Assume Nothing

That's like saying "simple reduction in CO2 emissions by way of developing more efficient cars doesn't warrant the development of electric cars". It doesn't follow. ... You misunderstood my post. I was saying that if a certain activity reduces energy consumption by x amount it "warrants" doing an activity that reduces it by 2x amount. There are health issues surrounding complete removal of meat from the diet (Yes, there is stuff you get from meat which is relatively low in vegetables). A vegetarian is more likely to break a bone, suffer iron deficiency, lack Vitamin B12, lack protein, and lack Vitamin D. "Researchers at Oxford University recently followed 35,000 individuals aged 20 to 89 for a period of five years and discovered that vegans are 30% more likely to break a bone than their vegetarian and flesh-eating peers. A subsequent study conducted by Sydney’s Garvan Institute for Medical Research found that vegetarians had bones 5% less dense than meat-eaters. This can be attributed to the fact that many vegetarians and vegans consume very little calcium due to the limitations of their diet." It isn't clearly established what it is that causes the CO2 emissions from the cattle. Is it the transport? Is it the manure? For the transport, there are easy solutions, use Hybrid/Electric cars or trucks to transport the feed. De-bone meat before it gets shipped. For the Manure, if the animal exists, it will still emit those gases. Sure, there will be less animals in the first place, but figures of current cattle emissions would be slightly bias. "Fruit and vegetable farms also harm the environment through the burning of agricultural waste and the production of oxide emissions from nitrogen fertilizer." It is undeniable that eating beef imported from New Zealand would be detrimental to the environment, but it just doesn't justify the complete abolition of the use of meat. How would Inuit people cope with a meatless diet? I believe that if we are able to reduce the amount of food wasted by at least a half, and eat less meat in general, that would cut down 1/2 of the environmental impact of meat eating (from 18% of CO2 emissions to 9%). EDIT - Oh I totally agree with eating free range chicken. It's not only better for the chicken, it's better tasting for yourself, and also has the added health benefits of having less fat (generalisation here). To start a new subtopic; How many days can you last (per week) on a Vegan/Vegetarian diet? No sneak bacon sandwiches, no hotdogs for a snack. Personally, I won't last for long (That's what she said?) but I think I can manage 3 days without meat. What about you (everyone reading this thread)? I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not in the first sentence.. :P it's hard to tell over the interwebz. Hm.. I really couldn't last long, I'm not a great eater (I don't like lots of food) and every meal but breakfast includes some kind of meat for me. I guess with a name like Not_Trolling, it's hard to tell. But generally speaking, it is actually healthier to eat Free Range Chicken, so no it wasn't sarcasm (although I probably phrased it in a patronising way >.<).

Oh I totally agree with eating free range chicken. It's not only better for the chicken, it's better tasting for yourself, and also has the added health benefits of having less fat (generalisation here). To start a new subtopic; How many days can you last (per week) on a Vegan/Vegetarian diet? No sneak bacon sandwiches, no hotdogs for a snack. Personally, I won't last for long (That's what she said?) but I think I can manage 3 days without meat. What about you (everyone reading this thread)?

You can kill ghasts and burn shadesif you're not into bones. Not really the point. They are impractical.

That's like saying "simple reduction in CO2 emissions by way of developing more efficient cars doesn't warrant the development of electric cars". It doesn't follow. [hide] Electric cars are less efficient than Efficient cars, it takes many hours to charge a electric car and there are many disadvantages to it (also lower top speed, etc). In itself, the environmental impact alone isn't a significant enough 'cause' for the world to become a vegetarian tomorrow. Also, a vegetarian diet has less variety than a mixed diet (a well balanced meal is just as healthy as a vegetarian meal). CO2 emissions isn't not the ONLY problem to eating meat, and completely ignoring meat products in your diet may cause Iron/Protein/B12 deficiency. And it really depends on what you're referring to in terms of the environmental impact. Like I said before, if there are more efficient methods to feed the cattle, and less wasteful methods to transport the food, the problem will be reduced. If you're referring to the manure, it will exist as long as the animal exists, so not eating it doesn't solve it (although if the meat industry shut down itself, that's a different story) Only got 3 more minutes of break left so I don't have the time to write more. My 2 cents [/hide]"It's not a perfect solution" is what I'm getting from your post. Even if vegetarianism won't solve global warming by itself and better methods of raising cattle could be developed -we can agree on that-, it is still a valid lifestyle with valid reasoning, and it helps tackle the problems mentioned. I don't think any vegetarian is saying a sudden global change is the only solution to anything. There's too much hate against vegetarians. Is it cognitive dissonance in action, after too many good arguments? I must agree with torilliachp (again). Well, the fact is, there are a few good, valid reasons (usually debatable, but I do agree to an extent that it does contribute to global warming), but there are plenty of crap ones too, that is too often used in a argument about Vegetarianism. The one thing I absolutely can't stand is a Vegetarian who constantly preach about how their lifestyle is 'better' and 'you should be ashamed of eating meat'. Admittedly, I have had that kind of experience before, and it gets really annoying at times.

Customizable bank all. Adjustable Censors Other ways to train Prayer/Herblore Replay-able cutscenes/Quests Better Hotkeys Combat Familiars able to fight in Single Combat Areas A system in which to collect charms better Intelligent auto-retaliate Ability to maintain a line of text above the player's head without continuously spamming the chatscreen (Only on trading worlds?) Ability to manually do things if you want to (Like Fletch-x/Pray-x) EDIT - Perhaps rewards for completing surveys/polls too?

You could be a n00b tuber. Yet noob tubing gets kills, and lots of them. If a guys wants alot of kills, noob tubing, to them, is efficient. To others, however, they are a noob, for getting cheap kills. Its like d claw rushing in pvp; Its noobish, but commonly effective, especially for kills. @'efficency' It really is their problem in the end. I could care less if they would rather spend 22 mil on a bcp when they could use a torso, instead of getting up non combat skills that might help them in the future, but hey. Thats their problem. However, I do hate when they try to rube off their efficient religion on everyone else. Killing slayer monsters with anything less than the best results in 'lrn2beefficient' or 'noob gear'. Maybe I like the look of the gear? Maybe im not trying to look like a cookie cutter high level?(bandos, claws, etc.)When people say'lol glory noob, get fury' I laugh. The bonuses...really do nothing. But thats my opinion. (i also dont wanna spend 10+ mil on something when I can not and say I didnt) See, if you want to use a glory over fury, go ahead. But when you say that "The bonuses....really do nothing" That isn't an opinion. That can be proven. And its been proven that the bonuses ARE helpful. There is a difference between an OPINION and a FACT. We've had this glory vs fury debate before. You can prove which is better...and by how much...etc. Now, for you, the bonuses may not be enough to balance out the cost. But don't discount fury altogether. Im not totally discounting the fury, hell, I would easily buy it if I wanted to. But the price, to me, is un-desirable. I could either buy the amulet, or get 300k+ xp in a non combat skill of my choice. If I was maxed, with money I could spend like nothing, I would get it, simply to max out my potential. The fact is, every bonus helps, no matter if the cost is big or small. One thing that is often ignored is the simple fact that Bandos can be resold at any moment in time, and if you have the money in your bank, why not. @Racheya, if both sides have the same level of idiots, why specifically elitist idiots that you dislike so much? And you're actually offended by people calling each other noobs... on the Internet?

Won't miss you :] To contribute to the thread, and echo what logical people with half a brain cell thought; Efficiency -is- fun. Don't act like it is endless calculations of gaining an extra 0.5k xp/h.

But I am having fun when I'm efficient. I'm sorry I find Turmoiling/steel titan-ing tasks fun. I don't get why people can't understand the FUN IS SUBJECTIVE part of all of this. Exactly the point. Some people like having the slowest xp/h possible, some people like the fastest. Why criticize people for simply being better?

Eh. I don't know how a title of a unrelated book correlates to anything about Vegetarianism...

Oh - Whoever asked me to source my information, I got some of it (note 'some') from this; http://www.vanguardonline.f9.co.uk/00509.htm (there is also research on this thing; http://www.opposingviews.com/arguments/myth-vegetarians-live-longer-and-have-more-energy-and-endurance)

That'll be with rune crossbow and eagle eye, obviously chaotic crossbow will be somewhat better, although probably not too much better, having rigor, however, would be a significant advantage. Doesn't rigour lose the soulsplit? And deflect damage?

Bet this was from the Vegetarianism thread. Animals perceived as 'intelligent' may have morals, I just haven't read up on it

That's like saying "simple reduction in CO2 emissions by way of developing more efficient cars doesn't warrant the development of electric cars". It doesn't follow. Electric cars are less efficient than Efficient cars, it takes many hours to charge a electric car and there are many disadvantages to it (also lower top speed, etc). In itself, the environmental impact alone isn't a significant enough 'cause' for the world to become a vegetarian tomorrow. Also, a vegetarian diet has less variety than a mixed diet (a well balanced meal is just as healthy as a vegetarian meal). CO2 emissions isn't not the ONLY problem to eating meat, and completely ignoring meat products in your diet may cause Iron/Protein/B12 deficiency. And it really depends on what you're referring to in terms of the environmental impact. Like I said before, if there are more efficient methods to feed the cattle, and less wasteful methods to transport the food, the problem will be reduced. If you're referring to the manure, it will exist as long as the animal exists, so not eating it doesn't solve it (although if the meat industry shut down itself, that's a different story) Only got 3 more minutes of break left so I don't have the time to write more. My 2 cents

The part about bearable classes I definitely agree with. If you don't go off-topic for one second, you get brain dead pretty quickly from the short attention span of the average human being. (30-40 minutes)

Why does Zamorakian spear win? Because anything non-spear/Halberd does half damage (justified from xp/hit thing, and the 40-40 min hit of Dbow with Dragon Arrows) One exception to that is mage

How about now? Arctic Ice in Death Spiral, dated September 20th, 2010 Simple reduction of meat in the average diet will solve it, doesn't warrant Vegetarianism

Because I can definitely type up an argument with hours of research on the bus? I will find some research, I just don't have the time at this moment in time

No. You're also, getting confused between vegetarian and vegan. I can see the logic in this. Why kill one cow which has maybe 100 kilos of meat when you can have many times more milk, cheese, yogurt. Vegans tend to avoid using animal related products, such as a fur coat or leather handbags, but Vegetarians don't (in general). Yeah. I know. Vegans also don't eat eggs, cheese or drink milk. Veganism is illogical to me, but I don't know why people have those motives, so I haven't really got an argument for that

How could YOU possibly be the judge on something like that? That is a boldface assumption based on no facts. That is perfectly natural. You know what isn't natural? The concept of industrial farms that raise millions of animals for the sole purpose of slaughtering them. (Again, I will reiterate: I do not have a problem with local, family owned farms or any of the meat that comes from those farms. I grew up in a rural farming community in Wisconsin, so please do not make the mistake of assuming that I am some city slicker who has never seen a cow before) Okay so maybe it wasn't out of context, now it's just irrelevant. Vegetarians make a conscious choice to not eat meat and I would venture to say that all of us are well aware of the monetary consequences that come along with it. To me, it isn't about the price and I think it's safe to assume most other vegetarians feel the same way. (correct me if I am wrong) I'm not getting emotional about anything. Nothing you say has been backed up by any sort of stats, figures, facts, links (now I know these aren't everything in an argument, but they bring credibility to what you say) and frankly, I'm sick of arguing with a brick wall. It seems that even when presented with glaring evidence to the contrary, you will not falter. Wasn't there facts and figures posted by Serpent_Eye? I replied to them. I can find facts if you really want, but I've got college. I did remember reading somewhere in tortillachip's post about the price of meat vs the price of vegetables. That factor isn't a significant one since vegetables in itself are quite expensive. I do agree with the point about animals being raised for the sole purpose of being slaughtered, it's not the killing process that I'm worried about. Since neither of us has the facts to back up How could YOU possibly be the judge on something like that? That is a boldface assumption based on no facts. ^ that. It is very hard to debate about it. (Would be like Monty Python if you really tried to argue about it, how do you know they -would- feel the same?)

No. You're also, getting confused between vegetarian and vegan. I can see the logic in this. Why kill one cow which has maybe 100 kilos of meat when you can have many times more milk, cheese, yogurt. Vegans tend to avoid using animal related products, such as a fur coat or leather handbags, but Vegetarians don't (in general).

Looking at your levels I would say whatever method you have of playing seems to be working! What he said! Why do people seem to have a 'Holier than thou' attitude towards elitism? Playing RS inefficiently doesn't make you a better person, or have more of 'a life', it only means you would take longer to achieve your goals (and you purposely choose to) Edit - We only quote your posts because; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

You make a clear distinction between the meat-eaters who've offended you and those who haven't, yet this sentence is aimed at every meat-eater. And you really wonder why people bring up the "holier than thou" thing? For the most part, that statement is true (even if a bit bitter). Although I might take out the "living longer" portion because that's very subjective and has many other factors aside from diet. He's belittling someone's motives for not wanting to become a vegetarian as if it simply comes down to "you care about meat so much that it will blind you to the point of going against all of these great (which is arguable) reasons". Simply put, eating meat is not my "priority". However, you can say I "prioritize" eating a tastier and more convenient diet over wanting to scrutinize everything I eat to make sure it's void of meat so that I feel like a better person at the end of the day. Actually, I do eat vegetarian dishes all the time, just not on purpose - and I don't feel any more righteous when I do. The main thing is, being an omnivore is pretty much the default choice in our society. The way he worded it, he made it sound like I go out of my way to make sure I get my meat, when really it's the vegetarian who eats based off of their "priorities". I simply eat based off of opportunity - not priorities. Oh and I agree with this.

And then to close out your bulletproof argument you said this: It seems like you're implying that farm animals are somehow less human than we are and, in fact, do not have the right to life over my sister or my dog. Yet in the first quote, you are clearly invoking the right to life argument, claiming that vegetarians are the ones that are immoral. Your supposed "facts" are very contradictory, no? Stop playing the Devil's Advocate or stop trolling. Either way, you aren't very good at it. EDIT: Firstly, I would like you to know that I will eat meat butchered on a local, family farm or from a local meat market. Your "quote" is extremely out of context. The prices that are being compared are NOT what it costs to produce the product, only what it costs to buy it from the store. Huge difference there, and some of us are very prepared to pay more for food that is organic. I like to shop at co-ops occasionally (only because they are VERY pricy), and that's two birds with one stone. Local and organic. My post didn't go through. I'll type it again. As for the farm animals thing; I did not say that farm animals have less of a right to life than we have, but to imply that we would feel the same way about being slaughtered is fallacious and unfounded. There is a distinction, I know they can feel something, but not the same. On animal welfare - In the wild, naturally there is predators, and prey. How many sheep do you think can defend themselves from a vicious lion, or tiger? My quote was not out of context, it was referring to the cost of buying it in a supermarket. To get a reasonable portion of packaged 'organic health products' is by far more costly than a package of kippers for a meal. And lastly, branding me a troll really helps your argument, right? Resorting to insults is the last thing I do in a debate. How we feel about vegetarianism, is what we're discussing. There is no need to get emotional over it.

The weak points of the moral argument is the fact that vegetarians blatantly ignore any possibility of a plant having the right to life (They are indeed living, they respond to stimuli, studies even show they have some sort of nervous system, perhaps even feeling pain) The attitude that vegetarians tend to annoy me. To say that eating meat is selfish, is in itself, hypocritical. Have you at some point in your life, used animal products? How can you be sure you haven't? To say that it is 'healthier' to eat a vegetarian diet than a healthy mixed diet is plainly biased and untrue. A good diet composed of a good balance of meat, vegetables and carbohydrates is essential. You wouldn't get much B12, Iron or Protein from other 'natural' sources, save dairy products. To say "Eating meat has safety risks" is plain stupid. There is no problem with well-cooked meat, and if you're talking about e-coli, there is that same risk in eating eggs, correct? You can't compare eating meat to eating your sister or dog. Those aren't farm animals, there is a difference. How you would feel, may not be what the animal feels. And also, question yourself this. Do you think animals in the wild die of old age having fulfilled a long, rewarding life? No, it is the battle of the beasts, most of the animals in the food industry are still preyed upon, even if we didn't eat them. As for the climate argument - As long as the animal exists, it will pollute the planet. Simply not eating the meat does not change anything, unless any major changes are done to the meat industry. Alot of the logic used in your post is flawed, think about it. EDIT - Oh, and price. How does that really come in? You're implying that the money factor is significant, yet it is not. In fact, I have found a quote on that. 'largely irrelevant socio-economic factor. Not being able to afford a lot of meat doesn't warrant its total exclusion. Besides, kippers are cheap and nutritious while the prices of organic vegetables, cashews, and packaged 'health products' can be astronomical.'

In general, I find that I learn lots more if the teacher has some sense of humour. No one likes a shouting, stressed out teacher that does nothing but get angry for no reason. Being patronizing never gets you anywhere either, so treat kids as kids and adults as adults too. I remember when my physics teacher just started and he taught alot at Secondary schools, so he was really annoying. Also, engage with the students, provoke discussion. You don't learn an awful lot listening to 20 minute's worth of text. I guess those are slightly personal to me, but that's my 50 cents