X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00  	autolearn=unavailable version=3.2.0-r431796
Sender: -2.6 (spamval) -- NONE
Return-Path: <improvetheworld-errors &AElig umich.edu>
Received: from newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) 	by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l0QLKoTK014755 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) 	for <dreeves &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:20:51 -0500
Received: from dave.mr.itd.umich.edu (mx.umich.edu [141.211.14.131]) 	by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l0QLKkWg004103; 	Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:20:46 -0500
Received: FROM newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) 	BY dave.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 45BA70AA.85D55.28738 ;  	26 Jan 2007 16:20:42 -0500
Received: from boston.eecs.umich.edu (boston.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.61]) 	by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l0QLKcQC004026 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); 	Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:20:38 -0500
Received: from boston.eecs.umich.edu (localhost.eecs.umich.edu [127.0.0.1]) 	by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l0QLKcTK014736 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); 	Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:20:38 -0500
Received: from localhost (dreeves &AElig localhost) 	by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) with ESMTP id l0QLKcW3014733; 	Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:20:38 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: boston.eecs.umich.edu: dreeves owned process doing -bs
X-X-Sender: dreeves &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu
In-Reply-To: <F46790C7-0ABD-40A9-83CA-55019BBCC7BF &AElig eecs.umich.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701261614460.30196 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>
References: <5FBB2176-92EF-4F1E-8ACE-38A7A187D671 &AElig umich.edu>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701241524480.9931 &AElig columbus.eecs.umich.edu>  <F46790C7-0ABD-40A9-83CA-55019BBCC7BF &AElig eecs.umich.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.0-r431796 (2006-08-16) on  	newman.eecs.umich.edu
X-Virus-Scan: : UVSCAN at UoM/EECS
X-Virus-Scan: : UVSCAN at UoM/EECS
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:20:37 -0500 (EST)
To: Joshua J Estelle <jestelle &AElig eecs.umich.edu>
cc: Nate Clark <ntclark &AElig eecs.umich.edu>, Robert Felty <robfelty &AElig umich.edu>,         improvetheworld &AElig umich.edu
From: Daniel Reeves <dreeves &AElig umich.edu>
Subject: Re: more reasons to be vegetarian

The efficiency argument doesn't cut it on its own though.  You wouldn't 
take a moral stance against live theatre because of how much more 
efficient movies are.

I think it's really important to have a sense of the true cost of eating 
meat, and unconscionable that we're not paying it.  The government 
subsidies are the first thing that has to go!


--- \/   FROM Joshua J Estelle AT 07.01.25 18:34 (Yesterday)   \/ ---

>> The text of this article is about how mass farming of meat is bad for the 
>> environment, not that eating meat is bad for the environment. If eating 
>> meat alone was bad for the environment, then eradicating all carnivores 
>> would solve our global warming problem, no?
>
> It is true that locally raised meet likely has negligible negative impact and 
> that the real problem is mass farming of meat, but I think even very 
> environmentally conscious meat eaters are unlikely to always eat "good" meat.
>
>> To change the topic slightly, your article reminded me of a very 
>> interesting essay by Jared Diamond (the "Guns, Germs, and Steel" guy) 
>> claiming that farming was the worst mistake humanity ever made:
>
> While farming may not also be perfect, it is by far the lesser evil to eating 
> meat.  Consider we have to feed 10 people for 1 year.  Then think about how 
> much land and resources you would need to feed them a meat eating diet.  Each 
> animal they eat will need a tremendous amount of resources to raise that 
> animal to be eaten.  Then consider if those 10 people were vegetarians.  The 
> amount of land and resources needed to feed them would be drastically 
> smaller.
>
> It's just more efficient to be vegetarian.
>
> I think I just discovered my short answer to when people ask me why I'm 
> vegetarian, "It's just more efficient."
>
> Best,
> Josh
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Robert Felty wrote:
>> 
>>> Really great article about how eating meat is bad for the environment. 
>>> Thanks to Clare for pointing it out to me.
>>> You can read it at:
>>> http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0120-20.htm
>

-- 
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  search://"Daniel Reeves"

    "The best way to accelerate a windows machine is at 9.8 m/s^2."