Re: The CD argument holds a double standard

"Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Ipse dixit wrote:
> > "Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>Ipse dixit wrote:
> >>>
> >>>I believe their CD argument holds a double standard.
> >>
> >>It doesn't.
> >
> > You ignore Rick's denial of the collateral deaths associated
> > with his diet while at the same time criticising vegans for
> > denying the collateral deaths associated with theirs, so your
> > argument against vegans is a double standard.
>
> I haven't read Rick's posts about the CDs in his diet,
> so I can't be consciously ignoring them.

That dodge won't help you.

If you look at a recent discussion between Rick and
myself on this issue you'll see there's no doubt that
Rick denies the fact or possibility that grass fed beef
accrues collateral deaths despite evidence provided
from a list of animals killed by the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's Animal Damage Control Program.

[start]
>> >> >> >Under pressure from ranchers, the U.S. government exterminates
>> >> >> >tens of thousands of predator and "nuisance" animals each year.
>> >> >> >In 1989, a partial list of animals killed by the U.S. Department of
>> >> >> >Agriculture's Animal Damage Control Program included 86,502
>> >> >> >coyotes, 7,158 foxes, 236 black bears, 1,220 bobcats and 80
>> >> >> >wolves. In 1988, 4.6 million birds, 9,000 beavers, 76,000 coyotes,
>> >> >> >5,000 raccoons, 300 black bears, and 200 mountain lions, among
>> >> >> >others, were killed.  Some 400 pet dogs and 100 cats were also
>> >> >> >inadvertently killed.  Extermination methods used include poisoning,
>> >> >> >shooting, gassing, and burning animals in their dens.
>> >> >> >======================
>> >> >> >ROTFLMAO  And the majority of those are killed to protect crops
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Ah, but it does give numbers proving grass fed beef accrues
>> >> >> collateral deaths, so why do you ignore them, hypocrite?
>> >> >======================
>> >> >Nope.
>> >>
>> >> You do ignore them, and that's a fact, liar.
>> >======================
>> >Nope.
>>
>> Yep. They do exist.
>=================
>Nope.
[end]

> I don't intend to read them, either.

Too late, so why do you ignore Rick's claim that no
collateral deaths exist during the production of grass
fed beef?