Meat eating might have made us human, sorry peta/vegetarians. Not.

Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10371
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Meat eating might have made us human, sorry peta/vegetarians. Not.

Anthropologist Finds Evidence of Hominin Meat Eating 1.5 Million Years Ago: Eating Meat May Have 'Made Us Human'
ScienceDaily (Oct. 3, 2012) — A skull fragment unearthed by anthropologists in Tanzania shows that our ancient ancestors were eating meat at least 1.5 million years ago, shedding new light into the evolution of human physiology and brain development.

"Meat eating has always been considered one of the things that made us human, with the protein contributing to the growth of our brains," said Charles Musiba, Ph.D., associate professor of anthropology at the University of Colorado Denver, who helped make the discovery. "Our work shows that 1.5 million years ago we were not opportunistic meat eaters, we were actively hunting and eating meat."


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3207
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote:I don't think

Gauche wrote:

I don't think it's really one or the other. There are degrees of subjectivity in human endeavors.

Ok, that makes sense

Gauche wrote:

If someone said you had a psychological disorder you wouldn't reply "Where was it ever etched in granite what psychological order is? There's no control group, etc ..." Or, maybe you would

No I would not say that. But, I see your point.

Gauche wrote:

and perhaps there's even some validity to that but it doesn't address your problem, the same way you have to think there is a moral issue at stake to have a discussion about it.

I wasn't necessarily thinking there was a moral issue at stake. But, I see what you mean. I was merely pondering where I stand on this.

Gauche wrote:

Otherwise, you'd have nothing more to contribute than a blanket objection to moral pronouncements that it's a purely subjective matter, which even if true would be an irrelevant observation because lack of objective value isn't a reason to abandon subjective concern.

I see

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3198
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: Otherwise,

Gauche wrote:

 

Otherwise, you'd have nothing more to contribute than a blanket objection to moral pronouncements that it's a purely subjective matter, which even if true would be an irrelevant observation because lack of objective value isn't a reason to abandon subjective concern.

sure it isn't.  but it is a reason not be a fucking prick.

universals in general are what is fucking up the world.  religion is only the most obnoxious one.

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

 I am such an ill-informed person I do NOT consider veggies to be a culture.

  Doesn't matter what you consider.  You may not consider outlaw bikers as having their own culture.  So what ?

I know it is fun for journalism majors and other ill educated types to declare a "culture" without defining what makes a distinct culture. They also mix the idea of ancient Egyptian culture with things as nebulous as a "culture" of weaing green.

The only defined meaning of culture is a separate and unique system that addresses all human social needs. In other words if it does not provide defense from without and justice within it is not even in the running for being considered a culture.

Bikers and drug dealers and the Mafia are what we call sub-cultures in that only a few of the aspects of a culture are different. The more different the more important the "sub" so until bikers home-school on biker history they are not even in the running for  significantly different.

Just to be clear about it, bikers are street gangs with bikes. Most who claim to be bikers aren't, more like college fraternies.

 

   Well I'm sure that when you graduated from college in the 1920's such a restricted definition may have been in effect.  I doubt it.  Actually you seem to tweak terms to suit your arguments.  You've done it before on this forum.  Let me bring up to date old man.

  Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Culture.

b: the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or SOCIAL GROUP; also: the characteristic features of everyday existence ( as diversions or  way of life ) shared by people or time < popular culture > < southern culture >

c: the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, an d practices that characterizes an institution or organization < a corporate culture focused on the bottom line >

d: the set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristics < studying the effect of computers on print culture> < changing the culture of materialism will take time --Peggy O'Mara>

  You are representative of a culture of geriatric blow hards who seem to believe their knowledge base is authoritative, final and above scrutiny.

I do not see how when one graduated has anything to do with knowing dictionaries compile common usage and not proper definitions. It has nothing to do with the common usage being a working definition of the word outside of common usage.

However I did graduate long enough ago to recognize the then new usage of "cool" had nothing to do with the temperature. In this case dropping the "sub" does not elevate a group within a culture to a culture itself simply because that is the way people have come to use the word.

Appropriate to some silly arguments we have seen here, a religion has a set of defined characteristics. Calling atheism a religion does not make it a religion even if that becomes commonly used outside the born-again, redneck sub-culture.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1475
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Dictionaries . .

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Culture.

b: the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or SOCIAL GROUP; also: the characteristic features of everyday existence ( as diversions or  way of life ) shared by people or time < popular culture > < southern culture >

c: the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, an d practices that characterizes an institution or organization < a corporate culture focused on the bottom line >

d: the set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristics < studying the effect of computers on print culture> < changing the culture of materialism will take time --Peggy O'Mara>

 

  It is interesting when the dictionary is pulled out on the board. Context is also determinative in meaning.  Why I was just tempted to do the same in another area of the board (unrelated):

 Dictionary : Dorsal  :: 'dor·sal'  [ dáwrss'l ]

a.  of or on the back: relating to or situated on the back of the body 

b.  Located behind a part or toward the rear of a structure.

c. Relating to the caudal end of the body in quadrupeds or the dorsal side in humans and other primates

etc.

 


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote: I do not

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

I do not see how when one graduated has anything to do with knowing dictionaries compile common usage and not proper definitions. It has nothing to do with the common usage being a working definition of the word outside of common usage.

 

  Then by all means feel free to publish your own anal retentive Giwer's Dictionary if you want to restrict yourself to only meanings that satisfy you.  Kind of like what Thomas Jefferson did to the Christian Bible if you get my meaning. Snip snip.

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
However I did graduate long enough ago to recognize the then new usage of "cool" had nothing to do with the temperature.

 

  Wow, knowing that means you're really "hip".    Ooops !  That wasn't the "proper definition" of hip since I wasn't speaking of human anatomy ?

       Gee Nony language is difficult !

 

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
In this case dropping the "sub" does not elevate a group within a culture to a culture itself simply because that is the way people have come to use the word.

 

  Right a culture doesn't officially exist until they start printing their own currency and raise an army.  ( ..but only in your dictionary )

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
... Calling atheism a religion does not make it a religion even if that becomes commonly used outside the born-again, redneck sub-culture.

 

 

 

                       But I bet you still call native Americans "Indians".  

 

 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

I do not see how when one graduated has anything to do with knowing dictionaries compile common usage and not proper definitions. It has nothing to do with the common usage being a working definition of the word outside of common usage.

 

  Then by all means feel free to publish your own anal retentive Giwer's Dictionary if you want to restrict yourself to only meanings that satisfy you.  Kind of like what Thomas Jefferson did to the Christian Bible if you get my meaning. Snip snip.

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
However I did graduate long enough ago to recognize the then new usage of "cool" had nothing to do with the temperature.

 

  Wow, knowing that means you're really "hip".    Ooops !  That wasn't the "proper definition" of hip since I wasn't speaking of human anatomy ?

       Gee Nony language is difficult !

 

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
In this case dropping the "sub" does not elevate a group within a culture to a culture itself simply because that is the way people have come to use the word.

 

  Right a culture doesn't officially exist until they start printing their own currency and raise an army.  ( ..but only in your dictionary )

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
... Calling atheism a religion does not make it a religion even if that becomes commonly used outside the born-again, redneck sub-culture.

 

 

 

                       But I bet you still call native Americans "Indians".  

 

 

I prefer "indigenous peoples" because they were around before America got dreamed up.

But I'm a smart ass.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
jcgadfly wrote:I prefer

jcgadfly wrote:

I prefer "indigenous peoples" because they were around before America got dreamed up.

But I'm a smart ass.

 

       "Mesoamericans" is a much more specific term and at least offers some particulars as to who and where I am referring to.   The people referred to as Olmecs and Toltecs offers even more specificity.    I suppose "Africa" was dreamed up as well. 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

I prefer "indigenous peoples" because they were around before America got dreamed up.

But I'm a smart ass.

 

       Mesoamericans is a much more specific term and at least offers some particulars as to who and where I am referring to.   The people referred to as Olmecs and Toltecs offers even more specificity.    I suppose "Africa" was dreamed up as well

Probably - I mean if humans can dream up gods, naming regions of the planet would be a piece if cake.

 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

danatemporary wrote:

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Culture.

b: the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or SOCIAL GROUP; also: the characteristic features of everyday existence ( as diversions or  way of life ) shared by people or time < popular culture > < southern culture >

c: the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, an d practices that characterizes an institution or organization < a corporate culture focused on the bottom line >

d: the set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristics < studying the effect of computers on print culture> < changing the culture of materialism will take time --Peggy O'Mara>

 

  It is interesting when the dictionary is pulled out on the board. Context is also determinative in meaning.  Why I was just tempted to do the same in another area of the board (unrelated):

 Dictionary : Dorsal  :: 'dor·sal'  [ dáwrss'l ]

a.  of or on the back: relating to or situated on the back of the body 

b.  Located behind a part or toward the rear of a structure.

c. Relating to the caudal end of the body in quadrupeds or the dorsal side in humans and other primates

etc.

In the good old days angles were obtuse and people were abstruse but the poorly educated said people were obtuse. The usage became so common that the dictionary was changed to accomodate the new usage.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

I do not see how when one graduated has anything to do with knowing dictionaries compile common usage and not proper definitions. It has nothing to do with the common usage being a working definition of the word outside of common usage.

  Then by all means feel free to publish your own anal retentive Giwer's Dictionary if you want to restrict yourself to only meanings that satisfy you.  Kind of like what Thomas Jefferson did to the Christian Bible if you get my meaning. Snip snip.

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
However I did graduate long enough ago to recognize the then new usage of

  Wow, knowing that means you're really "hip".    Ooops !  That wasn't the "proper definition" of hip since I wasn't speaking of human anatomy ?

       Gee Nony language is difficult !

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
In this case dropping the "sub" does not elevate a group within a culture to a culture itself simply because that is the way people have come to use the word.

  Right a culture doesn't officially exist until they start printing their own currency and raise an army.  ( ..but only in your dictionary )

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
... Calling atheism a religion does not make it a religion even if that becomes commonly used outside the born-again, redneck sub-culture.

                       But I bet you still call native Americans "Indians".  

For a fact most of them call themselves indians but don't let that get in your way. Screw them. They don't know what they are called. Why should they? They are only Indians.

In proper techical newsgroups I refer to them as Amerinds or Amerindians which is the technical term which I am sure irks you to no end since you probably never heard of it. But if you like the term "native" then homo sapiens are only native to South Africa and are migrants every place else in the world. If your definition is who got where first then the British are native New Zealanders.

If you are a native rights advocate based upon first arrival then the peoples of South America are the native North Americans and have a claim to kick out the later arriving North American tribes. And those Johnny come lately eskimos barely beat out the Europeans. Please provide a working definition of native.

I know that is too hard so let me give you an impossible challenge, produce a univerally agreed political definition of native Americans which reflects their absolute rights to land. And make is such that three distinct waves of immigration and two displacements or the previous natives are politically acceptable.

I know, us old farts insist upon the facts from flying nuns from horror shows.

Nor do I see a point of letting civility get in the way of a good flame war. But for the moment lets digress.

In the context of this discussion culture has a technical meaning. Within the technical meaning subculture also has a meaning. The technical meaning of subculture is not changed because common usage calls it a culture.

To keep it a bit in context many believers talk about spiritual energy and psychic energy and all kinds of energies. In the real world of physics energy has a very well defined meaning. That clowns talk about spritual and psychic energies does not mean they have anything to do with energy as defined by physics. They are not energy in any defined sense.

Frankly I haven't had a good flame war in years and am likely off my game but if you want to have one, Lay on, McNun, and cursed by she or he who is not in American Horror this season who cries hold your duff.

Yes, I am an anal retentive asshole but it is my asshole.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

I prefer "indigenous peoples" because they were around before America got dreamed up.

But I'm a smart ass.

       "Mesoamericans" is a much more specific term and at least offers some particulars as to who and where I am referring to.   The people referred to as Olmecs and Toltecs offers even more specificity.    I suppose "Africa" was dreamed up as well. 

Mesoamerican refers only to those who are from Mexico to Panama, Meso, Greek, between, the Americas North and South. More commonly known examples are Aztecs and Mayans.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

jcgadfly wrote:

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

I prefer "indigenous peoples" because they were around before America got dreamed up.

But I'm a smart ass.

       Mesoamericans is a much more specific term and at least offers some particulars as to who and where I am referring to.   The people referred to as Olmecs and Toltecs offers even more specificity.    I suppose "Africa" was dreamed up as well

Probably - I mean if humans can dream up gods, naming regions of the planet would be a piece if cake.

The flaming nun must be at that time of month trying to make an issue of this trivia.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1475
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Went to a lot of trouble on this one . . . .

{ A_Nony_Mouse wrote  }

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

  In the context of this discussion culture has a technical meaning. Within the technical meaning subculture also has a meaning. The technical meaning of subculture is not changed because common usage calls it a culture. 

  Never 100% sure all the time,  Am I to understand this is what Nony's original point was all about ?? Some would say nitpicker; some would honestly appreciate the effort made. 

 

 

 

 p.s. -- O-K-a-y enough then.

 - - - - - -

 

In the immortal words of Bureaucrat #1.0 from Futurama, “Technically correct is the best kind of correct.”

 


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:   

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

     

Mesoamerican refers only to those who are from Mexico to Panama, Meso, Greek, between, the Americas North and South. More commonly known examples are Aztecs and Mayans.

 

     I know what mesoamericans means and what region it refers to, hence my reference to the OLMECS and TOLTECS.  

 

    The indigenous people of that region are commonly referred to as South American Indians

                    http:// www.native-languages.org/south-american.htm

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:  The

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

 

 

The flaming nun must be at that time of month trying to make an issue of this trivia.

 

   ..and being insulted by a deformed baby who shits in its pants doesn't carry the weight that you might expect.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:For a

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

For a fact most of them call themselves indians but don't let that get in your way. Screw them. They don't know what they are called. Why should they?

 

  So now instead of valiantly defending the "proper definition" of a word ( like "culture" or "Indian" or "cool" ) you've flipped to the other side of the argument ?  Make up your mind.

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
In proper techical newsgroups I refer to them as Amerinds or Amerindians which is the technical term which I am sure irks you to no end.... 
 

 

Oh yes, the irksomeness is terrible.  I'm about to phone for an ambulance.

 

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
    ..since you probably never heard of it.

 

  I never heard of mesoamerican until I actually heard of it, either.    Should I be in awe of your reference ?

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
If your definition is who got where first then the British are native New Zealanders.

 

   So the Brits beat the Maori to New Zealand ?  I did not know that !

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
  If you are a native rights advocate based upon first arrival then the peoples of South America are the native North Americans and have a claim to kick out the later arriving North American tribes. And those Johnny come lately eskimos barely beat out the Europeans. Please provide a working definition of native.

  No, feel free to school me with your "proper definition" if you're still a supporter of that concept.  You've confused me with your new willingness to defend alternate definitions based upon popular usage.

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
  I know that is too hard so let me give you an impossible challenge, produce a univerally agreed political definition of native Americans which reflects their absolute rights to land. And make is such that three distinct waves of immigration and two displacements or the previous natives are politically acceptable.

 

    Political definitions ?  Wouldn't anthropology be the correct source for "proper definitions" in this discussion?

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
I know, us old farts insist upon the facts from flying nuns from horror shows.

Nor do I see a point of letting civility get in the way of a good flame war.

 

   OMG are you going to fling insults at me !  

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
But for the moment lets digress.

In the context of this discussion culture has a technical meaning. Within the technical meaning subculture also has a meaning.

  

 

    And what is the actual tipping point for when a sub-culture actually become a full-fledged culture.   Population ?  Political influence ?  Electing their own Pope ?

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
  To keep it a bit in context many believers talk about spiritual energy and psychic energy and all kinds of energies. In the real world of physics energy has a very well defined meaning. That clowns talk about spritual and psychic energies does not mean they have anything to do with energy as defined by physics. They are not energy in any defined sense.

      Are they discussing physics ?

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
Yes, I am an anal retentive asshole but it is my asshole.

 

 

      I'm sure you're very proud of your asshole.   Good for you.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

danatemporary wrote:

{ A_Nony_Mouse wrote  }

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

  In the context of this discussion culture has a technical meaning. Within the technical meaning subculture also has a meaning. The technical meaning of subculture is not changed because common usage calls it a culture. 

  Never 100% sure all the time,  Am I to understand this is what Nony's original point was all about ?? Some would say nitpicker; some would honestly appreciate the effort made. 

 p.s. -- O-K-a-y enough then.

 - - - - - -

In the immortal words of Bureaucrat #1.0 from Futurama, “Technically correct is the best kind of correct.”

That is what triggered it. Obviously something else is eating at he/she/it. I have no idea what is going on.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

The flaming nun must be at that time of month trying to make an issue of this trivia.

   ..and being insulted by a deformed baby who shits in its pants doesn't carry the weight that you might expect.

Anal retentive, remember?

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:  In the

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

  In the context of this discussion culture has a technical meaning. Within the technical meaning subculture also has a meaning. The technical meaning of subculture is not changed because common usage calls it a culture. 

 

   The context of this discussion is veganism.  It can rightly be referred to as a culture that is based upon a strong, sometimes fanatical, sense of ethics where vegans considers using animal products as abhorent ( remember Manageri and his long discussions about suffering, etc. ) and how meat eaters like us are worse than infidels.  The Amish have their own culture based upon their view and lifestyle, for example and would also be analogous. 

 

   Nony made vague references that culture wars aren't "bloodless"  ( I provided a link which clearly showed the term is associated with bloodless conflicts ) and yet Nony never actually defined his "proper definition" or  "technical meaning" of culture other than it's probably bloody and its bigger than a subculture. 

 And speaking of "context"  ...in the context of global population does that mean the much smaller United States of America is a subculture when compared to the countries of China or India which each have populations that exceed one billion people ?

Wow, I'm an American and I belong to a sub culture.

  

 

danatemporary wrote:
In the immortal words of Bureaucrat #1.0 from Futurama, “Technically correct is the best kind of correct.”

 

  Technically correct ?  Although language and linguistics exists as a field of study, it isn't like studying math or physics.  There's more than one correct answer when citing a particular term or word and context should be enough ( except for Nony ) to enlighten the reader as to what the fuck is going on.   The usage and even the definition of terms is never static or fixed.  For instance using a dictionary as a source will offer multiple definitions for the word "culture".   I've even provided a link with its multiple usages which clearly encompassed the way I used it when referring to vegans.  If you don't like it then take it up with the publishers of the Miriam-Webster dictionary.

 

Again from another source                http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/culture?s=t      It  references " youth culture" and "drug culture"    ..."or any social group within it: yob culture."  No "sub" prefix was added by the publishers.   Coincidence ?

 

  I haven't perverted the definition simply by citing vegans as a culture.   If anyone went back to post #199 and read the Miriam-Webster entry I provided previously you can enlighten yourselves.  You will also find the prefix "sub" to be lacking in all examples given.

 

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
I have no idea what is going on.

 

 

       Out of the mouth of ( deformed ) babes.

 

 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

...

 

  No, feel free to school me

I may be a fool but I do not run errands.

 

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

...

 

  No, feel free to school me

I may be a fool but I do not run errands.

 

 

 

     So much for your defense of "proper definitions", eh ?   Major fail.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

  In the context of this discussion culture has a technical meaning. Within the technical meaning subculture also has a meaning. The technical meaning of subculture is not changed because common usage calls it a culture. 

   The context of this discussion is veganism.  It can rightly be referred to as a culture that is based upon a strong, sometimes fanatical, sense of ethics where vegans considers using animal products as abhorent ( remember Manageri and his long discussions about suffering, etc. ) and how meat eaters like us are worse than infidels.  The Amish have their own culture based upon their view and lifestyle, for example and would also be analogous.

You say sense of ethnics defines this culture you imagine. And as I read the ethics it is based upon the idea of animal suffering. Yet the food fetish defined as vegan has existed all of the world. It also existed before the late 19th c. idea that animals could suffer was invented. There were veggieheads for millenia in India. They existed in ancient Egypt, Greece and Babylon all before and unrelated to the late 19th c. invention, recognition if you wish.

But you say all of those with this eating fetish are of the same culture even though only the recent western claims an ethical rationale.

If they are not the same culture then there are and were Indian Vegans, Greek vegans and a couple kinds of Egyptian vegans.

===

In regard to your icon nice vibrator.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:You say

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

You say sense of ethnics defines this culture you imagine. And as I read the ethics it is based upon the idea of animal suffering. Yet the food fetish defined as vegan has existed all of the world. It also existed before the late 19th c. idea that animals could suffer was invented. There were veggieheads for millenia in India. They existed in ancient Egypt, Greece and Babylon all before and unrelated to the late 19th c. invention, recognition if you wish.

But you say all of those with this eating fetish are of the same culture even though only the recent western claims an ethical rationale.

If they are not the same culture then there are and were Indian Vegans, Greek vegans and a couple kinds of Egyptian vegans.

 

 

     And likewise, throughout recorded history a drug culture has existed all over the world in virtually every civilization 

( dictionary entry referenced "drug culture" as example, post #219  http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/culture?s=t   ...read it for yourself lazy ass )

  

   Some used drugs for spiritual enlightenment others purely for escapism.   Whatever their differing motives they all took part in the same activity that defined them as druggies.  So ?

 

   

 

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
In regard to your icon nice vibrator.

 

        Yes, brass knuckles are nice but they don't have a manual safety so you might be confused by their operation.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
      Oh, I'll change

 

     Oh, I'll change my avatar from time to time just so that you can continue to spew forth your pithy observations.  Priceless !

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

You say sense of ethnics defines this culture you imagine. And as I read the ethics it is based upon the idea of animal suffering. Yet the food fetish defined as vegan has existed all of the world. It also existed before the late 19th c. idea that animals could suffer was invented. There were veggieheads for millenia in India. They existed in ancient Egypt, Greece and Babylon all before and unrelated to the late 19th c. invention, recognition if you wish.

But you say all of those with this eating fetish are of the same culture even though only the recent western claims an ethical rationale.

If they are not the same culture then there are and were Indian Vegans, Greek vegans and a couple kinds of Egyptian vegans.

     And likewise, throughout recorded history a drug culture has existed all over the world in virtually every civilization 

( dictionary entry referenced "drug culture" as example, post #219  http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/culture?s=t   ...read it for yourself lazy ass )

   Some used drugs for spiritual enlightenment others purely for escapism.   Whatever their differing motives they all took part in the same activity that defined them as druggies.  So ?

Repeating the nonsense does not change the nonsense.

Quote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
In regard to your icon nice vibrator.

        Yes, brass knuckles are nice but they don't have a manual safety so you might be confused by their operation.

I was thinking of fisting actually.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Oh, I'll change my avatar from time to time just so that you can continue to spew forth your pithy observations.  Priceless !

Everything has a price. I did like the flaming nun though it was so FXy.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:'You say

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
'

You say sense of ethnics defines this culture you imagine. And as I read the ethics it is based upon the idea of animal suffering. Yet the food fetish defined as vegan has existed all of the world. It also existed before the late 19th c. idea that animals could suffer was invented. There were veggieheads for millenia in India. They existed in ancient Egypt, Greece and Babylon all before and unrelated to the late 19th c. invention, recognition if you wish.

But you say all of those with this eating fetish are of the same culture even though only the recent western claims an ethical rationale.

If they are not the same culture then there are and were Indian Vegans, Greek vegans and a couple kinds of Egyptian vegans.

 

  Thanks for the detailed and informative history of vegans from antiquity.  I guess you do run errands after all, lol.

The "detail" of over riding significance you are neglecting is that Manageri represents veganism in the twenty first century.   Oops !

 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:But you

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

But you say all of those with this eating fetish are of the same culture even though only the recent western claims an ethical rationale.

 

 

 

  It goes without saying that your very own Jew fetish has evolved from the culture of Martin Luther ( religious ) , to Hitler ( racial hygiene ) ,  to your present version  of this Jew fetish.   

 

   As with the long histories of both veganism and anti-semitism, different paths to the same destination changes little or nothing regarding the final product.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:  I was

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

 

I was thinking of fisting actually.

 

     Then your ass hole must be a wreck

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2766
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is onlineOnline
For some reason I refused to

For some reason I refused to even look at this thread, but after reading the first page I skipped to the end.

1 - You can't live in this world with out supporting the death and torture of animals; unless you want to go live on an island and grow your own food, make your own shelter and learn to enjoy masturbation for passing the time.

2 - Any thing you use or do in this society is some how built from a foundation of meat eating. The roads you drive on, the gasoline you use, the oil, the tires, etc, etc, etc. You can't avoid it. No way. No how.

3 - I think it, the original post by Vastet, shows that random events can change the course of an entire civilization. Makes me wonder how or why our ancestors first at meat? Was it a dead animal and no fruit or nuts around? Some small family found the dead carcass of a cow and then started to eat specific parts which smelled good? They enjoyed it so much or it changed their brain in a way that they craved it? Then when they bumped in to another group who had no food they taught them to eat the meat. Next they were hunting out cows when ever they could find them?

Wonderful stuff!!!

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
'

You say sense of ethnics defines this culture you imagine. And as I read the ethics it is based upon the idea of animal suffering. Yet the food fetish defined as vegan has existed all of the world. It also existed before the late 19th c. idea that animals could suffer was invented. There were veggieheads for millenia in India. They existed in ancient Egypt, Greece and Babylon all before and unrelated to the late 19th c. invention, recognition if you wish.

But you say all of those with this eating fetish are of the same culture even though only the recent western claims an ethical rationale.

If they are not the same culture then there are and were Indian Vegans, Greek vegans and a couple kinds of Egyptian vegans.

  Thanks for the detailed and informative history of vegans from antiquity.  I guess you do run errands after all, lol.

The "detail" of over riding significance you are neglecting is that Manageri represents veganism in the twenty first century.   Oops !

I can only suggest you practice reading for comprehension as I included both modern Indian and the modern "ethical" version. There are others. Your issue is ALL kinds of veggieheads are the same culture. You did not specify any time frame. However as to 21st century there is still the religious variety in India and "ethical suffering" among others in the West. Perhaps you also need to learn to write so others can comprehend what you intend to communicate.

Even if limited to that one type, which is no place indicated in what you claimed, then his claim is against using any animal product on the "ethical" (read emotional) claim that collecting milk and eggs causes suffering. Seems to me the ovo-lacto veggieheads have no problem with raising animals. Not the same basis at all. It is a matter of time before I need to direct you to the veggiehead scene from Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

But you say all of those with this eating fetish are of the same culture even though only the recent western claims an ethical rationale.

  It goes without saying that your very own Jew fetish has evolved from the culture of Martin Luther ( religious ) , to Hitler ( racial hygiene ) ,  to your present version  of this Jew fetish.   

   As with the long histories of both veganism and anti-semitism, different paths to the same destination changes little or nothing regarding the final product.

So now you tell me what this is all about. I do not see what crazy Christians like Luther has to do with the subject. Now do I see the relevence of the ritual/taboo, genital mutilating Yahweh cult members. Do you have a problem with putting both in barrels and banging hard? This is an atheist website. Judaism doesn't get nearly the hassle it deserves compared to other religions.

I do not see how you connect the ritual sacrifice cult with ethical considerations on animal suffering. Are you suggesting them as opposites? My sig does address Zionism which by definition requires murder and theft to succeed and always has. And that requirement has been in writing since Jabotinski who is considered the philosophical basis for the Likud party which currently rules Israel. It also maintains the tyrannical jewish military dictatorship over millions of non-Jews. I consider the deliberate and willful deprivation of human rights to Palestinians to be much worse than any animal suffering if that is what you mean. Sic Semper Tyrannis!

As to long histories, Hitler was a vegetarian and therefore of the same culture as the veggiehead you are defending. In fact both of them are of the same culture and Gandhi by your single culture claim.

And before you try the usual crap read Sand's Invention of the Jewish People and remember it was that Zionist invention that was adopted by the Nazis. Without it, conversion was the only option. And before getting to excited about that read up on the Transfer agreement, Ha'Avara, which is the collaboration of the Zionists with the Nazis. And be sure to throw a hissy fit.

I still like your fisting vibrator.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

 

I was thinking of fisting actually.

 

     Then your ass hole must be a wreck

What might that have to do with your girl friends?

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

digitalbeachbum wrote:

3 - I think it, the original post by Vastet, shows that random events can change the course of an entire civilization. Makes me wonder how or why our ancestors first at meat? Was it a dead animal and no fruit or nuts around? Some small family found the dead carcass of a cow and then started to eat specific parts which smelled good? They enjoyed it so much or it changed their brain in a way that they craved it? Then when they bumped in to another group who had no food they taught them to eat the meat. Next they were hunting out cows when ever they could find them?

Wonderful stuff!!!

It isn't a matter of finding something dead and trying to find a use for it until someone decides to take a bite. Lemurs are omnivorous and tree-dwelling. Except for us and a variety of gorilla all related monkies and apes are tree-dwelling full or part time and most will eat anything they can catch. In trees it is mostly eggs and grubs. Eggs of any degree of maturity and then hatchlings are included. It is normal. The only change is the variety of meat eating and for us dependence on it.

And if you remember trying to catch birds and squirrels as a kid you remember it didn't work. For that you needed to throw rocks or spears, in other words use tools to catch animals to eat. Also snares and nets and such but the point being tools expanded the available meat supply. Expanded from things that could not run away like eggs and grubs to things that couldn't run fast enough. That was a huge increase in available meat sources. Eggs and grubs are an occasional bonus to leaf and tuber eating. With tools you can add hunting to the previous gathering.

Once meat allows greater brain development you have a positive feedback loop as smarter people make better hunters. Once the brain can recognize animal tracks it has an adavantage no other animal ever had. That leading to more food would lead to a brain able to figure out how old the tracks are and which are most recent making more meat available. The smart you get the more meat you get.

And then the side benefit that meat allows maximum physical size which means stronger which means bigger game which means more meat.

Of course equilibrium sets in at some point such as bigger than necessary means hunting for the sake of hunting as happens with predators. Their size changes with the size of the prey over millions of years. The rules are different for social hunters like us and African lions and a lot more.

Google it. There is a lot of literature around this idea not just for people by animals and it can keep you off the street and out of trouble for days once you get started.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:I can

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

I can only suggest you practice reading for comprehension as I included both modern Indian and the modern "ethical" version. There are others. 

 

 

 

  Perhaps the "others" are your favored "subcultures" that you prattled on about ?        ( but which never found there way into any of the actual dictionary references I provided for you, lol ! )

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:As to

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

As to long histories, Hitler was a vegetarian and therefore of the same culture as the veggiehead you are defending. In fact both of them are of the same culture and Gandhi by your single culture claim.

 Does that mean that Gandhi was also a member of the NSDAP ?     I learn all kinds of new things from you.

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
And before you try the usual crap read Sand's Invention of the Jewish People and remember it was that Zionist invention that was adopted by the Nazis. Without it, conversion was the only option. And before getting to excited about that read up on the Transfer agreement, Ha'Avara, which is the collaboration of the Zionists with the Nazis. And be sure to throw a hissy fit. 

 

   Does anyone who isn't obsessed with this Jew fetish of yours  actually spend all of their time memorizing this crap ?  Why would I read any of this shit when you can't even bring yourself to read a single entry from an online dictionary that I even provided a link to ?

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
I still like your fisting vibrator.

  Of course you like it, it's probably the only thing left that can still stimulate your old man nerve endings.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Google

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Google it. There is a lot of literature around this idea not just for people by animals and it can keep you off the street and out of trouble for days once you get started.

 

   Google a fucking dictionary and you'll find definitions of "culture" that refer to more than the single usage that you are strenuously clinging to.  Or just go back to post #199 or post#219 if that's too much work for you.  

   (  ....or perhaps you can convince yourself that some nasty Zionists who worked at Meriam-Webster altered the dictionary entry just to make you look stupid. )

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2766
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

3 - I think it, the original post by Vastet, shows that random events can change the course of an entire civilization. Makes me wonder how or why our ancestors first at meat? Was it a dead animal and no fruit or nuts around? Some small family found the dead carcass of a cow and then started to eat specific parts which smelled good? They enjoyed it so much or it changed their brain in a way that they craved it? Then when they bumped in to another group who had no food they taught them to eat the meat. Next they were hunting out cows when ever they could find them?

Wonderful stuff!!!

It isn't a matter of finding something dead and trying to find a use for it until someone decides to take a bite. Lemurs are omnivorous and tree-dwelling. Except for us and a variety of gorilla all related monkies and apes are tree-dwelling full or part time and most will eat anything they can catch. In trees it is mostly eggs and grubs. Eggs of any degree of maturity and then hatchlings are included. It is normal. The only change is the variety of meat eating and for us dependence on it.

And if you remember trying to catch birds and squirrels as a kid you remember it didn't work. For that you needed to throw rocks or spears, in other words use tools to catch animals to eat. Also snares and nets and such but the point being tools expanded the available meat supply. Expanded from things that could not run away like eggs and grubs to things that couldn't run fast enough. That was a huge increase in available meat sources. Eggs and grubs are an occasional bonus to leaf and tuber eating. With tools you can add hunting to the previous gathering.

Once meat allows greater brain development you have a positive feedback loop as smarter people make better hunters. Once the brain can recognize animal tracks it has an adavantage no other animal ever had. That leading to more food would lead to a brain able to figure out how old the tracks are and which are most recent making more meat available. The smart you get the more meat you get.

And then the side benefit that meat allows maximum physical size which means stronger which means bigger game which means more meat.

I believe the first meat eaters were scavengers.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

digitalbeachbum wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

3 - I think it, the original post by Vastet, shows that random events can change the course of an entire civilization. Makes me wonder how or why our ancestors first at meat? Was it a dead animal and no fruit or nuts around? Some small family found the dead carcass of a cow and then started to eat specific parts which smelled good? They enjoyed it so much or it changed their brain in a way that they craved it? Then when they bumped in to another group who had no food they taught them to eat the meat. Next they were hunting out cows when ever they could find them?

Wonderful stuff!!!

It isn't a matter of finding something dead and trying to find a use for it until someone decides to take a bite. Lemurs are omnivorous and tree-dwelling. Except for us and a variety of gorilla all related monkies and apes are tree-dwelling full or part time and most will eat anything they can catch. In trees it is mostly eggs and grubs. Eggs of any degree of maturity and then hatchlings are included. It is normal. The only change is the variety of meat eating and for us dependence on it.

And if you remember trying to catch birds and squirrels as a kid you remember it didn't work. For that you needed to throw rocks or spears, in other words use tools to catch animals to eat. Also snares and nets and such but the point being tools expanded the available meat supply. Expanded from things that could not run away like eggs and grubs to things that couldn't run fast enough. That was a huge increase in available meat sources. Eggs and grubs are an occasional bonus to leaf and tuber eating. With tools you can add hunting to the previous gathering.

Once meat allows greater brain development you have a positive feedback loop as smarter people make better hunters. Once the brain can recognize animal tracks it has an adavantage no other animal ever had. That leading to more food would lead to a brain able to figure out how old the tracks are and which are most recent making more meat available. The smart you get the more meat you get.

And then the side benefit that meat allows maximum physical size which means stronger which means bigger game which means more meat.

I believe the first meat eaters were scavengers.

Why? Grubs are insects are meat. Nearly hatced eggs and hatchlings are meat. This is half the fun. What do you mean by scavenging? It is also fun getting ahead of the anthropologists -- at least what gets published.

Think it through. Scanvengers and jungles don't go together. Scavengers go with savanahs so kill can be seen and smelled from a distance or height. If scavenging means accidentally coming across something dead it does not differ from grubs and eggs. So if people are on the grasslands they are already on two legs and with some form of tools and they are actively searching for carcasses to scavenge.

If doing that then they are in competition with other scavengers which come in two types, packs like hyenas and vultures which have no group behavior. To have a chance of chasing off hyena they have spears. But if they use them the chase off vultures they can dine on vulture au vin. That is not quite scavenging.

And then there is a more relevant fact. For every ton of big game the tonnage of smaller game increases almost exponentially by decrease in weight. Hunting elephant makes great Hollywood and bringing down Elk makes a great spread in a gun magazine but in all recorded history people have mainly gotten their meat from small animals. And catching small animals is one that can be learned in the forests before going into the grasslands.

There is nothing obvious in favor of scavenging and even if that was an early factor using carcasses to attract game is an obvious early first step. And all the while small game equivalents of rabbits and squirrels have been game to hunt and eat even before moving out on to the plains. There is no obvious clear demarcation to suggest scavenging was a major first step.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Google it. There is a lot of literature around this idea not just for people by animals and it can keep you off the street and out of trouble for days once you get started.

 

   Google a fucking dictionary and you'll find definitions of "culture" that refer to more than the single usage that you are strenuously clinging to.  Or just go back to post #199 or post#219 if that's too much work for you.  

   (  ....or perhaps you can convince yourself that some nasty Zionists who worked at Meriam-Webster altered the dictionary entry just to make you look stupid. )

What do I use as google terms to confirm your assertion that college pot and rave XTC and heroin and crack whores all share the same culture as you have asserted in claiming there is a single drug culture?

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
As to long histories, Hitler was a vegetarian and therefore of the same culture as the veggiehead you are defending. In fact both of them are of the same culture and Gandhi by your single culture claim.

 Does that mean that Gandhi was also a member of the NSDAP ?     I learn all kinds of new things from you.

The issue is only veggiehead and they were the same. But since you bring it up India was offered a seat on the International Military Tribunal, you know, the big one, and refused correctly declaring it was sham court of revenge not of justice. After all Stalin and communists were worse by every measure and were never brought to justice.

Hitler declared war on Stalin and we never thanked him.

Quote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
And before you try the usual crap read Sand's Invention of the Jewish People and remember it was that Zionist invention that was adopted by the Nazis. Without it, conversion was the only option. And before getting to excited about that read up on the Transfer agreement, Ha'Avara, which is the collaboration of the Zionists with the Nazis. And be sure to throw a hissy fit. 

   Does anyone who isn't obsessed with this Jew fetish of yours  actually spend all of their time memorizing this crap ?  Why would I read any of this shit when you can't even bring yourself to read a single entry from an online dictionary that I even provided a link to ?

Since you brought Jews into the discussion for some unstated reason I see no problem with continuing the subject you raised. I would never have brought it up. So as a fetish Jews appear to go with your brass vibrator. If you do not want a subject discussed, do not bring it up.

Quote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
I still like your fisting vibrator.

  Of course you like it, it's probably the only thing left that can still stimulate your old man nerve endings.

As to your new one, I have always preferred M1 Carbine Enforcer model as very much easier to control but still using a rifle cartridge.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

I can only suggest you practice reading for comprehension as I included both modern Indian and the modern "ethical" version. There are others. 

  Perhaps the "others" are your favored "subcultures" that you prattled on about ?        ( but which never found there way into any of the actual dictionary references I provided for you, lol ! )

I am now rather more interested in how you work in the ritual animal torture of Halachic slaughter with veggiephilia.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:What do I

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

What do I use as google terms to confirm your assertion that college pot and rave XTC and heroin and crack whores all share the same culture as you have asserted in claiming there is a single drug culture?

 

                          

                                     Here, let me do the difficult work of citing an actual dictionary entry which may again also prove too much for you deal with.  Here it is yet again:

            

                                                  Definition of Culture

 

 

              1   :  CULTIVATION, TILLAGE

 

              2   :  the act of developing the intellectual and moral faculties especially by education

 

              3   :  expert care and training <beauty culture>

 

              4   a  :  enlightenment and excellence of taste acquired by intellectual and aesthetic training

 

                   b  :  acquaintance with and taste in fine arts, humanities, and broad aspects of science as distinguished from vocational and technical skills

 

              5   a  :  the integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations

 

                                (  Okay Nony, clean your reading spectacles, put down your copy of Mein Kampf and pay close attention to the following entries )

 

                   b  :  the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or SOCIAL group; the characteristic features of everyday existence ( as diversions or a WAY OF LIFE ) shared by people in a place or time <popular culture> <southern culture>

 

                      

                                            ( Well Nony, I guess "pop culture" or southern culture" were given as examples just to piss you off ? )

 

           

                   c  :  THE SET OF SHARED ATTITUDES, VALUES, GOALS, AND PRACTICES that characterizes an institution or organization < a corporate culture focused on the bottom line >

 

                   d  :  the set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristic < studying the effect of computers on print culture > < changing the culture of materialism will take time--Peggy O'Mara>

 

                                                 www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture

 

                            

 

 

        ( Let's see ..... "beauty" culture, "pop" culture, "southern" culture, "corporate" culture, "print" culture, culture of "materialism", etc.  Fucking dictionary, why would anyone listen to them ! )

 

         

                        "Drug culture"  

 

                              http://alcoholism.about.com/b/2010/10/12/drug-culture-has-its-own-language.htm

 

 

                    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                          

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 2766
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

I believe the first meat eaters were scavengers.

Scavengers go with savanahs...

Yep. I agree. Now tell me where is the source of early humans? Mountains? Savannahs? Jungles? Temperate Forests?

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:As to

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

As to your new one, I have always preferred M1 Carbine Enforcer model as very much easier to control but still using a rifle cartridge.

 

             I haven't fallen into your state of physical frailty, hence controlling a weapon's recoil while maintaining accuracy is not a problem.  Plus I thought you would have "appreciated" a weapon ( Galil ARM ) that was fielded by the evil Zionists.   Phfft, Whatever.

 

  

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Just stepping in to tell you

Just stepping in to tell you I like the "Zombama" avatar.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3564
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is onlineOnline
jcgadfly wrote:Just stepping

jcgadfly wrote:

Just stepping in to tell you I like the "Zombama" avatar.

      

               Yeah, it seems there is now an entire graphics industry out there who are quite good at spoofing most any public figure you can think of ( ie, Bush Jr. as a chimp, etc )

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


x
Bronze Member
Posts: 591
Joined: 2010-06-15
User is offlineOffline
Probably close enough

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Hitler was a vegetarian

For pedantic laughs and since this is something I've wondered about and is a common trivia question, I can't help but mention that it seems that he probably did consume meat sometimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitlers_vegetarianism#Questioning_Hitler.27s_vegetarianism

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/food/2004/02/carnifuhrer.html

In his book, Berry cites written accounts—mostly articles and history texts—that show the instigator of World War II on occasion indulged in carnivorous delights. A 1937 New York Times profile called "At Home with the Furher," for example, describes Hitler as a vegetarian, though notes that he "occasionally relishes a slice of ham." (Hitler apparently celebrated Germany's 1938 annexation of Czechoslovakia with a slice of ham, a Prague specialty.) And in her 1964 book, The Gourmet Cooking School Cookbook, Dione Lucas, who worked at a Hamburg hotel that Hitler frequented, writes, "I do not mean to spoil your appetite for stuffed squab, but you might be interested to know that it was a great favorite with Hitler. ... Let us not hold that against a fine recipe though."

A dissenting view:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTJDGcoqqeM

 

 

 


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

x wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Hitler was a vegetarian

For pedantic laughs and since this is something I've wondered about and is a common trivia question, I can't help but mention that it seems that he probably did consume meat sometimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitlers_vegetarianism#Questioning_Hitler.27s_vegetarianism

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/food/2004/02/carnifuhrer.html

In his book, Berry cites written accounts—mostly articles and history texts—that show the instigator of World War II on occasion indulged in carnivorous delights. A 1937 New York Times profile called "At Home with the Furher," for example, describes Hitler as a vegetarian, though notes that he "occasionally relishes a slice of ham." (Hitler apparently celebrated Germany's 1938 annexation of Czechoslovakia with a slice of ham, a Prague specialty.) And in her 1964 book, The Gourmet Cooking School Cookbook, Dione Lucas, who worked at a Hamburg hotel that Hitler frequented, writes, "I do not mean to spoil your appetite for stuffed squab, but you might be interested to know that it was a great favorite with Hitler. ... Let us not hold that against a fine recipe though."

A dissenting view:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTJDGcoqqeM

One of these days I expect to find he liked cigars although he was publically an antismoking nazi like today's antismoking nazis. He also had a public image as a celibate that supposed the women loved. All we don't have is a claim Eva Braun had his child.

As to the veggieheads I expect most of them indulge furtively. That was the Scott Pilgrim reference. I have no idea what Gandhi was before he pulled the "went native" thing much less what he ate in private. The claim however does attract lots of strange people for a lot of reasons and has throughout history. I have no interest in debating who was a "real" one as what a "real" one is has at least the five sort of well defined categories I listed earlier in this thread. Hitler claimed to be an ethical type as he was a big supporter of animal cruelty laws while Gandhi was for religious reasons.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

digitalbeachbum wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

I believe the first meat eaters were scavengers.

Scavengers go with savanahs...

Yep. I agree. Now tell me where is the source of early humans? Mountains? Savannahs? Jungles? Temperate Forests?

 

Tropical forests, aka jungles. The older the fossils the more the features are suitable for climbing trees which are lost to anatomically adapted to walking with loss of tree features. The question was hold long ago walking became dominant. That was what was remarkable about Lucy. Since then a "lucy" about a million years older was found with more tree living features. I have to take people word for the interperatation of the features. It is very far from my field. Generally descriptions are comparisons with chimps who may live mainly on the ground but still sleep in trees.

Specifically human origins as in our kind of Homo Sapiens is beleived to have been in South Africa. It has also been suggested those people whose language includes clicks are direct descendents of the first HS. But that would be millions of years after our cousins like Australopethicus were exploring China.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml