So what do you think of the following: Plants Communicate to Warn Against Danger?!
Well, now what are veg*ns going to eat? Certainly this adds to the body of evidence that plants are sentient. BTW--- sentient doesn't necessarily include self-awareness. So you can stuff that counterargument.
What do you think of this article? Again, it's science so I'm aware that there is a virulent strain of anti-science, anti-intellectualism, anti-rationality on the V&V forum. So some critical thinker's responses would be appreciated.
Answers: http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/2007...
Well, now what are veg*ns going to eat? Certainly this adds to the body of evidence that plants are sentient. BTW--- sentient doesn't necessarily include self-awareness. So you can stuff that counterargument.
What do you think of this article? Again, it's science so I'm aware that there is a virulent strain of anti-science, anti-intellectualism, anti-rationality on the V&V forum. So some critical thinker's responses would be appreciated.
I thought that similar communication had been identified long ago, unless I imagined it, where trees discharge chemicals when under attack (like when caterpillars invade a grove of trees) and nearby trees adapt (respond) by increasing their defenses.
In the report you identified, the plants are physically linked by runners, and in a sense are a colony or could under certain views be considered an individual. But such communication is not news except in the sense that it is a new situation where communication is indicated.
But maybe I am wrong. I find it hard to believe that I dreamed all that up on my own however.
Very interesting - so that's why the slugs take a little bite out of every single leaf on my Hosta!
(This may not be the sort of intellectual comment you were hoping for - sorry!)
I read of this 30 years ago. A plant was wired up to machine measuring electrical responses and another plant was plunged into a pot of boiling water. The plant that was wired up sent electrical impluse recording off the scale.
A plant still doesn't feel PAIN and FEAR the way animals do. I never pretend veganism is about ending suffering, but reducing suffering. And with every pound of meat you eat, that's up to 17 pounds of plants who are killed. So you meat eaters are killing even more plants than veg*ans. And you eat plant foods, too, don't you?
I'm also aware of a strain of virulent antiveganism on the V&V forum by trolls who wish to justify eating meat.
They are gonna have to curl up and die I think Skully. Mind this is not news is it really planets obviously have feelings otherwise why would the willow weep, obviously brussels sprout, so they are clearly capable of movement also, mother in laws tongue so I am told LOL so they clearly have a sex drive and of course plants have the sense to know where to live in that if they land somewhere unsuitable they just hang around until conditons change and then they burst into life. If all LIFE is sacred the what about PLANT LIFE
you do realise what the defonition of life is dont you? you do realise that plants dont have feelings, nerves, brains or memories so they are not technically living, what plants do is called respiering, get your facts straight before you try and make a clever argument.
if you were aiming to make a vegan become a non-vegan, guess what, you failed, again, and misserably may i add. god your bad at this.
where is the neuronal network? the brain? the nocireceptors? the reflex? the consciousness? the understanding of pain or the ability to have perception to recognize pain? the motor neurons? learning from "painful" stimulus? recognition of damage sources and conscious avoidance of said source? blah... blah... blah.... you get the idea.
All living things need sustenance to survive and I'm no different. If I was a tree I'd happily get by on photosynthesis but I'm not so I can't. As an animal, I need either plants or animals to sustain me. Perhaps plants do communicate, but I still feel that there's a qualitative and quantitative difference in the degree of suffering felt by plants versus that experienced by animals. By eschewing animal products, I am doing what I can to reduce their suffering and I'm causing the death of fewer plants that way, too (livestock consume a LOT of plant matter on their way to slaughter.) I know you think you've trumped our best argument for veg*nism, but that would only be true if reducing suffering were an all or nothing propostion. It's not. I'm not going to kill 90-odd animals each year just to satisfy my palate because, oh well, I can't eliminate 100% of suffering amongst all living things world-wide. By that logic we might as well repeal all animal cruelty laws; if a single plant is going to suffer it's nonsensical to make it illegal for people to beat their dogs to death. I'm doing what I can, I enjoy eating this way, I'm not asking you to do it too... so that should be enough for you. When you add in the health and environmental benefits, I'm perfectly at peace with my decision. What I don't understand is why you're so put off by it; we're not outlawing your cheeseburger.
we're not anti-science, anti-intellectualism, anti-rationality
we're anti-troll.. so get off.
There is no reason you have to try to discredit a vegan diet by claiming that plants are sentinent.. Go ahead and eat your steak.. we don't care.. Why must you bother US about OUR diets??
It was an interesting article but without the pain and suffering you'll get no where with the vegers.
I also want to say that your description of the V & V forum is personified in Veggie Tart who is known to answer questions with erroneous "facts".
This communication is entirely chemical. Reporters love writing every news story with emotionalism to stir up the reader ("a lot like humans and other animals"??? BS!). Humans and animals have brains and nervous systems. Yes, they do communicate chemically, both internally and externally, but they also have the capacity to feel pain.
If you wound a plant, it sets off a domino effect of chemical reactions that end in a response (healing or defense). The same thing happens in an animal, but an animal also feels it.
Anyway, it costs 500 lbs of grain to feed a cow or something like that, so your whole point is moot.
Bustersmycat gave a good answer too.
In the article is states that this communication is comparable to a computer virus. Does this mean computers are sentient beings? No, The reaction is simply chemical based and not true communication. Furthermore these studies are in their early stages and are simply a theory not proven fact. Plants do not have a central nervous system and while they may respond to sunlight this is simply due to the photosynthetic process and not because they feel. Plants naturally rely on nature to distribute it's seeds in order to reproduce. By eating plants we are allowing these spores to produce seeds and create more plants. Please, stop trying to manipulate these articles and research to try and defend your own lifestyle. It's sad that you have such a pathetic life that you need to try and convert people.
I don't think that this is going to convince anyone that plants feel as much as animals, that is if they do "feel" anything. Just because something reacts chemically, doesn't mean that it feels.
Even if they did, I still need plants to survive. I don't need animals products to be healthy.
It is still a fact that I kill less plants by eating them directly instead of having them fed to animals first.
This is such a predictable and trollish thing to post.
This doesn't explain whether or not plants have a nervous system.