Firstly, there are many different methods for human composting, including just burial in a biodegradable box without preservatives. At cemeteries, plots might be slightly more expensive because they’re more spread out, but beyond that it’s the same cost as any burial.
But yes, I would absolutely pay the minor difference in cost to not waste resources (both my nutrients and the gas burnt). I have no heirs.
I would much rather be a tree than a toxic plot of grass. I think anyone visiting me would be happier with that too….but it’s much more about the environment than people for me.

Again, because this one method is costlier doesn’t mean it has to be. This method is really partial cremation. I would consider something more like this….

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a34054806/living-coffin-helps-bodies-decompose-faster/

Or less. Those cost less than most coffins.

People used to just go in a pine box and they composted quickly…none of these preservatives in the body and steel coffins designed to last centuries, that’s insanity to me and I want none of it.

Unfortunately the land fill would be a rotting cesspool of decaying bodies if people could toss bodies into dumpsters. Maybe consider donating to science, then they pay for your disposal.

Edit: this reminds me of the above ground cemeteries in New Orleans that (according to our tour guide) use the natural heat to naturally cremate bodies then they just push the last remains to the back of the tomb and reuse it.

An employee confided in me how her mother's funeral and burial would have cost roughly $60k to be interred next to her father at the cemetery. She ended up having the remains cremated and bought a nice urn. Then with the help of her boyfriend she went into the cemetery at night and dug a hole on top of her father's grave, placed the urn and buried it. Final cost about $1,800.

Is this sweet fish just lonely? Not much entertainment value in that environment ... looks to me anyway.

I've had a variety of fish several times in my life. Many have displayed distinctive personality traits and would be amazingly interactive with me. Elvis and Costello [Oscars] were my favorites as was Jambi [goldfish ... old vids still on YT]. Too bad I dreaded cleaning those tanks though [ugg]. Coupled with the heartache of the eventual/inevitable burial at 'sea' [in most cases], my urge for serenity on that front has been satiated for good.

Every story I see on this situation covers the emotional hot topics of they might endanger the tribes water supply, they might be trampling on sacred burial sites, they aren't being nice to the protestors.

So what are the facts? How was the company handling the concerns of the many people affected by the pipeline not just this one tribe. I have seen only one story that covered this and I have to say that it appears that the company has tried to work with them. https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-gates/on-the-standing-rock-tribes-dakota-pipeline-protest-/10154529600627457

I would love to see a story from the tribe perspective that shows. something that goes something like this. "we contacted the company on these dates and expressed out concerns over these topics (see attached letters, forms, online entries etc) we have not heard back or did not like their response (see attached responses). We worked with them and offered X alternatives... etc"

If I could see a fact filled version of their story that matches the one I linked above I would be more inclined to fully back them.

And another note, a tribal burial site was bulldozed before people could get there to determine if it had historical value which would have stopped the pipe line.

The best evidence you have for your claims (as I see it) is anecdotal at best.
3rd world countries 1) are not at all vegetarian and 2) don't get most cancers Westerners do largely because they don't eat processed foods or expose themselves to carcinogenic chemicals constantly....we do.
Again, NEVER get your science from the internet.

"Pro-life" is by definition "anti-choice".

If you're really pro-planet, a MUCH better way to go about it is try to get people to have fewer children. That will make exponentially more difference than some people eating fewer animals. In fact, if past human behavior is a guide, if we all stop eating animals, animals will cease to exist for the most part, so that's not helpful to them at all.

Again, fewer people is the proper answer, not forcefully change biologically engrained behavior. I made that choice, so I can eat all the animals I ever possibly can and I've done more for the planet and it's animals with that single action than 1000 vegans with vegan children...or more positive difference than one vegan with children, depending on how you want to look at it.

As a living being, I'm standing up for all living beings who certainly object to your choice to breed, both the voiceless and those with voice, and saying stop making choices that negatively impact us all, like having more children and grandchildren. If enough people would do that, eating meat won't be an ecological issue. ;-)

I didn't watch the videos, I don't get my science from the internet. I read scientific publications that contain peer reviewed science papers, and I've never seen one that said ALL the nutrients found in meat could be replaced with vegetable nutrients easily, simply, viably, or without excessive expense.
Also, it ignores that fact that most produce available in the first world comes with a huge carbon footprint and massive ecological damage because of the production methods, so it's not the 'clean' trade off you seem to assume.

Small family farms were plenty to meet demand for all of human history until about the last 50 years. Quit having kids, and it will be enough again and we can stop abusing animals and the eco system just to make enough food for humans.

A short, good life is preferable to no life at all.

Nope. I should have scheduled the one in that picture that's mine to end his life at least a year earlier, but I couldn't bring myself to do it. NOT doing it was immoral. If someone had been willing to eat him, I would be all for it. If someone wants to eat me, go for it...I suggest slow smoking and a molasses based BBQ sauce. Eating my dog would be ecologically sound, as opposed to the cremation we ended up with, or burial, being the only other option available.
If I raised dogs for food, I would not think twice about ending their life in their prime. That would be the reason they existed in the first place, and without that reason they would never get that chance.

Again, milk cows only exist because someone wanted to partner with them to benefit both. Without that symbiosis, they would not get the opportunity to exist at all. IMO, existence is preferable to no existence. Yes, they need to get pregnant at least once, but as I understand it, that's it so long as you keep up with milking them. Veal, now there I'll totally agree with you that IT'S abuse.

Animals are not people. They do not usually have the same need for freedom, and those that do have that need were never domesticated. It is not immoral to form a symbiosis with another species as long as you both benefit in some way, otherwise you're just a parasite.

? Taste, as in how animals taste? BS, that's not all. That's a component, sure, but there's incredibly more to it than that.

I prefer to give animals a reason to exist, knowing that without that human centric reason, they simply won't get the chance, but I do my best to purchase animal products that are created with the least distress and best conditions for the animals in question...granted that's not always possible to know.

Trust me, I've tried vegetarian 'meats', I know the difference, and absolutely don't prefer vegan fare, or vegetarian fare that attempts to emulate meat. If I want meat, I'll eat meat. You'll get my butter only by prying it from my cold, dead hands. ;-)

I don't think taste is quite as simple as you imply. Yes, there is a component of 'addiction' to certain foods, especially sugar rich foods.
There's no such thing as vegan cheese or chocolate, you mean tofu and carob...and I agree, they both suck.

Sorry, that's simply wrong. A poor eating vegan can certainly negatively impact the planet with their food choices. It's easy. Oreos for instance, are most certainly made with ecologically damaging factory farm methods creating the ingredients...well, those methods and chemists. I don't know off hand the carbon footprint and ecological impact of an oreo, but it's not "none".

How crazy scary does this look http://videosift.com/video/Swiss-Avalanche-Complete-Burial-and-Rescue

Thanks Wrapping it in newspaper for burial as we speak!

I'll send you a few pp's when I have them.

I love the 2004 Punisher game. I love it.
You can "interrogate" people in it, meaning you outright torture them for information or gratuitous, explicit death scenes. You can shove people into woodchippers, drill holes in their skull with a powerdrill, chromeplating heads or smash their pelvis with a prison cell door to pieces. Additionally there are four basic "interrogations" that you can do anywhere from banging peoples head open on the floor to threatening them with a gun (that goes off a lot). And that goes on top off the usuall ultraviolence you find in such first and third person shooters.
However, the game mechanics reward you for not killing people during interrogations and using them as well as the human shields tactically. I started playing for points, not mayhem. Which is really hard to do if you hide in a coffin with an M60 during a mob burial. It's nice to see the Punisher impaling people on actual Rhinos or crushing them in giant gears in Tony Starks living room but I'm playing to get the gold medal on that level, I wanna take the flamethrower to the zoo.
The game mechanics were really great and rewarded strategy and restraint with unlockable stuff. You actually became less violent in exchange for concept art and additional gear. That game is awesome.
The only thing that ever made me want to be violent was the way certain people behaved towards me or others. Games just feed my morbid sense of entertainment.

You may be interested in this interview then:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-07-30-ken-levine-talks-bioshock-infinite-burial-at-sea

And I agree.. I like where this is going.

The Burial remix of this is amazing.

Apparently the Westboro Baptist Church are now planni
ng to picket the school.

In response, Anonymous has said they are going to dismantle the WBC.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Anonymous-Message-To-The-Westboro-Baptist-Church

Donated my body to medical school. It's just my opinion, but i feel burial/cremation is a waste - not to mention a monetary waste. Anyway, they keep your "bits" for 3 years, cremate them, and hand them back to your family - if they want them. All in all, seems a good option.

Now that she mentioned it, dissolving in acid sounds like a cool idea.
My body, dressed in a suit, dangling on a crane over a big barrel filled with nitro-hydrochloric acid. And while my body is being slowly lowered into the acid a fat man in a gray suit laughs manically while stroking a white cat he's holding in his arms.
That'd be one burial none of my family and friends would forget easily

In parts of India where Zoroastrianism is still practised they "bury" their dead in a similar manner. They believe a corpse is corrupted by a demon and is thus made unclean. Burial means poisoning the ground with this corruption, and cremation means poisoning of the air so they dispose of their dead with the help of vultures. They leave their dead on a flat roof of a building called a Tower of Silence. The vultures take everything but the bones, the bones are left to be bleached by the Sun and gradually disintergrate after which they are washed out through coal and sand filters to the sea.

I quite like this religious tradition because it kind of makes sense ecologically. Vultures are incredibly important in the ecosystem and it seems strange that this bird has a reputation for being dirty or unclean when it is them that helps prevent the landscape from being covered in putrefying corpses. In the 90s vulture populations nosedived due to a drug used on cattle finding its way along the food chain. Something like a 99.5% population decrease. Sadly this burial tradtional pretty much went with them. Where previously corpses were stripped in a matter of minutes they now sat and rotted. Animal corpses also literally piled up, scavenging stray dog population exploded which had knock on problems, even shit like an increase in Tiger attacks (Tigers would venture into populated areas to hunt the Dogs).

Long story short I'd much rather have my body picked over by vultures than rot in a coffin or get turned into polluting gas. You know, assuming my organs weren't good for anything else.