Quote:
Baloney........... I think you are watching too much History channel.
This isn't exactly controversial or out there stuff here - it's a well documented fact that can be researched through whatever vehicle you prefer.
We eat far more, and especially far more meat, than at any other point in history. When you read of exceptions, it was the very wealthy, not the masses who ate this way, and they paid for it too, with gout ( Henry the Eighth, for example). You may read that Britain went through about 500 years when they ate no vegetables and fruits ( and actually thought they were bad for children). Even then, the masses weren't eating that much meat - mostly they poured suet or milk over starches, if they could get it.
Our parents and grandparents did not grow up eating meat the way we do today - in fact WE didn't grow up eating meat the way we do today. You may remember having meat with every meal, but that's selective memory except in meat farm families. There were casseroles, cheese based dishes and smaller portions.
Regarding the early origins of our diet, I grew up on archeological digs (my dad and brother are both archeologists), so I'm not ignorant on the subject, or about how these things are studied. Scientists study teeth and the type of wear they got, and that whenever tissue is preserved ( as it was with IceMan, the stomach contents can be studied too. We have the teeth of an omnivore, but there are times in history when teeth were worn down too much to have been useful for meat eating. You don't find much in the way of bones at such sites - not bone tools, not bone in the waste heaps ( which tend to be well preserved). You find artifacts that relate to vegetation. It's consistent.
This website is pretty cool if you have any interest in what has been learned about the origins of our diet:
http://www.ivu.org/history/early/ancestors.html
As for the comment another poster made about early stone tools; first of all, stone tools weren't around until the stone age ;-). Once they came into use, hey weren't just for hunting, anymore than tools are today. They were used for defense and for war, as well as for building, for harvesting roots, etc. They were used to make other tools and to make vessels, cut down reeds for building, and to strip cane for weaving. My father had a particular interest in tools and often experimented to see what could be done with them. Also, my son's Eagle project involved making artifacts for a museum, using indigenous methods, so I've seen a wide variety of stone age tools being used, none of them for hunting.
(quote) I don't know about your recent history but Man has been eating chickens for as long as we have been walking upright ..... and well my ancestors always walked upright
you can believe what ever you want about yours. (quote)
This explains a lot.
(quote) I am not saying that I approve of big agriculture stocking giant houses with chicks that live 8 weeks and then are butchered but I don't agree with foriegn fishing fleets taking all the fish from the oceans(quote)
So, would domestic fishing fleets depleting oceans be okay? Or are you saying none of it is optimal? Either way, the fact that something is bad doesn't excuse that another is too.
Look, I don't have a problem with farming. I don't even have a problem with big agriculture the way you describe it, but the way you describe it is not how it is done. 18" chickens are kept in a 12" area. That is STANDARD practice, even in 'free range' situations, where they are kept in the same way on the open floor instead of stacked in cages. This means at least third of the chicks are standing on top of someone else at any given time, and that makes them peck and kick at each other, and also, obviously they end up covered in each other's feces. I object to the practice of beating them to stun them, and then picking them up by whatever body part gets grabbed first and stuff them in cages willy nilly - breaking wings and legs while they are still alive. You can see this when you see the trucks on the freeway - some chickens ride the whole way with their wings broken and wedged in backwards. I object to their being put in a vat of electrified water to stun, but rarely kill, them once they are in the processing plant and and then they are plucked alive. ALL of which are STANDARD. ALL of which is very easy to research online, plus i have seen it with my own eyes. And, I object to the filth, and the rampant staph infections, which BTW is what brought me to this list.
Talk to your vet and ask if they put in two weeks in such a plant as part of their training - my vet did. Ask what they saw.
I do not object to responsible and humane farming.
(quote) I would say that feeding out chickens to feed our population is a much more responsible way to feed our population and feed it we must. If you are advocating veganism (is that what you call it) for the members of this site I think you are at the wrong place (end quote)
You never read any of my posts, did you? If you did, you wouldn't have drawn this conclusion. I have friends who are vegan and I respect them for the sacrifices they make, but I'm not one. I am an omnivore.
Laurel
Sigh, no I believe we (domestic) are trying to manage our fleets and the fish we take.
Laurel Good Luck in all of your endeavors. being an omnivore ....Chicken Rescuer ..... Chicken House reform
Sorry Suensmitty I did not intend to hijack your thread or use it to create a soapbox for someone to preach from. Good Luck with your Cornish Rock I hope he is healthy and keeps getting back up for a long time.
