Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Ocean is Broken (2013)

theherald.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 246 posts

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#41

Post by fleitz »

CalRobert wrote: post #4

I sometimes wonder if shopping for groceries is as frustrating for most people. I like Nutella, but when I see Palm Oil as the second ingredient I picture dead orangutans. I like beef, but I sympathize for a fellow mammal and think of the enormous amounts of diverted water and fertilizer runoff that goes in to producing feed. I enjoy fish, but thinking of this makes me sick to my stomach. I enjoy many beverages that…

There are no sins to atone for, stop feeling guilty.

Live life, mother nature isn't going to flood the earth and destroy everything if you don't accept the saviour into your heart.

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#42

Post by justinator »

pstuart wrote: post #28
leobelle wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.nutellausa.com/faqs.htm Nutella is "a member of the RSPO (Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil), Ferrero only uses palm oil which is extracted from controlled plantations in Malaysia." So you can enjoy your Nutella guilt free.

If one also ignores the fact that it's mainly sugar frosting.

See if Justin's Hazelnut Butter spread is available. Much less sugar, and less palm oil (more actual nuts) and Justin's also a member of RSPO.

It will cost you about an arm and a leg, but it's oh, so good.

http://www.justins.com/products.php

Sadly, I don't there's a way to directly link to the product description, which is really silly, but allows you to explore some other things they have. Their Vanilla Almond Butter tastes like cookie dough. In a good way.

(I am also not "Justin", of "Justin's"

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#43

Post by ASpring »

derefr wrote: post #29
frankzinger wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As someone already said, we should not worry about our planet, for it is going to be here, long long after we are finished. We should be worried about ourselves." See, this is something I don't get about most people. Does nobody else feel sympathy for individual animals ? We're inflicting immeasurable amounts of suffering and death and nothing will ever make that less of a tragedy.

That's a particular kind of scope insensitivity on your part, though: although we're inflicting suffering and death... so is the rest of nature, greater in most cases by enough signifiant figures that our effect gets lost in the noise. For every individual animal suffering at the hands of a human, millions die of starvation and disease in exactly their "adaptive habitat"--when they're not slowly chewed to death by pr…

Not that I am an animal whisperer but I think most animals would prefer to be in the wild for 5-6 years and then die a gruesome death compared to being locked in a tiny, literally shitty, cell as part of a CFO for 1-2 years and then dying a slightly less gruesome death.

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#44

Post by jaegerpicker »

CalRobert wrote: post #4

I sometimes wonder if shopping for groceries is as frustrating for most people. I like Nutella, but when I see Palm Oil as the second ingredient I picture dead orangutans. I like beef, but I sympathize for a fellow mammal and think of the enormous amounts of diverted water and fertilizer runoff that goes in to producing feed. I enjoy fish, but thinking of this makes me sick to my stomach. I enjoy many beverages that…

Far be it from me to tell anyone else what their conscience should be but to me it's not that we can be zero impact. Nothing living on this planet is zero impact. Sharks eat fish that eat krill that eat etc... The key is to be as sustainable as possible. We can eat fish but need to work to educate the uneducated about only supporting the responsible fishermen. When you quit and walk away from buying fish all together you lose your voice into the industry. People listen to the money and refusing to spend money will just leave the industry listening to those who do buy fish but don't care how it's caught. If you like fish but hate this kind of behavior then we need to make an effort to only buy sustainably caught/farmed fish. A very good resource is: http://www.seafoodwatch.org/cr/seafoodwatch.aspx

You sound like you already have done some reading about this, if so I wasn't trying to be condescending, I just try and get the info out as much as possible.

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#45

Post by ChrisNorstrom »

Well we can start by taking pictures of it instead of just writing walls of text about it hoping the average person will read about it and care.

Here's what pisses me off. Guy writes about how devastated the ocean is, doesn't take a single picture. The only photo in the whole article is him and his boat.

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#46

Post by ASpring »

falcolas wrote: post #39
leobelle wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, are you still eating meat? Fish? What are you doing for your part?

Considering that every single thing we could eat would have an impact on the environment (typically negatively), it's not as simple as abstaining from eating a particular substance.

A fair point.

Meat contributes far more of a negative impact on the environment than plants though. Consider the fact that it takes 8 lbs of grain to produce 1 lb of beef[1]. That's absurdly wasteful in the quantities of beef that most American's eat weekly.

[1]: http://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?articl...

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#47

Post by rprospero »

cwal37 wrote: post #15
lettergram wrote: post #9

Well this is the main reason I prefer to buy farm raised fish. It might not do much to help the eco system, or my health, but I feel at least the fish I am eating was raised with the purpose of being eaten. Further, I find it rather gross that fishermen essentially "throw away" everything they don't want.

It does help. In terms of output farmed fish are far and away the most efficient of livestock. It's been a few years, but if I recall correctly farmed tilapia produce 1kg per 1.1kg of feed. That's incredible compared to beef or even chicken. Also, encouraging well run fish farming operations takes pressure off of the wild stocks. In terms of eating meat, you're doing it right.

A few years ago, I was at the local natural food market and I overheard the manager explaining to a customer that the store did not and would not ever carry farm raised fish. He explained how farmed fish lived in horrible conditions and that the only moral and sustainable option is to only buy free range fish which were caught from the ocean, where fish were part of their proper ecosystem.

From an intellectual, sustainability standpoint, I suspect that you are right and that farmed fish is the way to go. However, this is why I've completely factored guilt and morality out of my environmental decisions - No matter what I do, one of the employees at the natural food store will tell me that I'm killing the planet.

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#48

Post by alexeisadeski3 »

ASpring wrote: post #43
derefr wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a particular kind of scope insensitivity on your part, though: although we're inflicting suffering and death... so is the rest of nature, greater in most cases by enough signifiant figures that our effect gets lost in the noise. For every individual animal suffering at the hands of a human, millions die of starvation and disease in exactly their "adaptive habitat"--when they're not slowly chewed to death by pr…

Not that I am an animal whisperer but I think most animals would prefer to be in the wild for 5-6 years and then die a gruesome death compared to being locked in a tiny, literally shitty, cell as part of a CFO for 1-2 years and then dying a slightly less gruesome death.

He's not disagreeing with that statement!

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#49

Post by pygy_ »

sliverstorm wrote: post #31
CalRobert wrote: post #4

I sometimes wonder if shopping for groceries is as frustrating for most people. I like Nutella, but when I see Palm Oil as the second ingredient I picture dead orangutans. I like beef, but I sympathize for a fellow mammal and think of the enormous amounts of diverted water and fertilizer runoff that goes in to producing feed. I enjoy fish, but thinking of this makes me sick to my stomach. I enjoy many beverages that…

I can't think of anything at the grocery store that doesn't have some sort of negative implication. Heck, just driving to the grocery store burns fuel and supports the automotive industry. Biking to the grocery store burns food (of which all food has negative implications) and supports the bicycle industry. You can work yourself into knots over it; there is no way in which you can eat food and not have some negative…

That's patent nonsense.

The problem is not consumption/destruction per se, but the fact that we destroy more than what the planet can build out of solar energy. We're burning the reserves and the means of production.

Re: The Ocean is Broken (2013)

#50

Post by derefr »

ASpring wrote: post #43
derefr wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a particular kind of scope insensitivity on your part, though: although we're inflicting suffering and death... so is the rest of nature, greater in most cases by enough signifiant figures that our effect gets lost in the noise. For every individual animal suffering at the hands of a human, millions die of starvation and disease in exactly their "adaptive habitat"--when they're not slowly chewed to death by pr…

Not that I am an animal whisperer but I think most animals would prefer to be in the wild for 5-6 years and then die a gruesome death compared to being locked in a tiny, literally shitty, cell as part of a CFO for 1-2 years and then dying a slightly less gruesome death.

Sure, but again, that's a failure to do the math. Humans put one animal in a cage; nature infects ten-thousand with worms and rips off the limbs of ten-thousand more. Our impact, however horrible per-animal, is lost in the noise when multiplied by the number of animals affected.
Post reply on HN