Debalic wrote:
It's too bad the great, empty plains in the middle of this country aren't covered in tall grasses and home to free-roaming herds of giant, hardy, meaty animals in the countless millions.
(The problem is catching them.)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- You know when you hear something so mindblogglingly stupid..
You know when you hear something so mindblogglingly stupid..Follow
Hell, while we're referring to vast resources of protein available in this country, what about those grey and white birds that seem to proliferate in every city?
(The problem is catching them.)
The claim that cow farts are a major contributing factor to the recent rise in carbon dioxide / methane in our atmosphere is unsubstantiated and ludicrous, at this point. There have been no valid scientific studies showing any significant contribution on a scale comparable with any other CO2 producing industry. If the argument is the the industry itself is a major producer of CO2 (i.e.. production of fertilizer, fuel consumption, etc...) and other harmful chemicals, there is some truth, but hardly enough to isolate it from any other industry in this regard (you can throw out whatever numbers you like, but be sure to provide comparable numbers from similar industries, else you falsely exaggerate the point).
It is certainly good to keep on eye on all industries that contribute to the problem, but giving cattle farming a substantial weight above any other in terms of decision making isn't exactly prudent - at least, not without more facts and less propaganda.
Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 3:09am by BrownDuck
It is certainly good to keep on eye on all industries that contribute to the problem, but giving cattle farming a substantial weight above any other in terms of decision making isn't exactly prudent - at least, not without more facts and less propaganda.
Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 3:09am by BrownDuck
BrownDuck wrote:
It is certainly good to keep on eye on all industries that contribute to the problem, but giving cattle farming a substantial weight above any other in terms of decision making isn't exactly prudent - at least, not without more facts and less propaganda.
You can look it up. The first time we had a thread about this, I'd never heard of the meat industry being a problem. I looked around, did some reading on the subject, and it's a conclusion that is hard to avoid.
If its responsile for 10-15% of all greenhouse gases, it's quite a lot. If you look at the breakdown of what causes greenhouses gases, most industries are in that range. It's not like there is a painless way to cut 50% of our emissions. It will have to be done incrementally, by having a look at all the industries responsible, and seeing which ones are the easiest to reform and change.
I'm not saying this is necessarily the number one priority, but it's worth having a look, because it causes so many other problems as well. I'm not gonna stop eating meat voluntarily, like most people. But if you reform the industry so that it becomes sustainable, and apply market mechanisms, most people will be priced out, and won't be able to afford meat so often. On the other hand, the meat they do eat will be good quality, fresh, organic.
I still can't believe you dont believe in anthropogenic global warming, Paulsol. To borrow a quote from you: look at the company you keep
The best thing to do for the environment is to eat human meat, the carbon footprint of the average human is way bigger then of a cow, and there is a huge surplus of humans. Two birds with one stone.
Save the environment, kill yourself, ill say, McCartney can go first.
Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 12:07pm by Sjans
Save the environment, kill yourself, ill say, McCartney can go first.
Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 12:07pm by Sjans
Quote:
Sierra Leone, Democratic Republic of Congo, Mozambique, Sri Lanka, Rwanda, India, Malawi, Guinea, Burundi and Bangladesh.
just because they haven't got any availible doesn't mean it's not usually a part of their diet.
Fig Rolls are part of my diet but due to a massive global crisis there are none in UK shops, does that mean fig rolls are not part of the UK diet? Strawman arguement.
Also: How was i angry? i asked you to answer a question that you never answered, and if you consider that a strop your very wrong, you where off topic and i wanted it back on topic.
Quote:
You could have a massive feast! And then turn all that land that used for supporting the meat industry into parks and forests, so that fat ******* meat eaters could run about a bit, and hopefuly get enough exercise to stave off the next heart attack.
It seems if you and McCartney get your way Hens, Cows, Sheep and pigs will be consigned to zoos and history books in short order.
Baron von tarv wrote:
Quote:
Sierra Leone, Democratic Republic of Congo, Mozambique, Sri Lanka, Rwanda, India, Malawi, Guinea, Burundi and Bangladesh.
I make it seven
Quote:
Fig Rolls are part of my diet but due to a massive global crisis there are none in UK shops, does that mean fig rolls are not part of the UK diet? Strawman arguement.
I agree, it really sucks. <3 fig rolls.
Quote:
It seems if you and McCartney get your way Hens, Cows, Sheep and pigs will be consigned to zoos and history books in short order.
Not really. It's only about intensive meat-farming. And, more importantly, we'll all be driving cloud-powered cars before we completely stop eating meat. It doesn't mean there isn't a problem somewhere, though.
Quote:
Not really. It's only about intensive meat-farming. And, more importantly, we'll all be driving cloud-powered cars before we completely stop eating meat. It doesn't mean there isn't a problem somewhere, though.
I wrote:
I really LOATHE when people try and deflect a debate away from the real isses/possible solutions by offering rampant stupidity as a viable alternitive.
Direct questions about factory farming and other issues raised here at global ecconomy and food sustainability but don't bring it into a global warming debate just because it's in the public eye..
ref number of countries: this is what happens when you scribble things down on paper and then not look at the right colomn when writing replys. I won't edit the top post because that will deny Red his moment of glory
Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 7:49am by tarv
Quote:
but it's not a global warming problem, at least factory farming isn't which is why i said.
It is a global warming problem in many ways. It might not be the most damaging one, or the most urgent, but its still part of it. 10-15% is quite big, since most polluting industries (or harmful habits) are in that range. It's not like we could stop doing one thing that would reduce our output by 50%. Every step will be for incremental progress of a few percentage points. And if you take into account the destruction of the rainforest as part of the problem, which it is, then it all adds up.
The problem might not so much be the industry itself, but the fact that it is rapidly expanding to meet other countries' desire to emulate our lifestyle, or in this case, our eating habits. And you have to measure the costs of this expansion against the benefits.
The thing about global warming is that there is no silver bullet. I get pissed off when people say "to stop global warming, make sure the tap is off when you're brushing your teeth, or that your TV is switched off and not just on stand-by." It's as stupid as saying "become a veggie to stop global warming". Obviously, neither of those things on their own will stop global warming. McCartney was being simplistic and soundbity. Having said that, there is no doubt that the "carbon footprint" for eating a steak is much bigger than the carbon footprint for eating locally produced spinach.
It's not "the" solution to stop eating meat, but it doesn't mean something can't be done to make this industry less damaging to the environment.
It's a pretty self-serving, short-sighted comment to simply suggest people all stop eating meat because the meat industry is a polluter.
Landfills spew out just as much methane, soes we should all quit throwing stuff away?
I suggest Cat meat as a protein supplement.
Landfills spew out just as much methane, soes we should all quit throwing stuff away?
I suggest Cat meat as a protein supplement.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Quote:
It's nice to know that Vegitarians are happy to advocate a complete cull of an entire set of species though, nice work.
This is just point-blank stupid, sorry. No one is saying "OMG eliminate teh cowz!"
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Quote:
but it's not a global warming problem, at least factory farming isn't which is why i said.
It is a global warming problem in many ways.
EPA wrote:
Table 1 U.S. Methane Emissions by Source (TgCO2 Equivalents) Source Category 1990 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Landfills 172.2 147.4 138.5 134.0 130.7 126.2 126.8 131.2 Natural Gas Systems 128.3 133.6 131.8 127.4 132.1 131.8 130.6 125.9 Enteric Fermentation 117.9 118.3 116.7 116.8 115.6 114.5 114.6 115.0 Coal Mining 81.9 62.6 62.8 58.9 56.2 55.6 52.4 53.8 Manure Management 31.2 36.4 38.8 38.8 38.1 38.9 39.3 39.1 Wastewater Treatment 24.8 31.7 32.6 33.6 34.3 34.7 35.8 36.8 Petroleum Systems 20.0 18.8 18.5 17.8 17.6 17.4 17.1 17.1 Rice Cultivation 7.1 7.5 7.9 8.3 7.5 7.6 6.8 6.9 Stationary Sources 7.8 7.4 6.9 7.1 7.3 6.7 6.4 6.7 Abandoned Coal Mines 6.1 8.1 7.2 7.3 7.7 6.9 6.4 6.4 Mobile Sources 4.8 4.0 3.9 3.6 3.4 3.1 2.9 2.7 Petrochemical Production 1.2 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.5 Iron and Steel 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 Agricultural Residue Burning 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.8 Total for U.S. 605.3 579.5 569.3 557.3 554.2 546.7 542.3 544.9 Source: US Emissions Inventory 2005: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2003
..and to get an idea of Methane's contribution to the GHG pool:
DOE wrote:
TABLE 1. The Important Greenhouse Gases (except water vapor) U.S. Department of Energy, (October, 2000) (1) (all concentrations expressed in parts per billion) Pre-industrial baseline Natural additions Man-made additions Total (ppb) Concentration Percent of Total Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 288,000 68,520 11,880 368,400 99.438% Methane (CH4) 848 577 320 1,745 0.471% Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 285 12 15 312 0.084% Misc. gases ( CFC's, etc.) 25 0 2 27 0.007% Total 289,158 69,109 12,217 370,484 100.00%
Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 3:17pm by Elinda
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Quote:
This is just point-blank stupid, sorry. No one is saying "OMG eliminate teh cowz
Quote:
You could have a massive feast! And then turn all that land that used for supporting the meat industry into parks and forests, so that fat @#%^ing meat eaters could run about a bit, and hopefuly get enough exercise to stave off the next heart attack.
So What would you do with all the cows if you don't eliminate them all? If you leave them they will still be farting and that leave no net reduction so i might aswell remain omnivorous.
The idea that stopping using animals as a foodsource to stop global warming is as utterly stupid and idiotic as destroying entire animal groups because you don't eat meat.
Stop breeding them, let predators at them and let the population normalize?
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Samira wrote:
Stop breeding them, let predators at them and let the population normalize?
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Quote:
Stop breeding them, let predators at them and let the population normalize?
Nil, also there are no preditors and the number of bovines alive now is a minute proportion to what exsisted 200 years ago.
Prior to the rindepest outbrake in southern Africa, Bovines numbered Billions that are now numbered in low millions.
Well of course there are no wild cows. They've been domesticated.
To say that "stop breeding them" is the same as "eliminate the breed altogether" is just obtuse.
And Joph, I think we've still got mountain lions and bears.
To say that "stop breeding them" is the same as "eliminate the breed altogether" is just obtuse.
And Joph, I think we've still got mountain lions and bears.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Samira wrote:
And Joph, I think we've still got mountain lions and bears.
Bears attack cows?
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
Samira wrote:
And Joph, I think we've still got mountain lions and bears.
Bears attack cows?
Probably! If the cows weren't behind barbed wire. Or, I guess, if the bears also were; but that seems unlikely.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Quote:
To say that "stop breeding them" is the same as "eliminate the breed altogether" is just obtuse.
Add in Sheep, hens and pigs while you're at it btw. Although sheep are used for wool aswell but still even that would fall under gas excreation.
Do you honestly see a future for these animals outside a zoo/park if people don't eat them anymore? Look how many Bison are left in exsistance compaired to cows.
If you are going to make stupid sweeping statements you really need to be able answer stupid sweeping statements that come back at you.
Stupid statement: Everyone must stop eating meat the farts are killing the planet!
Reply: Are you prepared to Kill every farmyard Animal on the planet rather than reduce car and industrial emmissions instead?
I just couldn't see the Black bears around here ever attacking a cow. Then again, they're the retarded bunch of the species.
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
As well. Not instead.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Baron von tarv wrote:
Do you honestly see a future for these animals outside a zoo/park if people don't eat them anymore?
I understand the point you're making, but that statement made me giggle.
"This animal has no future if we don't kill it and eat it!!"
Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 10:57am by Belkira
Jophiel wrote:
Samira wrote:
Stop breeding them, let predators at them and let the population normalize?
We do have all these guns lying around, but not sure if the sportsmen would find cow-hunting very entertaining.
The stockyards though can do other stuff. We could capture the methane and use it as fuel. We could engineer cleaner emitting cows, etc. etc.
If eliminating large mammals from the face of the earth is our answer to controlling methane emmissions, I think we will have shot ourselves in the footsies.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
I don't know if mountain lions are large enough to take down a cow. I guess something used to eat the bison herds. I'm guessing wolves working in packs? Bears are opportunistic but I don't think they typically try to hunt herd animals.
Anyway, I'm thinking too hard about a silly issue. There's bigger reasons why "let 'em loose" isn't a practical option than a lack of large predators and I know you weren't serious anyway.
Edit: I've mentioned before a friend who lived on a large downstate farm which was mostly reverted back to nature. It included a small herd of cattle who had gone feral and lived in some lightly wooded areas. They looked big and shaggy and unfriendly and we refered to them as aurochs. We also avoided them.
Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 11:03am by Jophiel
Anyway, I'm thinking too hard about a silly issue. There's bigger reasons why "let 'em loose" isn't a practical option than a lack of large predators and I know you weren't serious anyway.
Edit: I've mentioned before a friend who lived on a large downstate farm which was mostly reverted back to nature. It included a small herd of cattle who had gone feral and lived in some lightly wooded areas. They looked big and shaggy and unfriendly and we refered to them as aurochs. We also avoided them.
Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 11:03am by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Archfiend MDenham wrote:
Debalic wrote:
It's too bad the great, empty plains in the middle of this country aren't covered in tall grasses and home to free-roaming herds of giant, hardy, meaty animals in the countless millions.
(The problem is catching them.)
Mmmmm, vermin.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Recent Visitors: 660
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (660)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- You know when you hear something so mindblogglingly stupid..
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC