安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
And you can get away with quips that really showed me, along with my entire knowledge of human development. But I still get to eat cows, along with most of the world's economy.
Yeah, if I valued the opinions of those people, I'd be one. Good thing I don't. Their food is awful, and amazingly, they tend to concentrate into failed states, as if they had some other agenda uniting them.
That's just me being crazy, though. No way they're a bunch of anti-capitalist puppets who have no idea what they're doing, which is precisely why they're going to leave me alone and never start shaming or barbarously attacking people who eat meat.
I don't actually believe the environmental arguments, and with good reason. They don't make any sense in the light they are portrayed in. If a few hundred million Europeans poisoined the Earth with carbon over less than a century, we are already well and truly ****ed by more than 5 billion people in developing nations doing the exact same thing.
Of course, we were ****ed anyway by the fact that the global mean temperature is higher than what we have now. If that was always going to happen, what's the benefit to driving around in a car that relies on radioactive rare-earth metals for charge, eating vegetables, and paying lots of otherwise productive capital into energy sources we know to be ineficient?
The benefit is profit for the people who back that crap, and they have made their intentions clear over and over again. Where they can't be efficient in the market, they try to take control through force of law. Your insistence, and the insistence of your sources, is a reflection of that. The old "It's for your own good" ploy.
Like hell it is. The day I start listening to people who say "the science is in," as if such a complex science as global climatology could be understood by the modern yuppie, is the day I shoot my worthless brain.
As I said before, you're not saving anything. All you're doing is being self-satisfied with your moral choices. You have a right to them, but you do not have a right to defraud others.
I don't think you intentionally defraud, nor do many, and I don't judge you for it. But just look at the stains who share your views. Look at what they make, or more often, don't make, and how they whine. How they riot. How they force. How they justify theft and violence.
They are legion, and they are out to create the same hell they always create without knowing it. Given that, surely you can forgive me for being skeptical. Be vegan and go in peace if that's what you want. You can even try to convince me. But do me the return favor of at least bothering to address my arguments and respecting my choices.
I cannot respect your sources because they don't convince, they demand. Demand is the resort of the illogical, right before violence. I do not respect that mentality. Except when I have to. It always comes to war. I cannot see this "green" perspective as being on the right side. Especially not when it comes to the cost in human lives. Humans are more important than animals. Each one is imbued with the potential intelligence of a supercomputer and beyond.
I would not trade them for the Earth in its entirety, even if I am willing to let some be free to make stupid choices and die. Humanity is a blessing to existence, so long as it is permitted to exist. It is the only thing that can save this planet through its ingenuity and understanding. And if you try to make it eat only plants it will lose billions. The energy you would need to make a peanut-munching society would actually create the death you fear, as nuttrients would have to be drawn directly from the soil.
How about, let's not do something that stupid at all, and ruin the soil in the name of protecting it, and let herbivores with gastric systems designed to process roughage to make it into fuel for us? Or, we could do what we already do, and genetically engineer them, along with the crops they eat, to make the ever-increasing food supply we have. Just a thought that has fueled society.
But no, you can't have that, can you? It would destroy your sense of identity, make your opinions invalid, and keep you from saving the world. No worries, I'm in the same boat, and I think technoloigcal growth is the key to saving the world. But so long as you keep this Vegan perspective, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I bet I can grow better soldiers and civlians with GMO and animals than you can ever make with a vegan diet. Again, just look at your allies. There are no vegan heavyweights or MMA champions. There are very few vegetarian soldiers at all. I think you're backing the wrong horse, or soybean, in this case.
Is Nine being serious? Please tell me he isn't.
If they weren't, I'm concerned.
If only someone had killed and ate that deer none of this would be happening.