3 ms·
But a trillion animals for no purpose whatsoever is “infinitely better” than 12 monkeys, and you’re ok with that? That’s based on good science?
by madaxe_again 3y ago
But a trillion animals for no purpose whatsoever is “infinitely better” than 12 monkeys, and you’re ok with that? That’s based on good science?
- Veserv 3y agoYou know very well that eating animals has a purpose. The very fact that you are arguing that it is okay to torture monkeys means that you do not actually believe that eating animals is wrong. But you know what does have no purpose whatsoever, killing monkeys because you can not read the instructions. In fact, any organization incompetent enough to do that regularly will invariably kill people during human trials due to avoidable mistakes, fail to achieve anything, and possibly poison the well for actually useful animal testing of brain implants and more. Stopping Neuralink's total disregard for basic scientific protocol around the ethical usage of animal test subjects saves lives and increases the rate of medical progress. Every time you protect their unethical animal testing you are delaying the discovery of robust solutions to paralysis, and you are okay with that? I am not.
- madaxe_again 3y agoYou didn’t read TFA, did you. I’m talking about animals which are killed and sent to landfill as a result of agricultural failure, not animals which are eaten. But anyway, I hear you loud and clear - “rocket man bad”.