Vegan Forum

"There is no connection! I can make the same connection between masturbation and intelligence.
Since humans masturbate much more often than primates and we are the "most intelligent" following your logic means that we evolved our brains when we started to masturbate which is total BS."
haha i love this. people so often dont know the difference between correlation and causation. it is one of the most common mistakes we make when we evaluate the results of research. just because eating meat and being intelligent are correlated it doesnt mean that one causes the other.

AndyBa wrote:AdamD, the question is how will Human evolve without meat?
And the answer is, humans will not evolve because of diet. They will "evolve" if something bad will happen to earth and most people will die and only some mutated humans will remain that will be fit to live in new conditions. That will be evolution.

Considering current Globalization random micro-evolution due to gene drifting is very unlikely it can happen only in small populations.
So what is left for us in terms of evolutions is development: Development of culture, development of science, development of ethics.

That's just a blatant lie. People are always evolving to better survive in a modern society. Those who can't function as well in modern society drift to the bottom of the economic scale and eventually die out. Evolution always has and always will be part of life for every species. It's not as obvious now as it was before but it is definitely there.

CrystalMV wrote:

AdamD wrote:From an anthropological perspective, every existing human society is omnivorous. This indicates that humans are meant to be omnivorous.

You just proved that you can't even compare adequately. You say there are no societies where everyone is vegetarian and ignore the fact that there are no societies where no one is vegetarian. SOME people eat meat and that doesn't prove anything.

No, the vast, vast majority of people have eaten meat and still do eat meat. Vegitarians throuhgout history have been almost irrelevant in terms of people per capita. My point still stands. Societies that predominantly eat meat have survived through to the modern day, this implies that meat causes a society to last (strong enough correlation does imply causation).

AdamD wrote:No, the vast, vast majority of people have eaten meat and still do eat meat. Vegitarians throuhgout history have been almost irrelevant in terms of people per capita. My point still stands. Societies that predominantly eat meat have survived through to the modern day, this implies that meat causes a society to last (strong enough correlation does imply causation).

More popular doesn't mean better. You can see this situation in Windows/Linux, Christianity/Buddhism, SA-MP/MTA and also omnivorous/vegan diet. The vast majority of people have health problems, so what, health problems cause the societies to last? From your statements we could say that the vast majority of people live a lifestyle perfect for the health. The more convincing correlation is between average lifespan in the community and plant/animal food consumption ratio. Also, why are you lying and telling "there are no vegan societies"? http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/todays-paper/tp-life/article2204749.ece

you begin to evolve once you stop eating meat...

Kensho

CrystalMV wrote:More popular doesn't mean better. You can see this situation in Windows/Linux, Christianity/Buddhism, SA-MP/MTA and also omnivorous/vegan diet. The vast majority of people have health problems, so what, health problems cause the societies to last?

Nowhere did I say that more popular means better, only that such a strong associating between omnivorous societies and surviving indicates some form of correlation between the meat eating and success when coupled with the added information that no vegan society has survived (or even formed on a relevant scale). As for you last question about health problems the answer is yes. An element of adversity has always been present in human existence and must always be present to whip us along the road to progress. If none of us had medical problems then medicine would hardly see cause to advance.

CrystalMV wrote: From your statements we could say that the vast majority of people live a lifestyle perfect for the health.

Although you could say that you would be completely misinterpreting what I said for the sake of furthering your own argument. That's called straw-manning and is an argumentative no-no.

CrystalMV wrote: The more convincing correlation is between average lifespan in the community and plant/animal food consumption ratio. Also, why are you lying and telling "there are no vegan societies"? http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/todays-paper/tp-life/article2204749.ece

I would hardly call the existence of one tribe of savages who are locked in the stone age 'survival' nor would I see it as compelling if you did call it survival.

Humans can survive without meat... but how will they evolve?

Evolution is so slow that by the time we'd evolve we'll be so far ahead of nature that you couldn't even call it evolution anymore.

Perhaps this analogy will increase your understanding. No culture has ever existed without sexual reproduction. I believe sex is natural. I find sex to be quite enjoyable. I believe it would be the end of human civilization as we know it if everyone stopped having sex. However, I believe I would be behaving like an ignorant fool if I approached a group of monks, or any other celibate subculture, and told them, "You need to get laid."

Thought this study by the National Science Foundation was interesting. Basically, it shows that herbivores have evolved faster than carnivores and omnivores have evolved slowest of all.

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=123870&WT.mc_id=USNSF_51&WT.mc_ev=click

Societies that predominantly eat meat have survived through to the modern day, this implies that meat causes a society to last (strong enough correlation does imply causation).

no, no and no : so many veg monkeys' societies still exist. So many bees' societies still exist.......
Sure they are threatened by the human monkeys but .......
Anti-specism we call it.......

I disagree with you, but not completely. I don't think that humans aren't meant to eat meat. But I also don't think they are meant to eat meat. In other words, it isn't necessary or sufficient, but it won't hurt either and can be useful in some situations (e.g. starving in a wilderness or something).

Let me predicate this by saying that I am a vegan, but only because I don't agree with how animals are treated before/during death. I think if they're going to die for us, we should respect them highly. I don't believe that eating animal products in and of itself is wrong. I do believe that treating animals horribly for it is.

1) Humans are animals. They want to survive.
-- As I mentioned, eating meat can be useful (higher calorie count than lettuce) when it is needed for survival. Not essential, however. No one ever died from not eating meat (you can get all your nutrients without it, even B12, which is from a bacteria, not meat itself).

2) Humans are predominantly carnivorous.
--No, we're not. We're omnivorous and sometimes nearly scavengers. It's just that in survival situations (like most of our history) meat has higher calories than veggies. More calories = longer survival. Especially in areas where plants aren't abundant (wintery climates, etc.). We're predominantly carnivorous in the USA, but that's not natural. Really, humans eat what they can to survive, meat or no.

3) Humans surviving on vegetarian diets are evolutionarily novel.
--Again, back to my point about meat = more calories = survive longer. Especially in areas with sparse vegetation. We also have no precedent for using iphones or getting laser eye surgery or using new drugs, etc. etc.. And yet we do it and don't consider it wrong. Again, my point about meat = calories, more calories = survival.

4) Carnivores tend to be smart.
--Maybe. Or do smart creatures tend to eat meat? For example, the smart ones are smart enought to figure out how to kill other things? I sincerely doubt we are smart because we eat meat. That is a correlation and does not mean any causation at all. There are also other intelligent species that don't eat mostly meat (cows, primate families, and so on). We are the most intelligent, but once again, correlation and not causation. We may eat meat because we can think up smarter ways to kill and eat it, you see?
--Also, there are totally carnivorous animals and they are CERTAINLY not smarter than we are, not by a long shot.

5) Our primate cousins are also omnivorously adapted, though not as carnivorous.
--I repeat my point about smart things being smart enough to kill other creatures when needed for food. We are smarter than other primates, so we can think up smarter ways to kill and eat things.
--Again, there are totally carnivorous animals that are not more evolved or smarter than we are. "Eat more meat" does not equal "more intelligence."

A) Losing a great deal of their intelligence.
--Meat consumption may be partially correlated with intelligence, but we do not know the nature of that relationship. And it does not in any way mean there is a cause between eating meat and being smart (I encourage you to look up the difference between correlations and causations). And again, there are animals that eat way more meat than we do and who are not smarter, more evolved, more capable.

B) Returning to meat-eating.
--This is predicated on your former argument A, which is not based on a causation but rather a partial correlation. Not enough support for this. And once again (again again), eating meat isn't a must - it's a convenience.

C) Being very violent in how they procure their meat.
--Um, killing things is always violent (have you seen how we factory farm our meat now? It's even more violent than those apes you used in an example). We might just do it smarter (go for areas that kill things quickest) because we are smarter and know those things (once again, see my previous points).


Overall, not a great argument. Fun to think about, but there's really no foundation here.

It depends on person to person. But i don't believe in losing of intelligence due to vegan.

Its not so correct.

Accommodation in Dubai