6 ms·

(1) [Thing] is bad for the world (2) But I want it. This is the recipe for the road we are on.

Asooka 4y ago
If eating meat were bad for the environment, all predators who eat exclusively large prey would be extinct. We can have a discussion about how much meat per year production is sustainable, but I'm not going to start eating bugs.
- deltille 4y ago
  Most predators that eat exclusively large prey don't number in the billions. Any reason you are averse to eating bugs specifically?
  - IntrepidWorm 4y ago
    I second this - cow based protein and cricket based protein both supply adequate value in an average human diet - why is there such a stigma against one versus the other?
    - incone123 4y ago
      I ordered a cricket steak and was a little disappointed. But seriously its not stigma, its cuisine preference.
      - IntrepidWorm 4y ago
        Mmm.... .0003 oz cutlets.
      - wongarsu 4y ago
        Crickets don't taste like much. But we also each chicken. It's all about how you prepare it.
        smcl 4y ago
        I had them fried and seasoned/salted iirc, they were surprisingly good little snack. I think it'd take a bit of time for most people to not be squeamish about casually eating them, rather than as a little novelty thing at a food festival.
        incone123 4y ago
        I meant it as a joke about the size of crickets but I didn't write it very well.
        smcl 4y ago
        I liked it :)
    - m_eiman 4y ago
      It's cultural of course, but the funny thing is that kinda-insects are already culturally accepted food in the west – but only ones from the sea such as shrimp, crabs, etc.
  - throwaway4aday 4y ago
    I don't think it's a matter of "ew gross bugs" it's that there is always a strong undertone of "we should ban beef and replace it with bugs" in these conversations. That kind of thing gets people riled up, and it should.
- fsloth 4y ago
  Humans plus agricultural animals are 96% of all the mammalian biomass. In light of these numbers I don't understand the environmental rationalization based on the diets of predators.
  - throwaway4aday 4y ago
    You do realize that mammals are the smallest class by biomass right? Well, other than Cnidaria but who counts them anyways.
    - fsloth 4y ago
      Of course! But I felt the argument was mostly about mammals (how it's different to talk about predators meat and mans meat eating habits). Pointing out the scale of biomass is of course relevant to this discussion - there is so much of it, it's quite uninnovative humans should fixate on only few species.
- smcl 4y ago
  And where in the comment thread was anyone saying a) all instances of meat-eating is bad for the environment b) you will need to start eating insects
  - llanowarelves 4y ago
    Why does anyone in the thread need to have said it? That's been in the news cycle for the last half-decade and major NGOs as well as governments now (EU approved bugs as food) are on board, saying it'll be necessary to feed everybody their protein in the future. Why do you think that's not relevant?
    - smcl 4y ago
      Because they were responding to a person as if they had said it. You can't have a discussion where you just make up what the other person said and respond to that. And in fact you've done exactly the same. You've assigned a position to me that I haven't stated at all. It'd be like me ending this comment with: Why would you make such a inflammatory anti-muslim joke on Eid Al Fitr of all days?
      - llanowarelves 4y ago
        The bug comment is not saying anyone said it. It's to demonstrate limits. On a discussion about general religions, or future relevant policies, a comment like this would be normal, "I can respect Islam but I'm not going to stop eating pork". And then I guess you would say "who said you have to stop eating pork?".
        smcl 4y ago
        We can only guess the intent. You think it's a clever debate strategy, I think the person just wanted to provoke an argument.
        llanowarelves 4y ago
- lm28469 4y ago
  > If eating meat were bad for the environment, all predators who eat exclusively large prey would be extinct. It's not that eating meat is inherently bad, it's the abomination we created to make it a world wide cheap commodity. Just like a single car isn't a problem, the problem is the scale and the fact that we built our societies around it as if it was just an inevitable fact of life > all predators who eat exclusively large prey would be extinct. Lions don't have literal meat factories, don't treat animals like merchandise and don't use low quality processed meat as a filler for everything. This is such a low quality analogy. Look at that video and tell me it's just what large predators do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWbgZQxd6J4&t=106s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWbgZQxd6J4&t=106s > I'm not going to start eating bugs. Nobody saying that, I'm 90% vegetarian and I never had a single bug in my life. I'm lifting weight three times a week and rock climbing twice a week with no issues too so here goes the "muh protein/energy" argument. The bug based food and ultra processed vegetarian/vegan options are just a marketing fad imho Again, eating meat is fine, eating 500gr of low quality meat every single isn't, it's just about scale.
WaxedChewbacca 4y ago
[dead]
engineer_22 4y ago
If an impact-free human being is the goal, the only solution is genocide.
- krageon 4y ago
  This would be a pretty interesting point to engage with if you elaborated a little on why you believe this is the case and where you believe the GP said this.
mathgladiator 4y ago
(3) And im willing to pay for it. I only eat 100% grass-fed beef, and I believe the world would be better without corn fed abominations.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- PheonixPharts 4y ago
  > (3) And im willing to pay for it. If the true externalities of your consumption are not priced into the product then you're not really paying for it. As a general rule this is the problem with our entire lifestyle. Very few people will deny that we do not life a sustainable life style, and yet almost none consider what this means. The definition of unsustainable is that you are consuming beyond your ability to pay. If all the true future costs of our industrial life were factored into the products we consume, we could not afford any of them.
  - lolsal 4y ago
    > If the true externalities of your consumption are not priced into the product then you're not really paying for it. This is true, but other than showing up to the butcher with my money, what else can I do? Some _other thing_ needs to motivate these externalities into the price; not the consumer. The only thing I could conceive of doing is voting with my wallet, which I do when I buy grass-fed meat.
jdrc 4y ago
The order is reversed
refurb 4y ago
That's a silly argument because you being alive is "bad for the world". But hey, I'm guessing you "want to live"? So selfish.

If eating meat were bad for the environment, all predators who eat exclusively large prey would be extinct. We can have a discussion about how much meat per year production is sustainable, but I'm not going to start eating bugs.

deltille 4y ago
Most predators that eat exclusively large prey don't number in the billions. Any reason you are averse to eating bugs specifically?
- IntrepidWorm 4y ago
  I second this - cow based protein and cricket based protein both supply adequate value in an average human diet - why is there such a stigma against one versus the other?
  - incone123 4y ago
    I ordered a cricket steak and was a little disappointed. But seriously its not stigma, its cuisine preference.
    - IntrepidWorm 4y ago
      Mmm.... .0003 oz cutlets.
    - wongarsu 4y ago
      Crickets don't taste like much. But we also each chicken. It's all about how you prepare it.
      - smcl 4y ago
        I had them fried and seasoned/salted iirc, they were surprisingly good little snack. I think it'd take a bit of time for most people to not be squeamish about casually eating them, rather than as a little novelty thing at a food festival.
      - incone123 4y ago
        I meant it as a joke about the size of crickets but I didn't write it very well.
        smcl 4y ago
        I liked it :)
  - m_eiman 4y ago
    It's cultural of course, but the funny thing is that kinda-insects are already culturally accepted food in the west – but only ones from the sea such as shrimp, crabs, etc.
- throwaway4aday 4y ago
  I don't think it's a matter of "ew gross bugs" it's that there is always a strong undertone of "we should ban beef and replace it with bugs" in these conversations. That kind of thing gets people riled up, and it should.
fsloth 4y ago
Humans plus agricultural animals are 96% of all the mammalian biomass. In light of these numbers I don't understand the environmental rationalization based on the diets of predators.
- throwaway4aday 4y ago
  You do realize that mammals are the smallest class by biomass right? Well, other than Cnidaria but who counts them anyways.
  - fsloth 4y ago
    Of course! But I felt the argument was mostly about mammals (how it's different to talk about predators meat and mans meat eating habits). Pointing out the scale of biomass is of course relevant to this discussion - there is so much of it, it's quite uninnovative humans should fixate on only few species.
smcl 4y ago
And where in the comment thread was anyone saying a) all instances of meat-eating is bad for the environment b) you will need to start eating insects
- llanowarelves 4y ago
  Why does anyone in the thread need to have said it? That's been in the news cycle for the last half-decade and major NGOs as well as governments now (EU approved bugs as food) are on board, saying it'll be necessary to feed everybody their protein in the future. Why do you think that's not relevant?
  - smcl 4y ago
    Because they were responding to a person as if they had said it. You can't have a discussion where you just make up what the other person said and respond to that. And in fact you've done exactly the same. You've assigned a position to me that I haven't stated at all. It'd be like me ending this comment with: Why would you make such a inflammatory anti-muslim joke on Eid Al Fitr of all days?
    - llanowarelves 4y ago
      The bug comment is not saying anyone said it. It's to demonstrate limits. On a discussion about general religions, or future relevant policies, a comment like this would be normal, "I can respect Islam but I'm not going to stop eating pork". And then I guess you would say "who said you have to stop eating pork?".
      - smcl 4y ago
        We can only guess the intent. You think it's a clever debate strategy, I think the person just wanted to provoke an argument.
        llanowarelves 4y ago
lm28469 4y ago
> If eating meat were bad for the environment, all predators who eat exclusively large prey would be extinct. It's not that eating meat is inherently bad, it's the abomination we created to make it a world wide cheap commodity. Just like a single car isn't a problem, the problem is the scale and the fact that we built our societies around it as if it was just an inevitable fact of life > all predators who eat exclusively large prey would be extinct. Lions don't have literal meat factories, don't treat animals like merchandise and don't use low quality processed meat as a filler for everything. This is such a low quality analogy. Look at that video and tell me it's just what large predators do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWbgZQxd6J4&t=106s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWbgZQxd6J4&t=106s > I'm not going to start eating bugs. Nobody saying that, I'm 90% vegetarian and I never had a single bug in my life. I'm lifting weight three times a week and rock climbing twice a week with no issues too so here goes the "muh protein/energy" argument. The bug based food and ultra processed vegetarian/vegan options are just a marketing fad imho Again, eating meat is fine, eating 500gr of low quality meat every single isn't, it's just about scale.

WaxedChewbacca 4y ago

[dead]

engineer_22 4y ago

If an impact-free human being is the goal, the only solution is genocide.

krageon 4y ago
This would be a pretty interesting point to engage with if you elaborated a little on why you believe this is the case and where you believe the GP said this.

mathgladiator 4y ago

(3) And im willing to pay for it. I only eat 100% grass-fed beef, and I believe the world would be better without corn fed abominations.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
PheonixPharts 4y ago
> (3) And im willing to pay for it. If the true externalities of your consumption are not priced into the product then you're not really paying for it. As a general rule this is the problem with our entire lifestyle. Very few people will deny that we do not life a sustainable life style, and yet almost none consider what this means. The definition of unsustainable is that you are consuming beyond your ability to pay. If all the true future costs of our industrial life were factored into the products we consume, we could not afford any of them.
- lolsal 4y ago
  > If the true externalities of your consumption are not priced into the product then you're not really paying for it. This is true, but other than showing up to the butcher with my money, what else can I do? Some _other thing_ needs to motivate these externalities into the price; not the consumer. The only thing I could conceive of doing is voting with my wallet, which I do when I buy grass-fed meat.

jdrc 4y ago

The order is reversed

refurb 4y ago

That's a silly argument because you being alive is "bad for the world". But hey, I'm guessing you "want to live"? So selfish.