ModernArtist25

So according Peta, FDA reported 92 out of every 100 drugs that successfully pass animal trials, failed in humans. If this is true, why are we then keep using animals for testing?

here's the link: http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/us-government-animal-testing-programs/food-drug-administration/

good news is as technology advances, human chips will eventually be used instead of animals in the future:
http://wyss.harvard.edu/viewpage/484/

Well i sure cant see oxygen though what we breath, it is colorless

Do you mean we "see" them because we know that they exist? For example, if I believe in demons and angels, I will "see" them too...

Ooh i see, but only with a super microscope lol

Can elements like oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, etc. that make up the human body can be seen?

so if 65% of the human body is made of oxygen (according to wiki), does this mean that if humans die, oxygen is dispersed in the air and we all breath dead people?

Ok so forests(trees) provide us oxygen to breath. But so does bacteria. If all trees are destroyed, would it still be possible for us to live because there would still be bacteria everywhere?? why or why not?

This one too:

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/10/homosexuality-may-be-caused-chemical-modifications-dna

Says here, there are some genetic markers that can determine if someone is gay with 70 percent accuracy: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3265248/Homosexuality-imprinted-genes-Scientists-predict-gay-70-cent-accuracy.html

In terms of evolution, aren't humans meant to be straight so they can reproduce and that is why we still exist today?

What's your opinion on this? And why do you feel that way?

Provide facts if you can

You're thinking about larger usage of oil for tractors,

but farmers could make their own fuel from f.e. wastes from previous years, turn them to ethanol or other fuel, and burn it in modified engines of their devices.

Do most farmers make their own fuel?

 

I think we need a major international fund dedicated to teaching basic reading/writing in both native tongues and in English (for science purposes), basic maths, hygiene, reproduction, and science. I think the goal should be giving a basic education to every human that wants it. But again, these are political fixes. This really has nothing to do with biology, other than gaining the knowledge of when our bodies are reproductively active.

Please feel free to speak politically, would love to hear your opinion

Escape of the planet.. ?

 

Global warming is result of burning coal, oil and gas,

not exactly result of larger population of humans.

Larger population of humans mean more food needed, and that means more factory farming. Factory farming contributes to global warming: http://www.ecowatch.com/how-factory-farming-contributes-to-global-warming-1881690535.html

By what method. Take excess babies away from parents, sterilize people after they have allotted number of babies, kill excess babies, OR?

I believe in China, they fine people who breaks the child policy

I dont htink its good for anyone to go vegan.

So you think if Vegans don't exist at all, it won't have any affect on the global warming or environment as a whole?

I think limiting birthrate is the best solution.

You think it's better than education? why so?

 

In this day and age many people have a choice. That people choose their taste buds is one thing, using evolution as an excuse is another. Back when I still ate meat I certainly didn't try to justify it, I simply didn't give a damn. Is that so hard to admit?

I have to admit, I'm too selfish to let go of meat. But by nature, human beings are selfish, altruism does not exist. Everything we do is either for personal gratification or to protect our ego(we avoid feeling guilty or shame when we can)

But I try to eat less meat and support free-range meat anyway I can, that's the best I can do

Statistics show that educating women reduces birth rate, and the world birth rate is decreasing because more and more women are being educated.

 

 

On the other hand, the Earth might be able to produce food for double or triple the current population, with high tech food production, for example aquaponics and meat production without animals. Alternatively, we could change our diets and eat things like spirulina, which grows exceptionally fast. Part of the problem with farming is too little water and water at the wrong time; technology can eliminate these issues. Another problem is the amount of soil that has been poisoned by salt in water used for irrigation; remedies are possible, but currently too expensive.

 

 

The surface of Earth is about 148M km² of land. If 10% is arable, that is 14.8M km², which divided by 3400 ft² = 0.000,316 km² which equals almost 47B people possible to feed on 10% of Earth's land.

Good info!

 

Historically and statistically, education lowers birthrates. That's what helps overpopulation.

so educating people is the way to go? How will education be accessible in all countries?

if there is education for all but overpopulation is still continuing, will that still help?

Yes, vegans are easier on the environment. However, meat will one day be produced in vitro, so it will require fewer resources.

and will this vitro cause more environmental issues?

Vegans always present a simplistic argument. There are vast areas on the planet which have so little topsoil and such a bad climate that the only thing which will grow is grass. Why don't we eat grass? Because we have not evolved to do so. But we can use that land by rearing sheep and goats and eating them. What is wrong with doing that?

 

I don't see anything wrong with sheeps and goats eating grass, but when we start to take away the animal's freedom and have them live in a lonely dirty confined environment to benefit us humans, that's when the issue comes in

Wars? Like nuclear war for resources?

From what i understand it would help curb greenhouse gas emissions, but you will never convince a free world to not eat meat: people enjoy it too much, the consequences be damned.

 

A compromise might be to instil the idea that meat is a treat to be savoured, rather than some nebulous gristle to be found wrapped in breadcrumbs or in some ready meal.

 

Unfortunately the organisations that might have the will and influence to instil such changes are religious, and they are far too busy wasting their time counting the angels on some pinhead.

hmm...that's actually a pretty good idea, just having the meat as a treat to be savored. The traditional Okinawans actually only ate meat during big festivals and most of their diet consisted of sweet potatoes.And they lived a long lifespan

Well as you all know overpopulation is harming our planet, causing global warming, habitat loss, consumption of resources, etc.

Is there a way to remedy this? Will limiting the number of babies a couple can have in all countries be a solution?

If majority of people on Earth is a vegan, do you all think it will help with saving the environment? why or why not?

To me, more vegans will mean less factory farming which is ruining our planet with excess release of carbon dioxide contributing to global warming, manure from animals causing water pollution and deforestation to make way for crops to feed livestock.