Fully Lab-Grown Meat to be sold for first time in history

[Newark Aristocracy]

You mean the thing generally accepted to be a thing by the scientific community and only really denied by people with an economic incentive to do so?

lots of scientists don't accept the man made climate change hoax. the people who accept it have both economic and political incentives to push this false narrative. more control and power for politicians for one.

Oh shut up. You are just trying to use your biases to push through,it won't work,now we need to get the thread back on track.

[The Alma Mater]

You mean the thing generally accepted to be a thing by the scientific community and only really denied by people with an economic incentive to do so?

lots of scientists don't accept the man made climate change hoax. the people who accept it have both economic and political incentives to push this false narrative. more control and power for politicians for one.

*shrug* - does it matter ? Lab grown meat will be cheaper and use far less resources than industrial farming in the long run with less chances of diseases and far higher quality control.
Reducing "animal suffering" and "climate change emissions" are useful narratives to get the leftist hippies on board of this great economic victory.

[Ethics Committee of the SCPF]

You mean the thing generally accepted to be a thing by the scientific community and only really denied by people with an economic incentive to do so?

lots of scientists don't accept the man made climate change hoax. the people who accept it have both economic and political incentives to push this false narrative. more control and power for politicians for one.

Your just making stuff up at this point, no scientist that isn’t willing to bend down to the business men that pay them to say climate change is a hoax is going to spit lies about how “climate change is a hoax” or other dumb stuff like that. Can we just get back to the topic?

[Moralityland]

Bruh I quoted your post unedited. are you drunk?

So show us how I said that industrial farming caused food inequality, rather than the environmental damage I ascribed to it.

I never said it did, you were the one who said it did. industrial farming benefits the poor and lower middle class. industrial farming is good. lab grown meat will increase "inequality" by killing off farmers and small businesses and benefit big corporations who can afford the high priced scientists and expensive equipment and patented processes.

[Vassenor]

So show us how I said that industrial farming caused food inequality, rather than the environmental damage I ascribed to it.

I never said it did, you were the one who said it did. industrial farming benefits the poor and lower middle class. industrial farming is good. lab grown meat will increase "inequality" by killing off farmers and small businesses and benefit big corporations who can afford the high priced scientists and expensive equipment and patented processes.

You're asserting that I said a thing but won't show how I said a thing. Top logic.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

lots of scientists don't accept the man made climate change hoax. the people who accept it have both economic and political incentives to push this false narrative. more control and power for politicians for one.

*shrug* - does it matter ? Lab grown meat will be cheaper and use far less resources than industrial farming in the long run with less chances of diseases and far higher quality control.
Reducing "animal suffering" and "climate change emissions" are useful narratives to get the leftist hippies on board of this great economic victory.

Wow, you've really won over this animal-sympathetic and environmentalist "leftist hippy".

So this will use less resources will it? Prove it.

[Disgraces]

*shrug* - does it matter ? Lab grown meat will be cheaper and use far less resources than industrial farming in the long run with less chances of diseases and far higher quality control.
Reducing "animal suffering" and "climate change emissions" are useful narratives to get the leftist hippies on board of this great economic victory.

Wow, you've really won over this animal-sympathetic and environmentalist "leftist hippy".

So this will use less resources will it? Prove it.

Idk I'm not a scientist but it'll probably use less resources than a cow for example

[Nobel Hobos 2]

lots of scientists don't accept the man made climate change hoax. the people who accept it have both economic and political incentives to push this false narrative. more control and power for politicians for one.

Oh shut up. You are just trying to use your biases to push through,it won't work,now we need to get the thread back on track.

"Shut up" may actually be actionable. The rules on this forum are stupid.

Moralityland writes perfect sentences. Well-thought-out though obviously not sincere. But they break long thoughts up into short sentences and "doesn't bother" with punctuation. This is an experienced poster pretending to be dumber than they really are.

My guess is The East Marches.

[Moralityland]

lots of scientists don't accept the man made climate change hoax. the people who accept it have both economic and political incentives to push this false narrative. more control and power for politicians for one.

Your just making stuff up at this point, no scientist that isn’t willing to bend down to the business men that pay them to say climate change is a hoax is going to spit lies about how “climate change is a hoax” or other dumb stuff like that. Can we just get back to the topic?

and the scientists who claim it is real get millions in grants from the governments run by corrupt politicians, who then use the hoax to impose more draconian laws.

governments have more money than the corporations who oppose climate change alarmism. heck, corporations who support the climate change hoax , like big tech , have more money than corporations who don't.

[Newark Aristocracy]

Oh shut up. You are just trying to use your biases to push through,it won't work,now we need to get the thread back on track.

"Shut up" may actually be actionable. The rules on this forum are stupid.

Moralityland writes perfect sentences. Well-thought-out though obviously not sincere. But they break long thoughts up into short sentences and "doesn't bother" with punctuation. This is an experienced poster pretending to be dumber than they really are.

My guess is The East Marches.

Fine. I wasn't trying to flame you,I was trying to tell you your points were invalid,and desided to get aggressive. Now let's get this thread completely back on track. Plus,the rules are intentionally vague, subject to judgment per case.

[Resilient Acceleration]

How would this affect jobs in the beef industry? I would expect this technology to become prevalent within 10 years, especially if governments start implementing climate policies. Also, considering that 83% of available farmland is used for livestock production, the impact would probably be quite noticable. Not that the latter's a bad thing, we can significantly boost global agricultural output with so much lands freed up.

[Vassenor]

Your just making stuff up at this point, no scientist that isn’t willing to bend down to the business men that pay them to say climate change is a hoax is going to spit lies about how “climate change is a hoax” or other dumb stuff like that. Can we just get back to the topic?

and the scientists who claim it is real get millions in grants from the governments run by corrupt politicians, who then use the hoax to impose more draconian laws.

governments have more money than the corporations who oppose climate change alarmism. heck, corporations who support the climate change hoax , like big tech , have more money than corporations who don't.

Show us the evidence.

[Moralityland]

Nothing wrong killing animals for food.

But killing animals is not all that happens to animals to get them on your plate.

Live up to your nation name. Produce some moral reasoning.

God says it is ok to kill and eat animals. you animal rights loons don't get to say otherwise. whether animals "suffer" or not in the process is irrelevant. God decides morality.

And animals are property, both farm animals and pets, and property don't get rights, at least not in countries that are still sane.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Wow, you've really won over this animal-sympathetic and environmentalist "leftist hippy".

So this will use less resources will it? Prove it.

Idk I'm not a scientist but it'll probably use less resources than a cow for example

Bear in mind ... no wait.
Keep in mind that a cow does its own infection control, and can eat any kind of green vegetable even tainted with its own poop. And yes, it does grow brains and organs and bones that aren't sold as meat, however these "waste" products are sold down the line as pig food or fertilizer.

Vat-grown meat requires very pure inputs, sterile, and probably antibiotics etc to prevent bacteria gaining a hold anyway. Probably a fair deal of energy too, which usually comes from fossil fuels rather than pasture (as for a cow).

It might be relevant at this juncture to make a distinction between cows (which sometimes feed on pasture) and pigs (which can eat just about anything including human food waste). It speaks very badly of the production line processes which value reliability over the re-use of waste, even when it should be cheaper to re-use waste, that both industries have moved towards feeding the animals with farmed grain. From an emissions standpoint, meat animals fed on farmed grain is the absolute worst. Tax intervention is strongly called for.

[Moralityland]

and the scientists who claim it is real get millions in grants from the governments run by corrupt politicians, who then use the hoax to impose more draconian laws.

governments have more money than the corporations who oppose climate change alarmism. heck, corporations who support the climate change hoax , like big tech , have more money than corporations who don't.

Show us the evidence.

you first. show evidence it is real. show evidence scientists who disagree with the global warming/ climate change narrative are paid off by corporations.

[Vassenor]

But killing animals is not all that happens to animals to get them on your plate.

Live up to your nation name. Produce some moral reasoning.

God says it is ok to kill and eat animals. you animal rights loons don't get to say otherwise. whether animals "suffer" or not in the process is irrelevant. God decides morality.

And animals are property, both farm animals and pets, and property don't get rights, at least not in countries that are still sane.

God also said to stone people to death for wearing mixed fabrics.

[Vassenor]

Show us the evidence.

you first. show evidence it is real. show evidence scientists who disagree with the global warming/ climate change narrative are paid off by corporations.

Have at.

[Newark Aristocracy]

But killing animals is not all that happens to animals to get them on your plate.

Live up to your nation name. Produce some moral reasoning.

God says it is ok to kill and eat animals. you animal rights loons don't get to say otherwise. whether animals "suffer" or not in the process is irrelevant. God decides morality.

And animals are property, both farm animals and pets, and property don't get rights, at least not in countries that are still sane.

I can't stand this argument anymore.

Newark_Aristocracy.exe has stopped working.
Reason:INTEGER_OVERFLOW

[Nobel Hobos 2]

But killing animals is not all that happens to animals to get them on your plate.

Live up to your nation name. Produce some moral reasoning.

God says it is ok to kill and eat animals. you animal rights loons don't get to say otherwise. whether animals "suffer" or not in the process is irrelevant. God decides morality.

In other words, you have no morality.

And animals are property, both farm animals and pets, and property don't get rights, at least not in countries that are still sane.

Corporations have rights. Corporations are property. Are you calling the US insane?

[Nobel Hobos 2]

But killing animals is not all that happens to animals to get them on your plate.

Live up to your nation name. Produce some moral reasoning.

God says it is ok to kill and eat animals.

Damn. I missed this.

[Disgraces]

Show us the evidence.

you first. show evidence it is real. show evidence scientists who disagree with the global warming/ climate change narrative are paid off by corporations.

Show evidence God exists.

For the record I believe in a god

[Resilient Acceleration]

*shrug* - does it matter ? Lab grown meat will be cheaper and use far less resources than industrial farming in the long run with less chances of diseases and far higher quality control.
Reducing "animal suffering" and "climate change emissions" are useful narratives to get the leftist hippies on board of this great economic victory.

Wow, you've really won over this animal-sympathetic and environmentalist "leftist hippy".

So this will use less resources will it? Prove it.

The "disease" part is pretty important, though. Right now we just choke factory-farmed livestocks with antibiotics to prevent them from being ravaged by disease, significantly increasing the risks of antibiotic resistance on a global scale. https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... our-table/

[Resilient Acceleration]

you first. show evidence it is real. show evidence scientists who disagree with the global warming/ climate change narrative are paid off by corporations.

Show evidence God exists.

For the record I believe in a god

Well that escalated quickly.

[Moralityland]

Idk I'm not a scientist but it'll probably use less resources than a cow for example

Bear in mind ... no wait.
Keep in mind that a cow does its own infection control, and can eat any kind of green vegetable even tainted with its own poop. And yes, it does grow brains and organs and bones that aren't sold as meat, however these "waste" products are sold down the line as pig food or fertilizer.

Vat-grown meat requires very pure inputs, sterile, and probably antibiotics etc to prevent bacteria gaining a hold anyway. Probably a fair deal of energy too, which usually comes from fossil fuels rather than pasture (as for a cow).

It might be relevant at this juncture to make a distinction between cows (which sometimes feed on pasture) and pigs (which can eat just about anything including human food waste). It speaks very badly of the production line processes which value reliability over the re-use of waste, even when it should be cheaper to re-use waste, that both industries have moved towards feeding the animals with farmed grain. From an emissions standpoint, meat animals fed on farmed grain is the absolute worst. Tax intervention is strongly called for.

I have no problem with "fossil fuels". I don't believe in reducing co2 emissions and I disagree with taxing farms just because they use grain to feed animals. what you describe was the norm before, it is called zero waste farming. but many consumers prefer grain fed beef pork and chicken.

let the free market vote with their wallets. you can buy meat that is still made with zero waste farming. I prefer to buy grain fed . tax intervention only distorts the free market.

environmental concerns should not dictate policy. especially since the claims and concerns have not been proven yet. all environmental policy has done is make everything more expensive.

[Moralityland]

you first. show evidence it is real. show evidence scientists who disagree with the global warming/ climate change narrative are paid off by corporations.

Show evidence God exists.

For the record I believe in a god

two can play at that game, prove that animal suffering is relevant to morality or anything else.

animal suffering is a purely emotional. it has no moral basis, it has no rational basis. I suggest you just cover your eyes and mute the speakers if you don't want to see farm animals suffer.