Tyson Foods dumps pig farm after video of alleged abuse

Nov 20, 2013 Full story: WHDH 39

The nation's largest meat producer says it has terminated its contract with an Oklahoma farm after NBC News showed the company undercover video of workers on the farm kicking, hitting and throwing pigs and slamming piglets into the ground.

Read more
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#22 Dec 4, 2013
Virgil Starkwell wrote:
<quoted text>Another PETAfile lie.
Human abuse is an indicator of possible prior animal abuse but there is NO scientific research that shows the reverse is true.
True. The ARA movement either doesn't understand how to interpret science or is intentionally trying to deceive people. I am amazed at how easily they do it. I guess that is what happens when people think emotionally rather than logically.
Virginia Vegetarian

Stafford, VA

#23 Dec 7, 2013
Virgil Starkwell wrote:
<quoted text>Another PETAfile lie.
Human abuse is an indicator of possible prior animal abuse but there is NO scientific research that shows the reverse is true.
Just because you refuse to accept it (because it is contradictory to your own agenda). The fact is, there is research to indicate that animal cruelty and abuse can be a strong predictor of later human abuse. I've posted several links for your friend 'USA R0CKS'.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#24 Dec 7, 2013
Virginia Vegetarian wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because you refuse to accept it (because it is contradictory to your own agenda). The fact is, there is research to indicate that animal cruelty and abuse can be a strong predictor of later human abuse. I've posted several links for your friend 'USA R0CKS'.
That's funny, I have never read any scientifically validated research that shows this. If you have the research, please provide a link. Thanks!
Virginia Vegetarian

Stafford, VA

#25 Dec 7, 2013
USA R0CKS wrote:
<quoted text>
That's funny, I have never read any scientifically validated research that shows this. If you have the research, please provide a link. Thanks!
Have it, and posted it.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#26 Dec 8, 2013
Virginia Vegetarian wrote:
<quoted text>
Have it, and posted it.
Maybe it was deleted. Try posting it again. If there is research, it really changes things. My guess is that the problem is that you don't understand science and scientific validation which is why you keep posting the same thing and think that it is scientifically validated research.
Virgil Strarkwell

Midland, TX

#27 Dec 8, 2013
Virginia Vegetarian wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because you refuse to accept it (because it is contradictory to your own agenda). The fact is, there is research to indicate that animal cruelty and abuse can be a strong predictor of later human abuse. I've posted several links for your friend 'USA R0CKS'.
If I have an agenda it is to expose bullshit. Animal rights orgs just ooze bullshit. And thanks for posting those opinions.
Virginia Vegetarian

Stafford, VA

#28 Dec 9, 2013
USA R0CKS wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe it was deleted. Try posting it again. If there is research, it really changes things. My guess is that the problem is that you don't understand science and scientific validation which is why you keep posting the same thing and think that it is scientifically validated research.
Perhaps it is you who does not understand science or scientific validation and cannot understand and comprehend research studies. Please post your CV along with any scientifically validated research you have conducted. Surely with all your braggadocio, you have authored many published articles in well respected scientific journals. Just give us one title so we can verify the veracity of your opinions, which until you do, carry little to no weight with anyone (except you, of course).
Virginia Vegetarian

Stafford, VA

#29 Dec 9, 2013
Virgil Strarkwell wrote:
<quoted text>If I have an agenda it is to expose bullshit. Animal rights orgs just ooze bullshit. And thanks for posting those opinions.
Post research to the contrary that shows it to be, as you so eloquently put it, bullshit.
Virgil Starkwell

Midland, TX

#30 Dec 9, 2013
Virginia Vegetarian wrote:
<quoted text>
Post research to the contrary that shows it to be, as you so eloquently put it, bullshit.
You are the one making the research claims. The job of proof is all yours.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#32 Dec 9, 2013
Virginia Vegetarian wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps it is you who does not understand science or scientific validation and cannot understand and comprehend research studies. Please post your CV along with any scientifically validated research you have conducted. Surely with all your braggadocio, you have authored many published articles in well respected scientific journals. Just give us one title so we can verify the veracity of your opinions, which until you do, carry little to no weight with anyone (except you, of course).
I have never claimed to have been published. I AM NOT A RESEARCHER. I have conducted research in the past. There is a difference between the 2. I am also in a field that is heavily research based and I read and interpret research as part of my job. I would also like to point out that what I am saying is not my opinion. As of today, there is not scientifically validated research that shows animal abuse is an indicator, predictor or that it leads to human abuse. That isn't an opinion. That is reality. I am not making an argument from authority here. I am stating reality. If you understood science, it would make sense to you. I have explained this numerous times to colleagues (who were duped like you were) and they understood it completely. Your mistake is a common one. In fact, most people do not understand the error (which is an indictment on public school in the US). I really wish you would get off of thinking you are correct and let the evidence lead to conclusions rather than your conclusions leading you to misinterpret reality.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#33 Dec 9, 2013
Virginia Vegetarian wrote:
<quoted text>
Post research to the contrary that shows it to be, as you so eloquently put it, bullshit.
What are you talking about? You aren't even grasping the basics here. The school system has failed you. In science, we make predictions and then test them. Some are relationship predictions and some are cause and effect. What we don't do in science is assume something is true until it has been demonstrated to not be true. that is the opposite of science is actually more closely aligned with religious/mystic practices.
Virginia Vegetarian

Stafford, VA

#34 Dec 10, 2013
USA R0CKS wrote:
<quoted text>
What are you talking about? You aren't even grasping the basics here. The school system has failed you. In science, we make predictions and then test them. Some are relationship predictions and some are cause and effect. What we don't do in science is assume something is true until it has been demonstrated to not be true. that is the opposite of science is actually more closely aligned with religious/mystic practices.
Which scientific disciplines are you associated with? Chemistry? Physics? Mathematics? Engineering? Biology?

You talk the talk, but do you walk the walk? What is your pedigree to be so dismissive of the works of others? Could you stand up to the scrutiny of a Daubert hearing? If not, then why should anyone take your opinions seriously.

There is an interesting article in The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law you should read.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#35 Dec 10, 2013
Virginia Vegetarian wrote:
<quoted text>
Which scientific disciplines are you associated with? Chemistry? Physics? Mathematics? Engineering? Biology?
You talk the talk, but do you walk the walk? What is your pedigree to be so dismissive of the works of others? Could you stand up to the scrutiny of a Daubert hearing? If not, then why should anyone take your opinions seriously.
There is an interesting article in The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law you should read.
What science I am associated with is not really relevant. The rules that govern science and logic are what we are talking about. This is not an argument from authority. It is the rules that govern science.

In terms of science, you are making a generalization error. The sample that is taken in the research that you "cited" is of human abusers. When you discuss the findings, you can only discuss human abusers. What you are doing is discussing some of the correlates of human abusers. most abusers are men. It would be ridiculous of you to say that being a male is a predictor of human abuse yet, according to you, this is true. If you sample serial killers you can only assert that your findings apply to serial killers. If you are studying ants, your findings can only apply to ants.

In terms of logic, the error you are making is affirming the consequent. It basically goes like this.

If A, then B.
B, therefore A.
^^^this is an error. I will attempt to provide examples to show the error you are making. here is your contention.

If human abuse, then animal abuse (this part is true)
Animal abuse, therefore future human abuse (this part is NOT supported by science)

Let me try some more examples from multiple disciplines to explain this to you.

If serial killer, then middle aged male (accurate)
This person is a middle aged male, therefore he will be a serial killer.

If ant, then it has 6 legs.(this is true)
It has 6 legs, then it is an ant.(this the error you are making is not true. It could be any insect).

If steel, then a hard metal.(true)
Here is a hard surface, therefore it must be steel.(the logic error you are making).

I hope these examples help you understand the logical error you are making.

I would also add that I am not dismissive of any research. I am clarifying what the research actually says...which is different than what you say it says. I would also point out that you have not actually cited any research. You have cited people's interpretation of someone else's research. Seriously, take an advanced class on research methods. If you are not going to college, you could take a basic one at a community college. If you pay attention, it may be an eye opening experience for you.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#36 Dec 10, 2013
Virgil, am I explaining this well? I really don't know what else I could say or if I could give better examples. Some people have grasped this concept and some cannot. Is it me or them?

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#37 Dec 10, 2013
Virginia Vegetarian wrote:
<quoted text>

There is an interesting article in The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law you should read.
Are you referring to Gleyzer et al 2002? If so, that research was conducted on people who have mental diagnoses and were in treatment. I would also add that the relationship between conduct disorder and it predicting a future diagnosis anti-social personality disorder is pretty strong. When you separate people with mental health disorders into those with a history of animal abuse and those who do not, you basically separate them into those with conduct disorder and those without. Since conduct disorder predicts a future diagnosis of anti-social personality disorder, of coarse it would lead to the findings that they found. This isn't to put down the research. It is good research. It simply does not say what you contend it says.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#38 Dec 17, 2013
USA R0CKS wrote:
<quoted text>
You are probably correct. Problem is that "Karma" is real so they will find out that "fictitious premise is a bitch" which is much like saying "Santa Clause is a bitch" or "the toothfairy is a bitch" which in the end are completely meaningless. In simpler terms, this guy will find that that Karma is not a bitch because Karma isn't real.
You wrote that Karma is and is not real in the same post. Are your drooling little retards influencing you? I sutppose you will be smearing your own feces on walls next. LMAO.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#39 Dec 17, 2013
SUPPOSE*
Virgil Starkwell

Midland, TX

#40 Dec 18, 2013
cheapo wrote:
<quoted text>
I sutppose you will be smearing your own feces on walls next. LMAO.
Clearly, you're no role model, so why would anyone imitate you?

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#41 Dec 18, 2013
Virgil Starkwell wrote:
<quoted text>Clearly, you're no role model, so why would anyone imitate you?
Dropping acid again?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Food Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News This Woman Didn't Get Any Bacon In Her Burger S... 9 min Batch 37 Pain Is ... 2
News Letters: Bennington Pizza Plaza has big news 47 min markey da masshole 3
News Outside France, foodies are gorging themselves ... 1 hr Squach 13
News David v Goliath analogy drawn in gay cake case ... 2 hr St Rick Saintpornum 5
News Fight is on to save Aberystwyth's iconic Victor... 3 hr Sandra Cater 1
News Five of the world's weirdest restaurants 7 hr rah91 2
News The Mediterranean Diet Will Reduce Global Warming 7 hr Earthling-1 1
More from around the web