and hot dogs? What's that refered to, the proccess finner than grounding? And gradually moving out of the chicken-turkey-pig-&-cow-box.



We're already discussing fart power.

Actually, humans did help create the middle eastern desert, or at the very least accelerated the process. Irrigation for thousands of years has resulted in saline soil in the cradle of civilization. One of the oldest known stories in the world is the Epic of Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh was a Sumerian King famous for among other things, his prowess in cutting down the cedar forest and inciting the anger of the gods for it.

I don't have any problem with eating the rats. I just think, if nobody wants them, it's practically a non-issue anyway, because why should we care if the birds go extinct? It's not like without those birds, the global ecosystem collapses.

At the same time, I don't think we should just trash our environment on purpose, like dumping millions of gallons of toxic waste on a rainforest or something like that, because the consequences outweigh the benefits.

And yes, of course progress should be efficient. But excessive environmentalism shouldn't stand in the way of progress.

I maintain that every single "environmentalist" on this board is a hypocrite. What do you use to post messages here? That's right, a computer. And how was the energy generated that allows you to use that computer? Solar power? Maybe one or two, and then, what powered the machines that made those solar panels? More solar panels? Come on.

You have to start somewhere... also, you forgot to mention what powered the machines that made the computer, which would cause far more pollution than producing the solar panels.

Pregress should be efficient? By saying that environmentalism would almost stop progress, you're implying that progress through only increased efficiency can't be significant.



Has anyone actually labelled themselves an environmentalist?



This is absolutely ridiculous, do really need an explaination why it's so horribly incorrect to say people shouldn't work towards a goal unless they've already achived it?

Sorry for missing the fart power stuff... I was in a hurry and didn't read through everything.

I think people wouldn't eat insect containing food if they knew it was insects. First the food industry needs to come up with some exotic sounding euphemism for it, kind of like how it calls guts and random organs offal or sweet breads.

Arthur C Clarkesuggested that vegetable crops should be grown instead of "wasting" it on meat production. He argued that global famines could be avoided. He probably had forgotten about the common agricultural policy in Europe!
What about going back in time and start processing dinosaur meat. Anyone up for it?

Yes, but then we don't have meat to eat.

Would you really want to force billions of people to become vegetarians? I guarantee there would be resistance.

Not that I have evidence to back it up (heaven forbid) but I recall a lot of people telling me that the world currently produces more than enough food to sustain the human population including meat consumption- their argument was that other factors were causing famine- infrastructure, corruption, etc.

That said, props for being forward looking- with population growth market forces may force the majority of the Earth's population to go vegetarian anyway, but getting a head start could preserve a lot of resources.

I was thinking, have you heard that statistic that says each packet of M&Ms has 1/4 grasshopper? Well, why don't they up the percentage? slowly-like. Pretty soon M&Ms will be very nutritious and the younger generation will be familiar with insects as a part of consumption. </kidding>

I can't wait for 'Cricket Crunch'. Don't forget 'Cockroach Cluster'. Mmm, they're delicious!

Hello,

If it came down to starvation or vegetarianism -- then I don't think that there would be much resistance!

It is very inefficient to feed an herbivore a high protein diet -- when they have to eat something like 20 pounds of plant protein to produce 1 pound of meat protein. If we let the herbivores eat grass, and then we get to eat both the 20 pounds of plant protein and all the meat protein that they so nicely converted from something that we have about three-too-few stomachs to digest!