Soren

How long did it take to research this?

Well as it is gravity that drives the mechanism which creates light, its fair, human interaction is limited timevise. Sure you turn the stored chemical energy in your body into potential kinetic energy, driven by gravity. But all energy production requires human work to keep functioning.

Why do you care about the nr of species? Why is it important to you?

But why not focus that tranning and dedication on something that will make you more unique, than just another, in the endless stream of meat punching bags that litter the roads of history. Keeping fit is great and If you want the ultimate in strength, speed and skill try dancing, if you need something where pain is a major challenge try climbing.

Why do "you" want to hit people for Money?

Well I don't know what to do, but personally I am a total coward around people like that, just blend in to the background. If I have to say something then its along the lines of "yeah thats a really bad situation" maybe I would go as far as saying that shooting people for not supporting the soldiers is not something I agree with. And then I would just stay away from that person as much as posible.

Allright. Well I think that is a good way to say why we should not eat humans, as I don't see many "books" on the subject of grass eating made by cows.

Ethical inconsistancies, you mean like vegans who have no moral problems eating a living organism if it dosen't feel pain the same way they themself do? I was merly point out that killing and eating animals which some vegans consider "abuse" of animals. Might not be considered bad by a well treated child/adult.

Some people are very much against abusing animals but have no problem abusing humans. Hitler being the prime example.

Can you give a brief of the arguments, I already feel disgusted and I don't want to end up on some child molestation IP list?

Well they don't have a human consiousness, as we can emprically tell. I personally think, and its just my thoughts, that animals expirence the world in a similar fashion to the way we do, this constant "movie" rolling before their eyes, they experience stimuli. The big difference is how they react on stimuli, how it seems they are unable to reflect on their own actions, stimuli-respons learning. They are organic robots or biological machines as you say, their consciousness is just their "OS" plants have a very different "OS", in that regard the capability of the human mind is what makes us different and gives us free will otherwise we are mostly biological machines by weight too. They are part of the envoirement that surrounds us and is just as valid a food as other living organisms. So why don't I treat them the same as a flower, because of the value they provide is different. Because of their physical features they can be easy to project emotions on too and empathize with.

So Lions are evil? And are animals just free to treat us like they want to? Letting animals be what they are, what about animals which have been breed to be food? When comparing humans to animals the important difference is that we are humans and they are not humans. They can't poses property, they can't be reasoned with, they can't be responsible, they don't look like humans, they don't act like humans, they don't think like humans, they are physiological different. Sure there are similarities because of our shared animal past, but they still are not human and not close to being so.

I love that "pile of uncooked chicken breasts" comment, feeling the burn.

I clearly wanted to respond since I did. Given what you wrote I could not grasp why you replyed to me because its like I don't even exist, you are just off on some rant. When did I refuse anything in this thread? If it is true? It is true, that women are smaller and weaker physically on average. The video is about how women mitigate perceived risks. What is the purpose of this comment other than I guess disempowering women?How am I granting them the victim card automatically, or is this comment even directed towards me? So you agree that women are smaller but you think that in a straight fight a woman has a good chance of matching a man? "..not very empowering" why are you suddenly employing feminist shaming tactics? Well actually I don't assume that, it could also be a aggressive larger woman og a group of aggressive women while I think w on w is a more fair fight the weaker you are the less likely you are of taking chances.Your comments seems very incoherent and not directed at me, it's more a collection of rants.

Take it as an insult if you wish I was genuenly curious, why you would reply to me with all those assumptions?