Penn and Teller's episode about PETA

Well, even not turning a profit wouldn`t mean it`s a waste of money. Some things are worth losing some money for, if it helps the environment.

Unfortunately, many recycling advocates pissed away their credibility by backing the words of those who turned out not even to do sufficient research.

edited 24th Sep '11 5:15:38 PM by HiddenFacedMatt

Man, I REALLY don’t have a horse in this race, but I’m not sure if pulling evidence from the thing I mentioned as having an agenda and the ability to edit it’s interviewees as they see fit is a great counter-arguments.

I never took PETA seriously, but now it's impossible because they got their own porn domain. (Photos not entirely SFW)

They're certainly not above flagrant attention grabbing to try and get their point across.

Do keep in mind that Penn and Teller don't try to avert confirmation bias when they do research. They went looking for the worst parts of PETA and they found it.

It's pretty much how they approach every subject.

Which, while entertaining, has the educational worth of, well, PETA studies.

See, you seem to be assuming the truth of the arguments. The whole point of this thread was for me to ask "why do you believe these arguments when the evidence used to support the arguments seems to be really flimsy?"

But how do you know that? Are there third-party sources that can back up P&T's claims better than they did? I never really thought they were guilty of "creative editing", I just found that once I was able to think about the episode calmly (which takes a while, given that it's full of High Octane Nightmare Fuel), it seemed like the evidence they used to support their claims was highly dubious. Unless you have more trustworthy sources, how do you know that PETA has "lots of skeletons in the closet" rather than it being the case that P&T made most of those skeletons up out of thin air?

I never asked you to do otherwise. This thread isn't about the merits or ethics of meat-eating vs. vegetarianism.

Look everyone, I don't mean to sound rude, I really don't, but most of you seem to be missing the whole point of my original post. It's not "why do you dislike PETA" or "how can you eat meat" or even "here's my argument that PETA isn't crazy". It's "why do you believe P&T's claims about PETA when the evidence they cite to support these claims is so dubious?".

I'm not even arguing that PETA isn't crazy, maybe they are, but Penn & Teller's argument that they are doesn't seem to hold up well. Their claims also go beyond "they are crazy" to stuff like "they support the ALF which firebombs buildings", but they don't present much in the way of evidence to support these accusations, yet many people throughout this wiki seem to believe the accusations are true anyway and I can't understand why.

If there is compelling evidence for these accusations from sources that have no obvious reason to lie about it, I'd be happy to see it. If there's a reason P&T's evidence isn't as flimsy as it seemed to me, I'd be happy to hear it. However, posts that just say "well, PETA is crazy anyway" or "I love meat" are not helpful and, in the latter case, are even beside the point.

edited 30th Sep '11 9:43:45 AM by 411314

But the evidence is not dubious... The things Penn and Teller say on their show are true. Because if they were to lie, it would be called "slander." And if P&T did that, they, and Showtime, would be sued...

And they haven't been sued(at least, not by PETA).

edited 30th Sep '11 10:29:27 AM by Swish

There are other online sources confirming much of what was said in the episode, and the data is complied from many of Peta's annual reports, tax records, etc... The insulin issue is a hotly debated topic, but still based on actual events. Whether a former VP of Peta using insulin to live (insulin being derived from animal testing before she joined Peta, I believe) makes her a hypocrite or not is a bit of a personal judgement.

Obviously Penn and Teller are biased here, but I think the idea that they would make up information for their program is a little outlandish unless they want to be crowned the kings of hypocrisy.

edited 30th Sep '11 11:36:39 AM by Justice4243

PETA are IRL trolls, its ridiculous to give them attention.

I guess that's true of Penn and Teller too.

...I think this is my favorite post of the entire thread.

There are other online sources confirming much of what was said in the episode

But why trust that source? It's not a major news source, it appears to be some site that just anyone could've made. Here is a stie supposedly confirming conspiracy theories about the US government working with aliens, complete with documents to prove it. Does that convince you?

The episode said they'd looked at Peta's annual reports, tax records, etc. and that these things were open to the public, but they didn't explain how to find these documents. And even if there's a website claiming to show them, they could be made up just as easily as those Majestic-12 documents I linked to earlier. Is there a trustworthy source that has these documents (like a newspaper, or a government recordkeeping site)?

Yeah, that's actually a pretty good point. Thanks for pointing that out.

edited 5th Dec '11 11:18:32 AM by 411314

Sites that collect the anti-Peta stuff obviously have an agenda, but it's not exactly as if news articles supporting them are hard to find.

I'm not sure how that second one directly relates to PETA, but the first one is a good example of what I was looking for. Thanks, Justice4243. Also, to everyone, I realized recently that I may have come off as more combative on this thread than I meant to, so I'm sorry about that.

Page two of the article has someone linking the group that's being discussed with PETA, though PETA is denying the charges.

Penn & Teller are stage magicians who have been given a talk show. It's best not to take their word for....well, anything.

Here's a better source on PETA not being all that nice: Newsweek.

You know I don't take PETA seriously when they use clips of the FUCKING Holocaust to compare to the injustice of cows and chickens in slaughterhouses.

I alway thought Penn and Teller were about presenting the counter-views that are usually swamped out of the public consciousness by the pushers for the 'issues' explored.

In other words, they take it for granted that we know PETA's position and they're just presenting some info we might not know.

That said, it's organizations like PETA that make it difficult to commit yourself to any cause-focused group. It's hard to trust that their isn't some crazy, whacked out underbelly beneath the good intentions.

edited 27th Dec '13 7:03:40 AM by Dreammaster1