Congratulations! Your video, The Commercial that Killed a Fast Food Chain, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 508 Badge!

Your video, The Commercial that Killed a Fast Food Chain, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 494 Badge!

I also don't get this "dogs were domesticated by humans, cats domesticated themselves" bullshit. Dogs were domesticated the exact same way as cats, the only difference is we discovered cats are only useful for rodent control, as hunters. Dogs could be hunters (terriers), hunter-helpers (pointers, retrievers), protectors and herd control (shepards, collies), beasts of burden (Rottweilers), etc. Of course we spent more time working with dogs. They had useful abilities already. Cats are much like rats, racoons and other animals that thrive in the presence of humanity. They're just at the top of their respective food chain, like we are.

@newtboy
There's also absolutely no measure of the aquifer itself, how it moves, mixes, flows, etc. The system is mostly unmapped.

Fortunately that's not entirely true. If you go check out the wiki article, it has a lot of links on a lot of mapping that has been done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floridan_aquifer#Hydrology_and_Geology
Most relevant to trying to analyze things, the graphic below is a mapping of the normal water flow within the aquifer based off of testing from about 1,500 different locations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floridan_aquifer#/media/File:Estimated_transmissivity_of_the_Floridan_aquifer_sytem.png

The Mosaic leak occurred somewhere inland from Tampa as close as I can find, if you can narrow that down it'd help. On the map that looks like good news though because that region shows upwards of 100,000 m^3 of water flow per day. So very good mixing for the quantity of leak being discussed if it falls there.

And you didn't address the orange problem.
That's because there isn't one. Radon doesn't work like lead or mercury, it's a gas and doesn't build up in irrigation or the food chain. It bleeds off very fast, irrigation systems bleed it almost instantly into the atmosphere. In animals and meat bags like us, the references I've found suggest the average time from consumption to release is about an hour so we don't hold onto Radon long. Again reason for optimism imo.

Laughable. First you quote from a site that anyone would recognize as 100% pushing it's own agenda, then you fail to see that the site you are referencing is happy to toss terms like apex predator around. The very definition of Apex Predator is a predator at the top of a food chain.

If you bothered to learn anything other than regurgitate information that is basically dogma that they want you to spread, you could have easily clicked on one of the links at the bottom of the paper you reference, links that blow gaping holes into the 'science' that supports yours viewpoint.

Here is one: http://www.pnas.org/content/111/9/E796.long

The scientist used the same methodology and proved that in a REEF environment, Humans ARE apex predators. Why doesn't your dogmatic site list competitive theories? Does it not bother you that they are giving you information designed to influence others into following your beliefs without bothering to suggest counter-theories?

Personally, I consider both studies to be flawed, as we developed into an apex predator through use of tools. We trump other apex predators by either outsmarting them, using tools to defeat them (weapons,traps), or by changing their environment to suit ours (domestication, eradication).

For someone who is telling others to think outside the box, you have buried yourself IN the box on this issue. That's perfectly fine if you like it, but don't expect to not be called to task for it.

As far as morality goes, I know at least one of the two vegans here absolutely supports the development of new technological terrors (heh) that are designed to kill other humans. Since we are designing weapons to kill other humans, doesn't that go directly against the vegan outlook of do no harm to other sentient species for our own benefit? Eh, @transmorpher?

"Claiming to be at the top of the food chain has become a popular justification for eating animal products and an affirmation of our ability to violently dominate everything and everyone. Yet justifications for needless violence that draw on notions of power and supremacy are based on the philosophy of “Might makes right” — the principle behind the worst atrocities and crimes of human history."

"We humans are not at the top of anything. We are merely part of an interdependent web of life that forms complex yet fragile ecosystems. We choose to either participate in the protection of these natural systems, or to destroy them at our own peril. The concept of a food chain is a human construct that imposes a rigid and competitive hierarchy among species, rather than a good faith understanding of the complexity of the ecosystems to which we belong. Selectively appealing to biological determinism also ignores the fact that we are moral agents. By choosing plant foods, we can get our nutrients through primary sources of nourishment, in the most environmentally friendly and resource-efficient way possible, minimizing our harm to other animals, humans and the planet."

http://freefromharm.org/common-justifications-for-eating-animals/breaking-food-chain-myth/

You are really digging your own hole deeper. It is exactly this attitude that makes people dislike vegans. We are, by base nature, predators. We reside at the top of our food chain, barring accident or stupidity, because we are superior to the creatures that would (and do) eat us if they are given a chance.

If you choose to give up your birthright won through millenniums of evolution to be an apex predator, that is your option. Those of us that are comfortable with our predatory natures will still be chowing down on the food that we like. Sorry if it hits you in the feels.

They are almost always relieved or suspended, at least while the investigation is in process. Once the initial furor blows over, they are either quietly put back on duty or sometimes fired. Since most departments don't bother to blacklist them, they will simply find another place to be a cop.

Just like the two cops who killed the kid with the fake airsoft gun (Tamir Rice) both had prior incidents that, in any normal job would have prevented them from working in that field ever again. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_Rice and read the background of the officers. Both had incidents that should have made them unsuitable for duty, but they both were able to continue working and then were let off the hook by a grand jury after the shoo...murder of Rice. Since they were acquitted, the wonderful police unions mean they get to stay cops.

Now you tell me another field of employment that gets away with this. You might say the military, but generally if you screw up badly they will make you go away. There might be a cover up, but you are going to be kicked out, court martialed, or put in a dead end place where you will never advance out of nor have authority to make any important decisions. Politics is close, but if you aren't super high up in the food chain you will pay for it as well. Police, though, they will walk 99% of the time. Even the officer who shot the teen here in Austin that was wandering around naked and threatening people, he was only fired and this town is one of the most liberal towns in the USA. We've already established that a lot of police forces don't even bother checking with previous employers, so I expect he will be able to go someplace else and be a cop again.

The most fun thing? This has been going on for decades, hell, probably a couple of centuries. Only since the advent of video recording technology that was easily portable have we been shown the true nature of the beast. But, and forgive me as I can't find the exact quote, someone said something along the lines of that the majority of the public will forget anything in six weeks. Over and over we seem to prove that as we keep letting these people get away with impunity.

As I said to @newtboy sometime ago in a similar(ish) conversation, I appreciate your responses. It's nice to talk to someone not just spitting bile (which you'd do less if you ate a plant-based whole food diet ).

Those 'multiple phases of science' saying some food was good or bad at various times of your life is mostly the lobbyists and corporations making smoke screens. It's been known for decades that a plant-based whole food diet is protective against the #1 killer in the Western world. Again, it's the same as the tobacco companies. When the science disagrees with you, you cause a confusion smokescreen so people say exactly what you just said. And evidently it worked -- until the last few years when the internet and a handful of movies and books have started making it very clear what's going on. If you have a short attention span, I suggest you watch just a few 5-min videos on NutritionFacts. The guy is funny and has videos about just about everything in nutrition. And he takes everything from the newest studies. He also has a great book that came out recently, How Not to Die which is a fun read considering it's a diet science book.

Re: personal choice -- I understand you annoyance at being belittled by vegetarians/vegans, but you have to understand that we don't see it as a "personal choice". We see it as a moral one. Why is it not a "personal choice" to molest children? What if someone likes to molest children? It doesn't matter because, morally, you should not. And you're causing harm to another. The question is why are animals not allowed inside our moral-consideration-circle. Why are they excluded?

I personally think that vegetarians are hypocrites if they're doing it for moral reasons alone. You could argue that meat is murder, but dairy is torture. But, you gotta take whatever steps you need to get there. It's hard, I know. Giving up dairy was really hard.

My argument usually isn't about sentience. It's about choices. Why cause harm to something you don't need to just for your pleasure when there are literally better alternatives? We do, indeed, have to eat, so I eat the lowest form on the food chain that I can to survive. They just also luckily happen to be the most nutritious.

Sorry, I've tasted vegetarian bacon and it simply doesn't measure up. Even the seitan fake bacon, which is close, lacks the proper crispness and flavor.

I fully support anyone's choice to make the sacrifice to their lifestyle by skipping animal products, but even the best fake meat alternatives do not completely measure up to the real ones in taste and texture.

Everything dies and, outside of the 'civilized' food chain, most every creature dies from old age or by being eaten (sometimes while still alive). If I were to go into a cage full of lions, I don't think they would have a crisis of conscience over my level of sentience in deciding whether or not to eat me.

This is one I actually feel bad about people higher up in the political food chain being woken up and told....

WHAT?!?
They did WHAT?!?

Oh this is going to be a shitstorm.

Cops need to make their thin blue line about validity and fast.

Whenever there's a mosquito vectored disease, people talk about eradicating mosquitos, but never consider their role in the food chain, and it is not a small role.
They also never consider the effects of the eradication methods, which are often poison sprayed into the air or onto ponds. Decades ago, a 12 year old boy designed and made a device for eradicating mosquitos in water using sound waves for a science project, and it worked. He tuned his device to resonate at the same frequency as the gas bladder in mosquito larva, popping it and killing the mosquitos without effecting anything else, and leaving no residue. For some reason, I never hear about that method being used, but instead often see people dosing small ponds with poison, oil, or bacteria, all of which harm other organisms.
Targeting single strains of mosquito with genetics may be a good way to deal with disease issues, but will certainly also have unexpected unpredictable consequences. I hope they remember the fiasco caused by creating killer bees and study the issue from all sides thoroughly before releasing them into the wild.

@newtboy: Just to be clear, I really appreciate your comments. It's nice to talk to an omnivore who doesn't just respond with "I'LL EAT TWICE AS MUCH MEAT AS YOU DO TO MAKE UP FOR YOUR VEGANISM!" I'm trying to be objective, and I appreciate your attempt as well.

That being said...

I respect the genuine care you give to your animals. I didn't know you or your family (or both) owned such a farm. It does sound like you do, truly, meet their needs as animals. However, (and I hate to bring out the really controversial stuff), I'm sure plenty of slave-owners treated their slaves with genuine humanity. But that doesn't excuse the categorical enslavement of other beings. Despite all care given to those animals, they are still not able to live their natural lives as animals on earth. I don't see why our subjugation, no matter how "humane", can be considered anything less than "inhumane".

Now, the comparison to "most children in the world" is a moot one. Yes, of course everywhere there are going to be worse things happening. But the point is that we are rational, (hopefully) decent, higher-order-understanding-of-the-universe beings. Humans seem to like to cherry-pick when their huge brain is an excuse for greatness, or ignored and "we're just animals after all". So, just because there is suffering outside the scope of our influence, we do all have the ability to stop eating meat. Pretty easily, in fact, since there are tons and tons and tons of other means to get all the nutrition we need (not to mention way, way healthier means).

The point is that we are completely and totally (especially as upper-middle class 1st-world citizens) capable of not eating meat this very moment. You can't, however, change the living conditions in the slums of India by yourself right now.

And explain to me how mentally handicapped humans are not animals. What is the distinction? They are both objectively less intelligent. If anything, animals are more capable of surviving on their own. What makes mentally handicapped people any more special than animals? Just because they're human? That seems arbitrary. True, they should be treated differently because they are different animals, but I mean why should one be treated to our moral consideration and one should not? What makes humans so damn special?

And that "sustenance" argument is really, really misguided. As said above, you can eat an entire vegan diet and be probably even more healthy than an omnivore. And animals are not minimally suffering. Yes, a very cherished, rare group, as your animals are, are "minimally suffering", but many, many, many, many more are being horribly abused for that sustenance that can be gained elsewhere (with suffering of its own, truly. I always hear the "well, there are people given slave wages to pick vegetables in California". But, you'll be eating those vegetables and fruits anyway. That's an entirely other battle that needs to be waged in other ways, not through lack of consumption).

My assumption was not that 100% of farmers treat their animals inhumanely. My assumption was that billions of animals are being treated inhumanely. And the way parents treat their children is a red herring. That's not my argument at all. And again, it's outside the realm of my influence.

And to counter your last argument... my same argument above follows for the "food chain/web" argument. Once and for all:

We are rational, amazing, smart, complex and powerful beings on this planet. We have it within our power (each of us) to not eat meat. This is "against nature". But so is basically OUR ENTIRE CIVILIZATION. What makes us truly different from animals is that exact ability. To step back and choose our actions. Are you saying humans not capable of choosing their actions -- those with so much in the 1st world countries? That we're all forced to, by nature, to eat meat? That is the cognitive dissonance I speak of. That we're so special because we are rational beings, but at the same time we must eat meat because we are not rational human beings.

This entire argument was not endorsed by PETA, because they're a bunch of assholes -- but despite being assholes one can't argue that they have brought about change. Change comes from all angles. Grassroots, insane radicals, scientists, humanitarians. They all try to bring change in different ways and succeed influencing different groups. PETA's brazenness is its power. Large corporations, like McDonald's, must respond to such a power. Despite being assholes. Both of them.

--

I want to end on a note of humility -- that I admit to having that same cognitive dissonance when it comes to animals. As a cat owner, I often visualize the mound of turkey carcasses that both of my lovable kittens live on top of. And they truly are carnivores in that they cannot find sustenance outside of meat. How do I rationalize all the turkey deaths (my cats only exclusively eat turkey for some goddamn reason) just so I can have my lovable pets? I can't. And it kills me. Not sure if I'll get cats after they die.

--

Thanks for reading. That was a lot.

I haven't eaten there in a decade or so, but it used to be a slightly above average fast-food chain.

*quality *engineering to make this work. I'm guessing this is 3d printed.
*promote

On a less positive note, it's going to be a problem when my amphibious brethren aren't there to eat the bugs and provide a few links in the food chain. I hope they get a grasp on Chytrid soon, we have enough problems with habitat depletion as it is. I'm often surprised the mass extinction of an entire CLASS of life doesn't get more attention. It's a pretty big deal (but I am biased).