Got the cat!

[T i m]

<snip childish stuff>

Ok, you didn't heed my warnings ...

Every where? Oh, everywhere ... well, we do, typically? You? How often do you walk say 5 miles or cycle *anywhere*?

We have, thanks. But for the Kitcar to be polluting, it has to be driven and it hasn't (apart from the MOT and back, 200 yards total) for about 10 years. *Even* when it was being driven it has never been driven any distance (well, maybe once, to the factory open day), before that, typically 5 miles or less a week.

If I had scrapped the all the parts of the donor vehicle that would have been smelted down (energy / pollution), re formed into a new vehicle (energy / pollution) that could well have been your RV, that you have admitted here you use for shopping. I don't suppose we have

*yet* produced as much pollution driving the kitcar as was released creating your RV!

How much does the MPG drop when you are dragging yet another car behind it?

Our last holiday (10+ years ago, how many miles have you traveled on your last 10 years worth of holidays Brian?) was camping with the tandem and we would cycle or walk to the shops?

How many MPG does your RV do again?

I can't remember the last time we have used our car for doing the 'big shop' (even). We do it on foot with a shopping trolley, even going to several shops (easy when on foot), neither have we ever had a home delivery. You?

We walk to the shops, we walk to walk the dog. We walk to my Mums, we walk when and wherever we can and often carrying stuff (tools / materials) in the shopping trolley.

I bet you wish you hadn't opened your big mouth again now eh? ;-)

Like I said. You have made it perfectly clear that you pay some form of lip service towards caring about animal cruelty, seeming limiting it to pets. If you like eating meat or drinking cows breast milk (even though you are a big boy now), that's ok. It's your choice, but please don't try to suggest that it's done with the animals welfare in mind.

Well, they say 'it's the thought that counts ...' ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

Aren't you just.

Oh, and you don't! Listen to yerself!

What, her living in Scotland while I live in London is a particularly strange thing for you?

WTF is wrong with you? Just stand up and admit you put your lunch over animal welfare and call it done? What are you so frightened of?

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

I'm not talking about us cloning Dolly the sheep, I'm talking about any of the (general) species that we eat ... and not just how we have genetically modified them to be able to exploit them even more (more milk, more meat)?

We are breeding chickens that their own legs break under their own weight.

Quite. We have been playing doG or Darwin at the cost of animals and it's wrong (as with modifying dogs to have physical traits that make them weak or unhealthy).

Unnatural selection?

Cheers, T i m

[Brian Reay]

ROTFL, you really can't handle the questions on food, can you.

What is it you say about 'left brainers' not seeing the other side of things?

Dunno, including flights, 10's of thousands. Enjoyed the holidays. Flying isn't much fun but getting to the USA is tedious other ways, although I did fancy a cruise.

As for 10+ years, that explains your anger. Don't take it out on others, it isn't their fault.

New one, a whisker over 30mpg, towing. A tiny bit more if not. This new Euro 6 engines are remarkable.

Of course, unlike old clunkers, modern cars aren't allowed some nasties like CO. And what is allowed is far, far, lower than what the old beasts coughed out.

Irrelevant, this is about your hypocrisy not my choices.

[T i m]

<snip>

What about 'content / happy' though? My point is that what we do to them isn't natural, so must be 'unnatural' and so quite likely not to be good for an animals.

Some people keep their dogs outside. They stay in a kennel (or on the step <g>) and you might consider them to be as happy, as enriched as they can be. But what if you hadn't brought them up that way to see that as 'the norm', what if they had been let into the house, to lay with you and the kids on the sofa or at the bottom of the kids beds? Might they be happier still?

The fact that a donkey doesn't kick and bite the person loading it up with bricks, doesn't mean it doesn't want to, just that it's spirit has been broken, it has become a machine.

Why, that's not 'natural' is it?

Ok.

Ok.

That sounds 'better' ... at least they are allowed some natural interaction for a while ...

'Now' you mean? But wouldn't a cow (in nature I mean) then dry up to a produce only what a calf should have?

No, indeed, but my point is that there can be a massive difference in the interpretation of what constitutes the mistreatment of an animal and doing what's best for *it*.

The bottom line when it comes to dairy cattle is the best they could hope for is that they didn't exist of course as there is no way they can without us exploiting them.

And that would make sense to me because unless there are more calves out there in nature that need cows milk than they can get, humans should really be drinking it in the first place (and many aren't able to if they wanted).

I appreciate you are / were 'a farmer' Tim and so probably lived with and seen more livestock come *and go* in your life than most so would probably have a 'more seasoned / accepting / different' viewpoint on it all.

Similar with the guy working in the slaughterhouse etc.

BIL (a builder) did one day working near a slaughterhouse and couldn't go back. Like many though he chooses to keep that disconnection and still eats meat. [1]

Cheers, T i m

[1] We went and stayed with them in Norfolk a few days over an Xmas a few years back and they had the traditional Xmas foods. Daughter came with us and was already a Vegi and she had brought a Quorn / turkey style roast with her. Aunty happily cooked it for her and served it up along with all the other stuff and meat loving BIL tried some and came back for seconds.

So, if you 'consider' the animals there are more and more alternatives becoming available that often aren't only equally enjoyable but also better for us (health wise) and much better for the environment (methane, nitrate runoff, land / water usage etc). ;-)

[Brian Reay]

Are the plants etc that are harvested for you to eat 'content' / happy?

You aren't looking at the 'big picture' you are always accusing others of not doing.

Next time you eat an apple, just think, it was destined to be a tree, not a snack for you.

Does that include the dogs trained with those electric shock collars you seemed happy to condone? I was quite horrified to hear they were legal.

Who on here has even hinted they would condone abusing a donkey or any other animal, other than perhaps someone who appeared to condone electric dog collars?

It is more than OK.

Those who keep cows- I know someone who does in the extended family- take the greatest of care of them, and their other animals.

That is normal. Clearly you don't know about how cows etc are looked after.

Actually, it was pretty well always so for some breeds. Those were chosen for domestication. True it has improved but excess was was normal.

So, if the cows aren't mistreated, why are you whining?

Shall we apply the same logic to the plants etc you eat?

<Another of your stories snipped>

[T i m]

Oh, the irony!

Hey, you are the one in denial mate, as is the left brainer way.

See any irony there?

Another bizarre left brainer conclusion Brian?

Quite right, you can't help it. ;-(

Again, it's 'total pollution footprint' mate and you are still *way* more polluting then me.

So, you change the subject from animal cruelty onto my potential pollution (and I warned you against it, but you still went ahead) and now you accuse me of doing the very thing you started in your desperate flailing to justify the unjustifiable!

Talk about desperate!

But hey, we all know your position on the subject of animal cruelty and pollution now so you can carry on howling at the moon on your own.

Cheers, T i m

[whisky-dave]

Millions of years ago it was more likely that we would have ate fruit and veg and things that didn't run away.

But we have evolved in many ways, cooking was one of the great leaps forward.

[whisky-dave]

No they removed the actual trees from beeches in Australia. I doubt they'd remove them when large enough to be called coconuts otherwise the removers would be at risk.

I'm always careful when I walk under a coconut tree in London, even the plastic ones in night clubs ;-)

[bert]

In article [e-mail], T i m [e-mail]> writes

I've castrated young bulls in the past. Does that count?

[spuorgelgoog]

No, you're only allowed to eat criadillas if you'd be willing to castrate yourself too :-)

Owain

[T i m]

<snip>

Count for the full beef eaters licence, I don't think so.

It doesn't sound very natural either but I guess it depended on why you did it?

Cheers, T i m

p.s. It will be interesting to see how many dairy farmers survive this Covid-19 virus, what with demand being down and them having to tip milk away.

Given that I understand the margins are very low on milk at the best of times so I'm guessing this could be the final straw for some, so that means those who do survive won't be able to produce enough, the demand will then outstrip (local) supply and then the price might rise to a point where it's actually properly profitable (and so manage demand). Unless we start importing milk from elsewhere?

The funny thing is, whilst people have been desperate to get their hands on even a pint of UHT, most of the alternatives have still been in good supply and if the price of cows milk goes up comparatively, maybe some might try the alternatives and realise they are perfectly useable (and then not go back to drinking the breast milk of a different species). ;-)

You can imagine trying to explain that to the kids of the future, just like the Bob Newhart - Sir Walter Raleigh sketch:

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

<snip>

All many *actually* care about is what they like to eat ... and unless they actually have to get their hands bloody themselves are happy to brush such details under the carpet.

I think this whole Covid-19 thing is going to reset a lot of things we simply got used to and assumed therefore were 'normal' or 'acceptable' when they really aren't, a lesson I hope they have learned in Wuhan (but am afraid it won't be).

Cheers, T i m

[John_j]

Not totally defeat so much as weaken a bit given that there arent that many infected cats for some reason.

[tabbypurr]

I don't think you're quite getting this.

[Richard]

<snip>

Patience, man! It took two over a year to train one terrier... ;)

[Tim Lamb]

Lucky it isn't a Springer Spaniel! Old dogs and new tricks job.

[Brian Reay]

So you are happy to confine a harmless cat but criticise those who suggest it for criminals and sex offenders.

[Brian Reay]

Unlike the Labour Party friends in the IRA etc who just murder people in the UK.

[Andrew]

Or a suckler cow, unused to being handled by humans.