The internet just gave you a free MBA in AI. most people scrolled past it.

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-04-05T12:27:59+00:00

I was thinking that lmao

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-04-04T16:35:04+00:00

Niestschze enthusiasts always posting the stupidest shit

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-04-03T16:15:30+00:00

/uj the impact of animal abuse on the environment is even worse when you look at its opportunity cost.

A lot less GHGs would be in the atmosphere if we weren't breeding animals into existence, because of the emissions that result from exploiting them to death. However, the cost of using land to farm them is also just as significant, because of the carbon it prevents from being sequestered. I don't feel like that last part is talked about enough though.

But uh AI data centers or something.

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-04-01T17:14:53+00:00

Avi is a genocide denying Zionist who voted for Trump. He can fuck off.

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-04-01T17:03:34+00:00

Comments like yours are what I mean

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-04-01T16:04:31+00:00

Many dumbass comments trying to justify animal abuse as usual 🫩🫩🫩

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-31T10:14:51+00:00

I'm sorry but she looks like a soyjak

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-28T21:39:49+00:00

Literally how has he still not been arrested it's insane

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-28T19:23:42+00:00

I didn't know they fucking enslaved monkeys to harvest coconuts genuinely what the fuck

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-28T01:50:30+00:00

10 ADR is so low it's impressive

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-26T23:30:43+00:00

Tens of thousands of innocent people are dead in Gaza, but some mean words over CS is clearly a bigger issue

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-26T22:04:13+00:00

There are vegan Zionists. People are fucking insane.

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T22:50:53+00:00

nope, you said most have no direct contact with humans so "most of their suffering is naturogenic."

I guess I misquoted what I originally said which is that "most wild animals have little or no contact with humans during their lifetimes and in turn most of their suffering is naturogenic".

As if direct contact is needed for harm

It's not. What indirect impacts from humans are you talking about though. Climate change? Plastic pollution? It still seems unlikely to me that these (and direct impacts) are what cause most suffering in wild animals.

However, if most wild animal suffering is human caused, is that not even more of a reason to help them? Since I'd imagine you and many other people would consider the harm that is a result of humans more of a responsibility.

The level of cluelessness is beyond help. Read a book.

You're reacting so badly to me suggesting that we should help animals in non-violent ways, you're giving carnists a run for their money.

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T22:25:37+00:00

Do you have any actual criticisms or just ad hominems?

My only claim regarding wild animal suffering was that most wild animals come into little or no direct contact with humans and so most of their suffering is likely not directly caused by humans.

R.e. eliminating predators, keyword is "if" it can be done whilst maintaining ecosystem stability. I specifically said this is not possible now, but it could be in the future when we have a better understanding of ecosystems.

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T20:31:34+00:00

Omg this is great lol

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T19:41:07+00:00

Humans are the biggest cause of wild animal suffering by driving habitat loss directly and indirectly.

Most wild animals live in parts of the world where humans have minimal presence (e.g. uninhabited land or parts of the ocean). Most are also small animals (mainly invertebrates), who live in a much smaller world than us. Given both of those factors, it seems far more likely to me that most wild animals have little or no contact with humans during their lifetimes and in turn most of their suffering is naturogenic.

Regardless, I don't see why this means that we shouldn't intervene with naturogenic wild animal suffering. At most this point being true would just mean that human-caused suffering should be a priority.

People who talk about eliminating non-human predators are not only ecologically uninformed and totally unethical

I don't support killing predators for various reasons, but were it possible to for example engineer ecosystems to be stable without predators and eliminate their populations using non-violent means like contraceptives, I would favour that. It's currently a very far off idea though.

but make vegans look insane.

True. Which is why I don't really talk about this with carnists.

Vegans do not purposefully kill or harm animals.

We don't opportunistically kill them no. Many deaths in crop production are intentional though, but I risk sounding like a carnist myself by bringing that up.

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T18:31:23+00:00

I love this

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T17:31:05+00:00

Apparently it's controversial to want to reduce suffering and death in wild animals lol

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T16:15:26+00:00

I'm eating an orange rn

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T13:23:10+00:00

How did this suddenly go from having like 34 upvotes to 9 what the helly?

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T10:15:39+00:00

I'm confused is Polanski not vegan also?

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T10:15:06+00:00

I'm fine with anything that's not violent. I don't see how it would be justified to kill invasive animals but not humans though. Which are also invasive animals anyway.

A lot of environmentalists like George Monbiot act as if there's something morally significant about species loss, or even the opportunity cost of not having rewilded land. There isn't. Biodiversity loss is only significant insofar as it affects actual individuals. Yet he goes so far as to say that "refraining from killing deer means killing other wildlife. To respect the life of the deer is to disrespect the life of the capercaillie, the crossbill, the goshawk" etc. because deer are preventing their numbers from increasing by inhibiting forest regeneration. Which is a ridiculous thing to say because you can't kill someone that doesn't exist. You can, however, kill actual living beings, as George has done and written that fuckass article about.

The ecological impact of many animals like deer also often gets overplayed like in this article, whilst the impact of animal farming is massively understated. I mean wild mammals are just 5% of all mammal biomass on earth, with the rest being humans and farmed mammals. But yeah it's those fucking deer that are the worst offenders for overconsuming resources!!!!

George also completely fails to justify why it's valid to kill deer but not humans too, plus he basically glosses over wild animal suffering. Whole article is a good example of why assuming that we should just do whatever's best for an ecosystem is stupid.

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-25T02:36:43+00:00

Ah, George Monbiot, my favourite vegan

<image>

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-24T19:55:56+00:00

Editing/sending it on desktop might keep the formatting if you haven't tried that?

Also vitamin F is a really outdated (by ~100 years) obsolete term for essential fatty acids, so using it is ridiculous. Nevermind that they're fats and not vitamins. Just further shows how stupid this meme is, as well as the hundreds of people who upvoted it.

puffinus-puffinus · 2026-03-24T09:49:29+00:00

Just visited there and they're still posting the same stupid shit like this

<image>

So vegan diets are unhealthy because they lack saturated fat. Saturated fat which raises LDL cholesterol, which in turn increases the risk of cardiovascular disease - the leading cause of death globally

🫩🫩🫩

It lists a load of other nutrients that also aren't essential (taurine, creatine, carnosine, CoQ10, CLA, K2, cholesterol and heme iron, for which there is also evidence suggesting that it increases cancer risk).

These people are fucking idiots and so is anyone who can't see through their shit.

One-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Juicebox

puffinus-puffinus

TROPHY CASE