Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

You know when you hear something so mindblogglingly stupid..Follow

#52 Apr 23 2008 at 8:02 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Jophiel wrote:
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.
When we can finally move into our Cities in the Sky, the cows can be free to roam the plains again.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#53 Apr 23 2008 at 8:03 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Quote:
We do have all these guns lying around, but not sure if the sportsmen would find cow-hunting very entertaining.


Give 'em a few generations. The wily and elusive cow will be the most sought-after prey in the world.

They'll be like feral pigs with horns.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#54 Apr 23 2008 at 8:07 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
The great white hunter will mount his prized 5-tit udder on the wall of the hunting lodge.

For the Cows

Born free, as free as the wind blows
As free as the grass grows
Born free to follow your heart

Live free and beauty surrounds you
The world still astounds you
Each time you look at a star

Stay free, where no walls divide you
You're free as the roaring tide
So there's no need to hide

Born free, and life is worth living
But only worth living
'cause you're born free


You all get to have the song running through your head.



Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 6:08pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#55 Apr 23 2008 at 8:07 AM Rating: Good
Actually, the solution to this is obvious and already under development: Harvest the methane from fermented cow **** and use it to produce energy.

That cow **** is combustible, yo. Combustible substances = energy = movement.

If we were REALLY serious about reducing greenhouse emissions, we'd all be driving cow-patty powered cars.
#56 Apr 23 2008 at 8:10 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
catwho, pet mage of Jabober wrote:
Actually, the solution to this is obvious and already under development: Harvest the methane from fermented cow **** and use it to produce energy.

That cow sh*t is combustible, yo. Combustible substances = energy = movement.

If we were REALLY serious about reducing greenhouse emissions, we'd all be driving cow-patty powered cars.
Under development?...dung has been used as fuels for fire for like forever.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#57 Apr 23 2008 at 8:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
catwho, pet mage of Jabober wrote:
Actually, the solution to this is obvious and already under development: Harvest the methane from fermented cow **** and use it to produce energy.

That cow sh*t is combustible, yo. Combustible substances = energy = movement.

If we were REALLY serious about reducing greenhouse emissions, we'd all be driving cow-patty powered cars.


I just pictured a car with a cow attached to the gas tank by its butt. In my vision the cow was quite surprised to be there, and yes, plotting revenge.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#58 Apr 23 2008 at 8:18 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
3. Why stop at farming? Dogs fart something terrible and they must be adding to the problem, so do we ban any pets that add to the greenhouse gases aswell? What about the herds of wildebeast, Impala, Yak, they have no purpose at all, at least Cows feed us, thats useful. Can't we get rid of all the pointless animals first? lets start with Wombats.


We could invent a fun way for the wombats to kill each other ...

Screenshot


#59 Apr 23 2008 at 8:26 AM Rating: Decent
****
8,619 posts
Sam, that wasn't nice, my keyboard now has a light coating of Lilt Zero.
#60 Apr 23 2008 at 9:59 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

a light coating of Lilt Zero.


Horrifying. I have no idea how you can drink that.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#61 Apr 23 2008 at 10:47 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Or, we could just...ride the cows? I know! Have the cows *pull* the cars! That will also cut down on the horrifying 60-mph head-on collisions.
____________________________
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.
#62 Apr 23 2008 at 10:57 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Debalic wrote:
60-mph
Moos per hour?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#63 Apr 23 2008 at 11:16 AM Rating: Good
Elinda wrote:
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.
Not sure how this chart will copy over, but it should be fairly reliable data.

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
Enteric Fermentation, btw, is livestock farts.

..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


So, livestock equate to approx. 21% of methane emissions, and methane accounts for just under 0.5% of the greenhouse gases in our atmosphere. Thanks - it's nice to have raw data on how insignificant it really is.

To be fair, methane has a 21-to-1 ratio of GWP (global warming potential) compared to carbon dioxide, (http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads/08_ES.pdf p.3), but given the percentage... blah. In that same document, on p.4 (presumably where your data came from), we find the table for CO2 emissions as well, which I find interesting. It doesn't paste here very well, but from 2006, we see approximate CO2 emissions of 5,983 Tg CO2 Eq., with fossil fuel burning making up about 5,638 of that. Industrial contribution as a whole is limited to 862 of that 5,638, with electricity production and transportation combining for a total of 4,184 of that 5,638.

Given those numbers, and the assumption that the majority of greenhouse gas production where cattle farming is concerned falls under either the methane contribution noted in Elinda's data or the industrial contribution noted in my reference, I fail to see how livestock farming alone can contribute to any major percent of greenhouse emissions, short of some glaring oversight in the data. Until we conquer our dependence on fossil fuel for energy and transportation, chasing after the livestock industry is quite simply, a red herring.


Edit: This data is all US data only, of course.

Edited, Apr 23rd 2008 2:18pm by BrownDuck
#64 Apr 23 2008 at 11:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Sir, we have moved on to more important matters of moos per hour.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#65 Apr 23 2008 at 11:18 AM Rating: Decent
Samira wrote:
Sir, we have moved on to more important matters of moos per hour.


I'm going to need to see references. Smiley: sly
#66 Apr 23 2008 at 11:19 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

chasing after the livestock industry is quite simply, a red herring.


No shit, genius. It's a marketing concept to allow the equivocation of the two in the public mind.

You're posting on the wrong forum if you think it's helpful to expound on the fucking painfully obvious.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#67 Apr 23 2008 at 11:20 AM Rating: Decent
Smasharoo wrote:

chasing after the livestock industry is quite simply, a red herring.


No shit, genius. It's a marketing concept to allow the equivocation of the two in the public mind.

You're posting on the wrong forum if you think it's helpful to expound on the fucking painfully obvious.


It is always helpful to analyze data in different ways. It helps establish the bigger picture more clearly.
#68 Apr 23 2008 at 11:32 AM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Urbanisation has screwed the natural habitat of many species (including numerous insects, songbirds, mammals and amphibians), while others can thrive (often 'vermin' such as foxes, coyotes, corvids (crows and the like) and certain invertebrates) in suburbs and towns.

We've screwed up the balance of ecosystems that have been working out for thousands of years (whether you're a Darwinist or Creationist).

Unless we do something to redress the imbalance, we'll see mass extinctions and mass infestations.

We can either cull those species that we've artificially advantaged, restore the habitat of those we've disadvantaged, or use husbandry to sustain environments that achieve both and provide food for the majority of people who continue to be omnivores.

Works for me.

With all the land-space available in our globalised economies, I see no justification for factory farming, and every opportunity for producing sustainable food sources and maintaining natural balance.

And for those vegetarians haters of plant-life, the same could apply to flora as well as fauna.
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#69 Apr 23 2008 at 2:52 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
Given those numbers, and the assumption that the majority of greenhouse gas production where cattle farming is concerned falls under either the methane contribution noted in Elinda's data or the industrial contribution noted in my reference, I fail to see how livestock farming alone can contribute to any major percent of greenhouse emissions, short of some glaring oversight in the data. Until we conquer our dependence on fossil fuel for energy and transportation, chasing after the livestock industry is quite simply, a red herring.


Farm equipment belches smoke. The food for that cattle has to get raised, and grains require extensive farming. Sure, some of the cows graze, but in the winter they are mostly grain fed.

So, accounting for the fossil fuel consumption in running the farm equipment used to raise food for the cows, the percentage jumps up a bit more.
#70 Apr 23 2008 at 4:05 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
This thread made me lol. After years of almost eating no meat, I come to find that I am borderline anemic and need to up my meat intake. I ate my first steak in years a few days ago.

Sorry, Sir Paul.
#71 Apr 23 2008 at 4:10 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

After years of almost eating no meat


That seems accurate. The only times I've dined with you, you ate mussels and beef hearts :)

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#72 Apr 23 2008 at 4:13 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

After years of almost eating no meat


That seems accurate. The only times I've dined with you, you ate mussels and beef hearts :)

I don't eat a lot of beef, but those hearts are DEEElishus. I understand what you're saying, though. A lot of land is laid to waste so that mussels can graze. Smiley: frown
#73 Apr 23 2008 at 4:15 PM Rating: Good
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,293 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

After years of almost eating no meat


That seems accurate. The only times I've dined with you, you ate mussels and beef hearts...and er, fish eyes.


Fixed.
____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#74 Apr 23 2008 at 4:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
Tare wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:

After years of almost eating no meat


That seems accurate. The only times I've dined with you, you ate mussels and beef hearts...and er, fish eyes.


Fixed.


Frankly, I don't know how he'd notice what anyone else was eating what with the tasmanian devil cloud of food around him.

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#75 Apr 23 2008 at 4:17 PM Rating: Good
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,293 posts
Nexa wrote:
Tare wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:

After years of almost eating no meat


That seems accurate. The only times I've dined with you, you ate mussels and beef hearts...and er, fish eyes.


Fixed.


Frankly, I don't know how he'd notice what anyone else was eating what with the tasmanian devil cloud of food around him.

Nexa


And the abundance of sweet, boozy, candy boozy drinks.
____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#76 Apr 23 2008 at 4:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
Tare wrote:

And the abundance of sweet, boozy, candy boozy drinks.


Yes, well, it's clear that Flea was hoping to knock us all out and eat all the meat in the establishment without anyone knowing.

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 158 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (158)