Birds seen stuck in position for hours in Tsuen Wan prompts call to police, but source says investigation affected by lack of CCTV at site.

Birds seen stuck in position for hours in Tsuen Wan prompts call to police, but source says investigation affected by lack of CCTV at site.

  • Manifish_Destiny@lemmy.worldEnglish
    53·
    1 month ago

    I’d happily beat someone to death over something like this

    You wanna see animal abuse?

    I’ll fucking show you abuse.

        • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.orgEnglish
          27·
          1 month ago

          The point is that being that (rightfully) angry at animal abuse and not being vegan is fucking hypocritical.

          • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.caEnglish
            72·
            1 month ago

            No its not and I’m tired of trying to explain the concept of moral equivalence to idiots who think that it is.

            Its the same difference as would be hunting for food versus hunting for trophy sport. I can be perfectly fine with people hunting a deer in order to make some delicious deer sausage. But be against them hunting that same animal just to cut off its head to show off in their den.

            I can be perfectly morally fine with the idea that SOME forms of lower life are acceptable harvests for my own sustenance, but be morally outraged by animals being killed for needless reasons or sadism.

            Despite vegans attempts to muddy the issue, context matters.

            Its the same reason I would set a trap to kill a mouse that is causing trouble in my house, eating and pooping into my rice bag. But wouldn’t go out of my way to plant traps in a place where those same mice aren’t bothering me.

            Its the same reason I’d kill a moth that is keeping me from sleeping at night, but leave it alone if its harmlessly flying around my garage.

            Context matters. So quit your faux-outrage bullshit.

            • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.orgEnglish
              35·
              1 month ago

              This would be a lot more convincing if humans needed to eat animals, which we don’t. If done for pleasure ( taste or aesthetics), it’s hypocritical to then condemn other animal abuse/cruelty.

              • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.caEnglish
                61·
                1 month ago

                Actually, it’s been widely proven that being carnivores is precisely the reason we evolved to be where we are in the first place.

                There was no other diet that had the caloric bang-for-the-buck that allowed the complex requirements of the hominid brain to actually evolve.

                Due to a process of ‘encephalization’, humans have a larger brain size than would be expected for their body size. To sustain an expansively large brain, energetic compensation was required during hominin evolution. When examining individual organs, the brain mass surplus (and its energy requirement), is closely balanced by the reduction in size (and energy requirement) of the gastrointestinal tract. This is not surprising, considering the gut is the only organ that can sufficiently vary in size to offset the metabolic cost of a larger brain (Aiello and Wheeler, 1995). This process required a shift from a diet high in bulky plants of low digestibility (requiring voluminous fermentation chambers such as a rumen or cecum, or an extensive colon), to a higher-quality diet where foods are more energy dense and require less digestive processing. In temperate grass and woodland environments, this equates to an animal-derived protein-rich and fat-rich diet (Speth, 1989).

                Full text here

                So sure, keep making up your bullshit about whether or not we need to eat meat. But while you’re doing so, remember to thank a carnivore for evolving us to the point where you have the priviledge to make such a choice.

                • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.orgEnglish
                  23·
                  1 month ago

                  You do understand that evolution is not a ladder right? If we hadn’t evolved this way, we would have evolved another way. Hey, maybe we wouldn’t be so hell-bent on destroying earth if we had.

                  Regardless, eating animals is not necessary today, glad you agree.

                  • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.caEnglish
                    61·
                    1 month ago

                    If we hadn’t evolved this way, we would have evolved another way

                    Uhhhh…no…we wouldn’t have. That’s the entire point.

                    In order for humans to develop things like speech, tool-making, complex sociological relationships, everything that literally makes us human, required a big brain. Big brains require lots of power in terms of caloric density. Which is why becoming meat-eaters was a threshold in our evolution. No meat…no homo sapiens, end of story.

                    Whatever we would be, (If we would evolve at all) wouldn’t be considered a homo sapien. It would likely be just another branch of an early hominim species that died out shortly after moving down from the trees.

                    You are correct that evolution is not a “ladder”. You’re trying to educate someone who literally majored in archaeology with a minor in history. The past is quite literally my thing. There were many many early hominim species that began evolving. Why we’re here and they aren’t is because we had the brain power to figure out how to control our environment. And that brain power came from the caloric density or meat.

                    So no…we wouldn’t have evolved “another way”.

          • iAvicenna@lemmy.worldEnglish
            42·
            1 month ago

            “Do you eat cheese? THEN DON’T FUCKING COMPLAIN WHEN SOMEONE GLUES A PIGEON TO A WALL” is surely the most effective way to convince people while feeling morally superior.

            • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.orgEnglish
              33·
              1 month ago

              You are projecting your insecurities onto me. I don’t feel morally superior, but have a think what saying that does to you. Suddenly there is no reason to think about the stuff discussed here, because if I only say these things to feel morally superior then obviously it can’t be true and you don’t have to change anything, right? You are short circuting your own critical thinking.

              • iAvicenna@lemmy.worldEnglish
                3·
                1 month ago

                You definitely like telling people how they should feel and what they should discuss, I can give you that.

          • Aatube@kbin.melroy.orgOP
            43·
            1 month ago

            Everyone has their limit to the ratio between tolerance and group convenience. Even vegans must also tolerate plant cruelty, for one. It’s not an “on-or-off” switch.

            • CommanderCloon@lemmy.mlEnglish
              31·
              1 month ago

              Let’s assume plant cruelty is a thing, for the sake of argument. About 50% of cereals produced, and a 3rd of all crop land are used to feed livestock.

              Yet livestock account for 17% of the world calories

              The best way to reduce “plant harm” is to remove meat consumption. Bonus points for stopping animal cruelty, reducing transport of gigatons of freight, reducing deforestation & even returning land to wilderness

              • Aatube@kbin.melroy.orgOP
                3·
                1 month ago

                I know, my point is there’s still a level of cruelty that everyone tolerates. Yet reduction is always better. Punishing such pigeon-gluers is reduction. Being vegetarian is reduction. Being vegan is reduction. That does not mean being any of these is being hypocritical.