2/9/2004: Chicken flambe
If it's an animal pic, and it's not Friday, you know it's not gonna be good. And this isn't good: it's man's inhumanity as shown in south Asian lands where the bird flu is forcing them to destroy large numbers of chickens. And apparently they don't really care all that much about the state of the chickens before incinerating them... live. Ow.
Cheaper to just burn them and kill them for the cost of a match than to gas them first, I suppose.
Count the number of smiling faces.
Why do they smile? Is it because they are being photographed, and that's What You Do?
Is it because they like the smell of burning chickens?
Is it because their village is being rid of the diseased animals?
Is it because they think it's funny that the live animal is on fire and running around?
Other cultures. Go figure.
Original or extra crispy! South Asian Style.............:)
Welcome, sugarcoated. Patron Saint of what?
They're smiling because they are enjoying watching the chicken die by their will.
It's for the same reason people loved public executions.
"Boy my life sucks, but look at that guy! His is even worse! Ha! I'm pretty lucky..go me!"
Originally posted by wolf
Cheaper to just burn them and kill them for the cost of a match than to gas them first, I suppose.
It costs zero dollars to chop their head off before setting them on fire.
Then again, we might have burning headless chicken running around.
Hey yeah, doesn't this whole story end with "...and then it ran under the truck and hit the gas line and... kaboom..."
from the land of cock fighting... they we're probably placing bets on which bird could go the farthest:(
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that Richard Pryor's chicken?
Originally posted by e unibus plurum
from the land of cock fighting... they we're probably placing bets on which bird could go the farthest:(
I say that chicken has at least another 20 yards in 'im.
Originally posted by Slartibartfast
It costs zero dollars to chop their head off before setting them on fire.
Of course sometimes chopping the head of doesnt kill the chicken.
http://www.miketheheadlesschicken.org/story.htm"he was a big fat chicken who didn't know he didn't have a head" - "he seemed as happy as any other chicken."
oh, brig, that's just effing wrong! he lived 18 months after his head was chopped off!? that's almost as long as Luvbugz has lived with no brain!
christalmighty
oh, and I"D vote for him over the turkeys we'll be choosing from!
Originally posted by lumberjim
oh, brig, that's just effing wrong!
I think the part that is most disturbing is that the town has a festival every year to celebrate Mike. I have never been to it (I hope to convince HP to take me one time soon) but have been told its a small town trying to do its self up real big. So kinda silly but hey sometimes that just the type of thing people need.
Apparently Mike was featured in Life Magazine in 1945, not many chickens can boast that.
That's pretty sick seeing that poor chicken running for it's life on fire. I can't understand how people can be so barbaric, and the story of Mike the headless chicken, well that's truly amazing, if it's in fact a real story.
Originally posted by Leah
the story of Mike the headless chicken, well that's truly amazing, if it's in fact a real story.
It is indeed a real story. The chicken was featured in Life Magazine, in the Oct. 22nd 1945 issue, the article is on Page 53 in the Magazine, with the title of the article being Headless Rooster.
A quick Google Search will land you several hits but below is a link that shows the table of contents for that Life Magazine Issue.
http://www.oldlifemagazines.com/mag.php?d=102245Again i am reminded of why i HATE human life. i hope everyone that witnessed this torture without stepping in to decrease the chickens pain will feel the pain when what goes around comes back around to them.
People that harm things that cannot fight back are the lowest form of scum that will ever exist. Bastards.:mad:
And its because of these uncaring callous countries that these chickens are diseased, because they are so filthy everything living contracts something.
Those filthy, scummy heathens? Not worshipping the correct God? It's our burden to educate them, give them tooth brushes and whatnot.
Okay, I was laying it on thick. There's obviously a lot of feeling there in this, Sun. I agree that it's pretty needless. Just whack the heads off, then burn them if they need to.
Why should I care about the pain of a chicken? I only look out for the well-being of other humans so that the race in general will look out for me as well. You know -- "Treat others like you would like to be treated"? There's nothing a chicken can do for me. Therefore, why should I care?
Yeah, juju, there's a strange dichotomy there. Although I eat meat, I don't take pleasure in it's demise. i.e. I won't play with the food; I won't light it on fire and let it run around the yard.
Thats amazing Juju, i cant even begin to fathom even cosidering having a thought like that. Its just something that has always been my most strongest ever of feelings, issues like this. I see a lot of humans die, and feel next to nothing, but when its an animal.. it just tears me apart.
Ask not what your chicken can do for you, but what you can do for your chicken.
(like say, cut off its head before burning it)
But where's the rationality?
This reminds me of when one my friends said to me, "Wow.. even your emotions are rational!" Maybe she was right...
Not everything has to be rational. I understand why you feel that way, i just dont understand how you _could_ feel that way.
I dont think all humans are equal, I think all life is equal, and i give as much respect to the quality of life to a fish, or a chicken than i do to a baby, or my grandfather.... which is a high amount of respect.
B]JUJU SAID
Treat others like you would like to be treated"? There's nothing a chicken can do for me. Therefore, why should I care?[/B]
You dont eat eggs (or any of the 100000 products made from eggs)? you dont eat chicken? have you ever slept on a feather quilt? have you ever sat on the farmhouse verandah and been relaxed by the soothing pecking of the chickens scratchin round on the lawn?
Originally posted by Sun_Sparkz
have you ever sat on the farmhouse verandah and been relaxed by the soothing pecking of the chickens scratchin round on the lawn?
I'm just guessing here, but I bet his answer is going to be no.
Originally posted by juju
Why should I care about the pain of a chicken? I only look out for the well-being of other humans so that the race in general will look out for me as well. You know -- "Treat others like you would like to be treated"? There's nothing a chicken can do for me. Therefore, why should I care?
You can tell a lot about a person by the way they treat people and animals that can't do a thing for them.
Originally posted by Sun_Sparkz
You dont eat eggs (or any of the 100000 products made from eggs)? you dont eat chicken? have you ever slept on a feather quilt? have you ever sat on the farmhouse verandah and been relaxed by the soothing pecking of the chickens scratchin round on the lawn?
Weelll, that's not what I mean. All those things are beneficial to me, but they come about against the will of the chicken (at least, the first two do, and in the last case, the chicken is completely indifferent). That's not really what I meant by, "What they can do for me". What I mean is, a chicken is not going to stand up for me when I'm being beaten, or help me find food when I am starving.
The whole reason man created civilization and morality is so we can protect each other, group together, and help each other out. We're just more effective that way. Chickens are not smart enough to participate in our group, so there's no good reason to extend morality to them.
Originally posted by Sun_Sparkz
Not everything has to be rational. I understand why you feel that way, i just dont understand how you _could_ feel that way.
I dont think all humans are equal, I think all life is equal, and i give as much respect to the quality of life to a fish, or a chicken than i do to a baby, or my grandfather.... which is a high amount of respect.
I prefer everything to be rational. Why would you give the same respect to a fish and a human baby? A fish can't do anything for you except die so you can eat it.
I do see what you're saying, though. I just find the discussion interesting. :)
I just mean that i would feel as much pain and sorrow for a tortured dying animal as i would for a tortured/ dying human. If not more because its so helpless. Its just like when the retarded kids used to get picked on at school - they couldnt do anything about it, they didnt even know why it was happening, I am upset that certain people in the human race can inflict or tolerate such behaviour, which makes my views on the human race even more frowned upon.
I dont really care if animals do nothing for me, It would give me satisfaction just to see them in safety and comfort. Just because they cant vote for me, or drive me to work in the morning doesn't mean i shouldn't care weather or not they are running around on fire.
So thats why the chicken crossed the road!:angry:
Originally posted by juju
Why should I care about the pain of a chicken? I only look out for the well-being of other humans so that the race in general will look out for me as well. You know -- "Treat others like you would like to be treated"? There's nothing a chicken can do for me. Therefore, why should I care?
It's a damn shame slavery is illegal here. I'd buy your ass and torture you to death over a long period of time, regardless of whatever our colors are. I mean, why the fuck should I care if you're in pain when I can
buy you? Money makes the man. Having more makes me better than you. You're a classless low cast piece of shit. If you were on fire, I wouldn't take the time to piss on you to put it out.
I mean, really, I only look out for the well-being of other rich people. What can a worthless piece of shit like you do for me? Therefore, why should I care?
Quzah.
ah,,,, quzah.
I am not entirely sure if u were taking a stab at Juju or sticking up for our feathered friend but if it was the latter i offer my applause.
:thumb:
The whole reason man created civilization and morality is so we can protect each other, group together, and help each other out. We're just more effective that way.
Bullshit. Civilization was created by my group to kick your groups ass. You can convert to my group or die. Your choice.:p
I think I see the point you're trying to make, Quzah, but it really has nothing to do with the point I'm trying to make. I'm not insinuating that I'm better than chickens. I'm just saying that there's nothing they as a species can do for me.
A poor person can still help out a rich person in a time of need. Use your imagination, there are countless examples you could think up.
Think <i>reciprocity</i>.
I'm not insinuating that I'm better than chickens. I'm just saying that there's nothing they as a species can do for me.
this i understood. but why do you need a reason to be compasionate about something? You can't tell me you dont have a heart, you have to feel -something- for these poor defenseless chickens being burned alive. don't you?
c'mon. juju's just being a smart ass. he doesn;t really feel that way. this is just like the whole " i don;t love my parents" horsepuckey he lays down when he's feeling the need for a debate. I mean, SOMEONE's got to take an opposing viewpoint, or there's no argument/debate, and this is much less interesting.
Juju's a giver, man.
Originally posted by Sun_Sparkz
this i understood. but why do you need a reason to be compasionate about something?
Because, like most people, I'm selfish. I don't want to direct energy into something that has no gain.
It's like if you took a $100 bill out of your pocket and burned it with a lighter. Unless you're a pyromaniac, what's the point? You've just wasted $100. I don't want to waste compassion on those who can't reciprocate.
So your compassion is a limited resource?
Well, there's only so many hours in the day. Plus, do I really need that emotional roller-coaster? Being enraged is very tiring.
Originally posted by xoxoxoBruce
[quote]The whole reason man created civilization and morality is so we can protect each other, group together, and help each other out. We're just more effective that way.
Bullshit. Civilization was created by my group to kick your groups ass. You can convert to my group or die. Your choice.:p [/QUOTE]That doesn't necessarily conflict with what I said, though.
Hey, UT, how sure are you that chicken is alive anyway? Maybe you city types have heard, but don't believe. Chickens will run around without their heads. The case of Mike earlier in this thread was extreme, but it's true. My point is, do we know this chicken didn't have his skull bashed in and was then thrown in the fire? Then jumping out again of course. Though, for all intents and purposes, dead?
I mean throwing live chickens in a fire without so much as a fence to keep them in? So they can just run out like this guy? That's got to be a fire safety no-no.
I looked on Snopes but couldn't find it... Oh well.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, since these chickens are diseased it would make more sense to crack their skulls than cut off their heads. Don't get diseased chicken blood everywhere that way.
Originally posted by lumberjim
Juju's a giver, man.
Hey, let's keep those kinds of secrets to the bedroom, Jim. They don't need to know that!
By the way, I'm pretty sure in the movie it is always referred to as "Iocaine powder". A silly point, I guess, since it <i>is</i> a poison.
I was just joking there, just to be clear. In fact, last year when I went to vote for our state senator, there was a proposed measure that would increase the penalties in the city for animal cruelty from a misdeameanor to a felony. I voted against it, 'cause fuck 'em, they' don't contribute to our society. Why should they get the benefits? And it didn't pass (though that was mostly because all the hunters were afraid the law would be misused).
Heh... the best part of that is, my wife was FOR the measure. But she didn't vote, so her opinion didn't count. It's really fun ribbing her about that.
It's not good for high volume, but apparently the preferred method for killing chickens is to grab the feet, grab the head, and pull until you feel a little *pop*, severing the spinal cord.
A coworkers former college roommate was working at a Tyson Chicken plant as part of his agricultural management degree. The interns all had to learn all the positions on the line as part of the management training. When it came his turn to kill the chicken, he pulled too hard and ripped it's head off. It did the running around spraying blood thing, as expected. He got ribbed about it the rest of his time at the plant.
I sold a car to a "chicken-chaser" once. At the time i worked for a dealer that specialized in bad credit deals, and this guy had been a chicken chaser for 4 years.....since his promotion to that position. I didn;t ask. His broncoII that he traded stunk so goddamn bad, I made the detail guy park it away for me when the deal was done.
I have a strict rule about sitting in a car that is not worth as much as my pants.
Originally posted by juju
I was just joking there, just to be clear.
I was making a point. Why is it such a burden to have compassion? But to be clear, if you were on fire, I still wouldn't take the time to piss on you to put the fire out.
Quzah.
I should hope not. That would be pretty inefficient compared to stop-drop-and-roll. There are <i>some</i> things I can do for myself. Maybe instead you could just drive me to the hospital afterwards?
We (US) did away with something like 72,000 chickens yesterday over the avian flu... Mother nature or terrorism concentrated ag is an easy target. Of course the back yard folks in asia aren't doing so well either.
Originally posted by juju
There are <i>some</i> things I can do for myself.
Originally posted by Griff
We (US) did away with something like 72,000 chickens yesterday over the avian flu... Mother nature or terrorism concentrated ag is an easy target. Of course the back yard folks in asia aren't doing so well either.
As opposed to the normal
thousands upon thousands upon thousands per day that this country kills for food. Canada uses upwards of 40,000 male chicks
per day for fertalizer. 72,000? Shit. That's a drop in a bucket.
Quzah.
Originally posted by quzah
72,000? Shit. That's a drop in a bucket.
Quzah.
Takes a lot of food to feed a nation of 300 million souls.
Originally posted by glatt
Takes a lot of food to feed a nation of 300 million souls.
You're amusing. Most of the food crops raised go to end up feeding cattle and not people. Raising "live stock" is far more wasteful than raising plants to feed those same souls.
Quzah.
Why do you sign your name when it's automatically added to the left of your post? It's not as if we're going to miss who it's from.
Originally posted by juju
Why do you sign your name when it's automatically added to the left of your post? It's not as if we're going to miss who it's from.
Why do you care?
Quzah.
It's something I used to do when I first came here, and then that thought came to me in a sort of revelation. After that thought occured to me, I couldn't figure out why I was doing it, so I stopped. I was just curious what your reaction would be to the same thought.
I don't mean it in a sarcastic way at all.
As sad as that looks, I had to laugh. And to the person who said original or crispy...LOL, you rule! :D
Originally posted by quzah
Why do you care?
Quzah.
Humorous and yet in no way meat-based.
Griff
Originally posted by quzah
You're amusing. Most of the food crops raised go to end up feeding cattle and not people. Raising "live stock" is far more wasteful than raising plants to feed those same souls.
Quzah.
When the US reaches the population density of, say, India, then maybe we will need to all switch to a diet of just lentils and rice to avoid famine. In the meantime, we can use our crop land for whatever we want. For me, that means meat with my veggies.
Glatt.
Originally posted by quzah
You're amusing. Most of the food crops raised go to end up feeding cattle and not people. Raising "live stock" is far more wasteful than raising plants to feed those same souls.
Quzah.
Where are you getting this information from? Most of the food crops raised in the US go to feed people in the US and other country's. Yes some is grown to feed animals, but most of it is for people. The stuff that is grown for animals is grown that way from the start, cattle and horses, etc are fed a different variety of corn, oats, etc. then you find in your local grocery store. Just about the only "livestock" food that is grown in huge numbers is Alfalfa hay, and that is because its the base for so many animals diets. Raising livestock is not far more wasteful, the plants that livestock eat, people often times cant eat, they have mold, they have bugs, or something else equally as bad. If the livestock don't eat it then it will be thrown away. Also where do you think the fertilizer for all of these fruits and veggies you buy in the store come from, you guessed right, the back end of a cow. The cow is not just a taker he is also a giver.
mmmm beef.
Far be it for me to agree with Quzah, but...
I think the idea is that if you used the land to grow food for humans, you could feed more humans than if you used the land to grow feed for livestock and then eat that livestock. I forget what the numbers are, but they are pretty compelling. This isn't just an opinion, it's a verifiable fact. I just don't know the numbers off the top of my head.
My point is that we have this 'extra' land that allows us to raise livestock. So where's the harm in having an inefficient system?
Vegetarian: Indian word for "bad hunter"
Originally posted by glatt
Far be it for me to agree with Quzah, but...
I think the idea is that if you used the land to grow food for humans, you could feed more humans than if you used the land to grow feed for livestock and then eat that livestock. I forget what the numbers are, but they are pretty compelling. This isn't just an opinion, it's a verifiable fact. I just don't know the numbers off the top of my head.
Here are some numbers.
Here are some more.
Few more.
Are there numbers like that on non vegan sites? I just spent half an hour looking at USDA and Department of Agriculture websites and cant find any of those numbers. I am not saying the numbers are wrong just that figures can be twisted to fit a certain need (i.e. trying to make everyone Vegan), so would prefer to see a non bias group of numbers before I believe them.
Originally posted by Brigliadore
Are there numbers like that on non vegan sites? I just spent half an hour looking at USDA and Department of Agriculture websites and cant find any of those numbers. I am not saying the numbers are wrong just that figures can be twisted to fit a certain need (i.e. trying to make everyone Vegan), so would prefer to see a non bias group of numbers before I believe them.
I hate to sound cliche, but:
OMFG!!! LOL LMFAO!!!. You are truely a riot. You went to the
USDA web site to find evidence of numbers [/b]against the USDA[/b]? You slay me, you really do.
That's like going to GW's web site to find out information that portrays the Democratic Party in a good light.
Thanks for the laugh.
But seriously, just what do you think it takes to feed a cow? A bail of hay a day? Half of one? Let's say half. Now how much water do they drink? How much water went into that bail of hay? How much land is used for that bail? How much land is used for the cow? How long does it take for one cow to grow to "butcher size"? How much cow shit does a cow shit (if a cow could shit cow shit) per day? How much urine?
That's just one cow. Take a moment to think about that. I doubt the numbers are "doctored" too much. Just pause for a moment to actually think of how long it takes for one cow to get that big and how much food they'd eat.
Quzah.
sounds like a good argument to eat lots of veal.
Originally posted by Brigliadore
Are there numbers like that on non vegan sites? I just spent half an hour looking at USDA and Department of Agriculture websites and cant find any of those numbers. I am not saying the numbers are wrong just that figures can be twisted to fit a certain need (i.e. trying to make everyone Vegan), so would prefer to see a non bias group of numbers before I believe them.
I doubt you'd find the information all spelled out for you like that on the USDA site, but maybe you'd find enough info to put your own numbers together. Or you could check the references used by the veg pages.
Originally posted by quzah
I hate to sound cliche, but: [b]OMFG!!! LOL LMFAO!!!. You are truely a riot. You went to the USDA web site to find evidence of numbers against the USDA? You slay me, you really do.
But seriously, just what do you think it takes to feed a cow? A bail of hay a day? Half of one? Let's say half. Now how much water do they drink? How much water went into that bail of hay? How much land is used for that bail? How much land is used for the cow? How long does it take for one cow to grow to "butcher size"? How much cow shit does a cow shit (if a cow could shit cow shit) per day? How much urine?
[/B]
I went to those web sites because they often have charts of just how much grain, cattle, hay, etc is produced and consumed in a year. While yes they are bias toward livestock production they do have good info collected by the government. Its not looking for evidence against the USDA, its looking for hard numbers, which they often have.
Actually I know what it takes to feed a cow, my uncle in a cattle rancher. I have been around cows almost my whole life, even had dairy cattle in High School. I could give you rough estimates based on being raised around cattle and having neighbors who grew hay but they would be just estimates.
I want facts not based on books written by vegans. Already I have found a few statistics on the USDA sites that were different then the ones on the vegan websites. Are they worth posting here? prob. not, but if 3 or 4 of the stated facts are wrong then others might be as well.
You are welcome to believe those statistics, me I'm taking them with a huge grain of salt.
Originally posted by Brigliadore
my uncle in a cattle rancher..
just a typo, or a freudian slip? hmmmmmmmmm
Originally posted by lumberjim
just a typo, or a freudian slip? hmmmmmmmmm
none of the above.
Next you'll be telling me the cowboys are the badguys.:eek:
If God didn't intend for us to eat animals, why are they made out of meat?
not much of a first post, i know. but i feel the need to say that whenever an animal rights argument comes up. it's my trump card when i can't think of anything else to contribute.
You fucker, you're not even going to fucking answer me??
Originally posted by juju
You fucker, you're not even going to fucking answer me??
I clicked back through the thread. I can't tell who you're yelling at.
Quzah. First UT ignores me, and now Quzah is ignoring me. In both cases, I asked simple questions.
Forget it, though. It's not that important.
Originally posted by juju
Quzah. First UT ignores me, and now Quzah is ignoring me. In both cases, I asked simple questions.
Forget it, though. It's not that important.
I answered Jeopard style. In the form of a question. Next off, you basicly answered the question yourself when you said you used to do it. Next you'll ask Wolf why he puts his name in his sig when it's on the left hand side. Or did you already ask that in another thread and I missed it?
Quzah.
Originally posted by quzah
Next you'll ask Wolf why he puts his name in his sig when it's on the left hand side. Or did you already ask that in another thread and I missed it?
Quzah.
Wolf is a she.
juju
You're a big Ayn Rand fan aren't you?
I liked her when I was 18. Then I realized it was a pretty sad way to go through life. Not invalid necessarily, but sad.
peace,
mh
I agree with some of her views, but then I see holes in others.
What do you mean, sad? Sad that I lack compassion for animals? Or sad that I'm selfish?
Why?
Because i always have. Back in the dialup days (she says as she leans back in her rocking chair), we nearly ALL signed our posts.
Originally posted by Brigliadore
I want facts not based on books written by vegans. Already I have found a few statistics on the USDA sites that were different then the ones on the vegan websites. Are they worth posting here? prob. not, but if 3 or 4 of the stated facts are wrong then others might be as well.
Like Jinx said, look at the references on the pages linked: Worldwatch (left wing org, but I believe them), New York Times,
The USDA, and the list goes on. Still some books by vegans, but many other clearly non-biased sources.
No you won't find this info spelled out anywhere else, because people don't want to know it.
There is no profit motive for the vegans, but there is a huge one for the meat industry. The vegans have other motives, some of which may be misguided, but are mostly rational (IMO, but I am one one of them... well almost). Also, you have many common folk who simply make their living (not profit) off of animals, which makes it a very difficult issue. If there was a mass exodus from eating meat it would probably be most devastating for the grain farmers. But that won't happen, so I shouldn't worry.
Originally posted by juju
What do you mean, sad? Sad that I lack compassion for animals? Or sad that I'm selfish?
Both...
What I'm saying is that I think it's particularly unenlightened of people when given the choice between:
A) Me = gets 99 widgets and Something else = doesn't suffer
and
B) Me = gets 100 widgets and Something else = suffers a lot
to simply choose B based on a "what's it to me?" argument.
Of course selfishness is important. Humans always have their self-interest in mind. However, if selfishness is the only measure of the worth of something, that is "sad".
Your milage may vary.
I don't ask,"What's it to me", because I seldom do things for no reason. What's my motivation?
However, if selfishness is the only measure of the worth of something, that is "sad".
What other measure is there?
Well, there's "meta selfishness", or the desire to feel good about oneself for easing the suffering of others, regardless of their ability to repay. It's probably based on your empathy. When I see something like the burning chicken, I feel a sympathetic pain myself, so there is on some level a selfish aspect to my desire to prevent the pain.
Ahh, econ. Everything has utility...
Originally posted by juju
I don't ask,"What's it to me", because I seldom do things for no reason. What's my motivation?
What other measure is there?
Same question. If you don't believe there is another measure, then you have no motivation. Like I said before, the internal logic is sound. The only problem becomes where to draw the line.
If you knew that in order for you to have a "good day" today, a baby would have to die, would you allow that to happen? Or would you just decide to have a "bad day"? What about a kitten? Or an ant?
Everyone's got a threshold. Yours is just shorter than others.
One related question: Is there anything important enough that you would give up your life in order to preserve it?