Going vegan to save the planet

[TroglocratsRdumb]

MSN

www.msn.com

Story by Andrea Scripps News
Substituting 50% of our animal-based foods with plant-based options could cut greenhouse gas emissions from farming by 31% by 2050 and help protect forests and natural land, a new study suggests.

According to a study published in Nature Communications, despite accounting for less than 20% of the global food energy supply, producing animal-based foods like meat, chicken, pork, and milk consumes extensive resources, leading to significant greenhouse gas emissions and harm to biodiversity

"Plant-based meats are not just a novel food product but a critical opportunity for achieving food security and climate goals while also achieving health and biodiversity objectives worldwide," said the study’s co-author, Eva Wollenberg, a social scientist at the University of Vermont. "Yet, such transitions are challenging and require a range of technological innovations and policy interventions."

Comment:
The Crazy Climate Change Doomsday Cult will not leave other people alone.
They want to force other people to be vegans to save the planet from the imaginary climate change boogeyman.
People need meat because it provides essential amino acids.

 

[rightwinger]

If God didn’t want you to eat meat, he wouldn’t have made it taste so good

 

[Hellokitty]

MSN

www.msn.com

Story by Andrea Scripps News
Substituting 50% of our animal-based foods with plant-based options could cut greenhouse gas emissions from farming by 31% by 2050 and help protect forests and natural land, a new study suggests.

According to a study published in Nature Communications, despite accounting for less than 20% of the global food energy supply, producing animal-based foods like meat, chicken, pork, and milk consumes extensive resources, leading to significant greenhouse gas emissions and harm to biodiversity

"Plant-based meats are not just a novel food product but a critical opportunity for achieving food security and climate goals while also achieving health and biodiversity objectives worldwide," said the study’s co-author, Eva Wollenberg, a social scientist at the University of Vermont. "Yet, such transitions are challenging and require a range of technological innovations and policy interventions."

Comment:
The Crazy Climate Change Doomsday Cult will not leave other people alone.
They want to force other people to be vegans to save the planet from the imaginary climate change boogeyman.
People need meat because it provides essential amino acids.

Democrats who support this should support making sure government doesn't fund any food assistance programs being able to purchase meats and whatnot.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

MSN

www.msn.com

Story by Andrea Scripps News
Substituting 50% of our animal-based foods with plant-based options could cut greenhouse gas emissions from farming by 31% by 2050 and help protect forests and natural land, a new study suggests.

According to a study published in Nature Communications, despite accounting for less than 20% of the global food energy supply, producing animal-based foods like meat, chicken, pork, and milk consumes extensive resources, leading to significant greenhouse gas emissions and harm to biodiversity

"Plant-based meats are not just a novel food product but a critical opportunity for achieving food security and climate goals while also achieving health and biodiversity objectives worldwide," said the study’s co-author, Eva Wollenberg, a social scientist at the University of Vermont. "Yet, such transitions are challenging and require a range of technological innovations and policy interventions."

Comment:
The Crazy Climate Change Doomsday Cult will not leave other people alone.
They want to force other people to be vegans to save the planet from the imaginary climate change boogeyman.
People need meat because it provides essential amino acids.

If that's what it takes to save the planet, maybe the planet doesn't deserve to live.

 

[Crick]

If God didn’t want you to eat meat, he wouldn’t have made it taste so good

He apparently wants you to severely limit sex so why does it feel so good?

 

[rightwinger]

He apparently wants you to severely limit sex so why does it feel so good?

Who wants to limit sex?
God wants us to have sex as often as we can
Otherwise he would have made us like other animals that only have sex when the female is fertile

 

[Woodznutz]

The earth would blossom like a rose if animal agriculture was done correctly. Ag sages of the past called farming "manure management". Sadly, most manure is mismanaged, so the earth is deprived of a needed fertility resource. Instead, manure has been wasted or become a pollutant.

 

[ReinyDays]

Back in the 1970's, the number kicked around was 20 acres of animal food provide the same amount of human food in a single acre of land ... think of all the methane cows belch ... drive by a big feed lot ... if you want to protect the environment, then cut meat consumption by 90% ... or say you hate nature ... there's no grey matter here, either you're with us or against us ... choose wisely ...

For folks dragging some extra weight, maybe a salad every once in a while wouldn't hurt ...

 

[Captain Caveman]

MSN

www.msn.com

Story by Andrea Scripps News
Substituting 50% of our animal-based foods with plant-based options could cut greenhouse gas emissions from farming by 31% by 2050 and help protect forests and natural land, a new study suggests.

According to a study published in Nature Communications, despite accounting for less than 20% of the global food energy supply, producing animal-based foods like meat, chicken, pork, and milk consumes extensive resources, leading to significant greenhouse gas emissions and harm to biodiversity

"Plant-based meats are not just a novel food product but a critical opportunity for achieving food security and climate goals while also achieving health and biodiversity objectives worldwide," said the study’s co-author, Eva Wollenberg, a social scientist at the University of Vermont. "Yet, such transitions are challenging and require a range of technological innovations and policy interventions."

Comment:
The Crazy Climate Change Doomsday Cult will not leave other people alone.
They want to force other people to be vegans to save the planet from the imaginary climate change boogeyman.
People need meat because it provides essential amino acids.

The problem is, meat agriculture is responsible for about 56% to 58% of the emissions, crops 42% to 44%. Reducing one increases the other, and there's not much difference between the two.

 

[Woodznutz]

Back in the 1970's, the number kicked around was 20 acres of animal food provide the same amount of human food in a single acre of land ... think of all the methane cows belch ... drive by a big feed lot ... if you want to protect the environment, then cut meat consumption by 90% ... or say you hate nature ... there's no grey matter here, either you're with us or against us ... choose wisely ...

For folks dragging some extra weight, maybe a salad every once in a while wouldn't hurt ...

Salads are overrated nutritionally, also salad dressings are notoriously loaded with sodium.

The primary function of animal agriculture is improving the fertility of the land, so it produces more, and healthier, foods. Caring for these animals also makes better people. Food and health of people is actually a byproduct of agriculture and is an indicator of its success, or failure. At this point we are failing miserably.

 

[Crick]

Salads are overrated nutritionally, also salad dressings are notoriously loaded with sodium.

I would have noted the fat as well, and some have more than their fair share of cholesterol.

The primary function of animal agriculture is improving the fertility of the land, so it produces more, and healthier, foods.

I have to disagree with you there. The primary function of animal agriculture, like any other business, is to make money. I don't see a lot of ranchers letting their cattle graze in planted fields. And I don't see them picking the cow shit up from the fields to redistribute it. So how exactly is that fertility improvement taking place?

Caring for these animals also makes better people.

I'm not so sure about that. Not everyone can raise an animal from birth to 3-5 years old, then kill it, chop it up and cook it for dinner.

Food and health of people is actually a byproduct of agriculture and is an indicator of its success, or failure. At this point we are failing miserably.

You sound as if you've spend some time on a farm or ranch. Is that so?

 

[Woodznutz]

I have to disagree with you there. The primary function of animal agriculture, like any other business, is to make money. I don't see a lot of ranchers letting their cattle graze in planted fields. And I don't see them picking the cow shit up from the fields to redistribute it. So how exactly is that fertility improvement taking place?

Farmers have abandoned the primary function in order to chase money. The primary function doesn't change. Organic farmers understand this.

I'm not so sure about that. Not everyone can raise an animal from birth to 3-5 years old, then kill it, chop it up and cook it for dinner.

Most farmers take great care of their animals while raising them. 4Hers are especially benefitted from raising their animals.

You sound as if you've spent some time on a farm or ranch. Is that so?

As kids my brother and I worked on my uncle's dairy farm during summer vacations. I also had a hobby farm where I raised chickens and a beef cow. I also spent a lot of time around horses, mainly riding.

 

[Crick]

Farmers have abandoned the primary function in order to chase money. The primary function doesn't change. Organic farmers understand this.

If you don't make money, you don't carry on. I'm sure most farmers understand the interreleatedness of it all, but they're not operating charities for poor soil.

Most farmers take great care of their animals while raising them. 4Hers are especially benefitted from raising their animals.

I'm sure that they do. But for those raising meat production cattle, pigs or chickens I can't help but think there's some emotional trauma involved in the process; either before, during or afterwards the animal they've raised goes to slaughter. I also love to eat meat and I hope to see more progress on lab grown meat as a viable alternative. It seems like a win-win solution to removing systemized predation from our culture.

As kids my brother and I worked on my uncle's dairy farm during summer vacations. I also had a hobby farm where I raised chickens and a beef cow. I also spent a lot of time around horses, mainly riding.

Sounds pretty idyllic with some hard work thrown in to keep you honest. Is the dairy farm still a going concern?

 

[Woodznutz]

Sounds pretty idyllic with some hard work thrown in to keep you honest. Is the dairy farm still a going concern?

We stopped going to the farm when we got out of high school. The farms, he owned several, likely were inherited by his brothers who were also dairy farmers, as my uncle had no children.

CAFO's (concentrated animal feeding operations) can work if the manure produced is properly managed. Too much of it goes to digesters where it is turned into biogas and burned to produce electricity. It has gone from a valuable fertilizer to a waste product. In large western feedlots the manure is bulldozed into huge piles where it loses its value by age and weathering.

The problem is that too many animals are being produced because people are eating too much meat from animals that are being produced too fast. Grass fed beef takes longer but is healthier. What is little known is that cattle that are finished/fattened on a high grain diet would soon die of heart disease if not slaughtered at about 18-24 months of age. Some animal fats are healthy, but beef fat is particularly dense and should be avoided.

 

[Resnic]

He apparently wants you to severely limit sex so why does it feel so good?

That is incorrect.

He wants people to multiply and have children. But he wants us to be married and be a couple because it takes a man and a woman together to raise children to be good adults. Family is critical. Married people can bang away.

It's also designed that way to limit godless and hedonistic people. The idea is people who run around and have sex with anyone are just sluts. Those people are less likely to have a sense of morals, standards and values. They breed this idea life is only about their personal desires and satisfaction. It isn't that way for every individual but it is that way for people as a whole. It's why he torched soddom and Gomorrah because they just became godless, selfish, hedonists. The more people wallow in selfishness and depravity the more they grow to love it.

And it feels good because if it didn't we wouldn't have a innate desire to have sex and procreate the species.

Feeling good is also a test of ones willpower and strength. All sins are desireable ones. It's hard to resist doing things you want to do and would enjoy. But that's what shows a man's strength and dedication is to want to do something but not do it. It takes massive amounts of willpower to not go bang every chick you can. Just like quitting smoking is very hard and only the strongest can do it meanwhile the weak ones never do.

 

[Moonglow]

Democrats who support this should support making sure government doesn't fund any food assistance programs being able to purchase meats and whatnot.

too much to ask of any program.

 

[Moonglow]

It's also designed that way to limit godless and hedonistic people. The idea is people who run around and have sex with anyone are just sluts.

 

[Crick]

He apparently wants you to severely limit sex so why does it feel so good?

That is incorrect.

I disagree, of course.

He wants people to multiply and have children. But he wants us to be married and be a couple because it takes a man and a woman together to raise children to be good adults. Family is critical. Married people can bang away.

As you note, the Bible says that sex outside of marriage is a sin. Obviously, that limits sex. But it is acceptable for married couples to have sex purely for pleasure. What might be the difference between sex purely for pleasure inside and outside of marriage? Of course, when the Bible was written, there were no effective birth control methods, but now there are several. Did God not know that would come about?

It's also designed that way to limit godless and hedonistic people. The idea is people who run around and have sex with anyone are just sluts. Those people are less likely to have a sense of morals, standards and values. They breed this idea life is only about their personal desires and satisfaction. It isn't that way for every individual but it is that way for people as a whole.

Why would godless and hedonistic people pay any attention to God's wishes and commandments? Aside from that, your comment about sluts is just circular. And it's entirely possible for people to feel that sex can and should be enjoyed freely but have strong morals and values on other topics. Many devout Christians have committed murder. Morality is a complex subject, not controlled by a single knob.

It's why he torched soddom and Gomorrah because they just became godless, selfish, hedonists.

At the time, most of the planet's human population were not Christians. Why did he kill only the people (including the innocent) in Sodom and Gomorrah? Why didn't he kill everyone on Earth but the faithful? Recent research has found that Sodom and Gomorrah were actually struck by a meteor and destroyed by "fire from the sky". The story was simply created to take advantage of the opportunity just as Noah's flood was inspired by the Mediterranean overflowing at what would become the Bosporus Straits into the basin that became the Black Sea.

The more people wallow in selfishness and depravity the more they grow to love it.

That would seem to be a design failure, wouldn't it? Are selfishness and depravity acceptable among the married?

And it feels good because if it didn't we wouldn't have a innate desire to have sex and procreate the species.

You realize that's a strong argument for evolution.

Feeling good is also a test of ones willpower and strength. All sins are desireable ones. It's hard to resist doing things you want to do and would enjoy.

Many sins are not driven by desire but by anger and fear

But that's what shows a man's strength and dedication is to want to do something but not do it.

What about the large numbers of people on Earth, raised in other religions and everyone before the rise of Judaism, who had never heard of your god's commandments about sex and marriage? Was ignorance a valid excuse?

It takes massive amounts of willpower to not go bang every chick you can.

It is not that difficult to keep yourself in check if you actually have some reason to do so. The strongest human motivation is the avoidance of pain/death. If you think having sex with a willing partner will earn you a punch in the nose, you will not have that much trouble keeping your pants on. I find it interesting that you take this solely from the male perspective. How much willpower does it take for women to not go straddle every dude with a bulge? Does the required willpower set the magnitude of the sin?

Just like quitting smoking is very hard and only the strongest can do it meanwhile the weak ones never do.

I smoked for many years. Like many smokers, I tried to quit dozens of times. I knew all along that all that was required was sufficient motivation but I didn't know how to create it. Sixteen years ago I was diagnosed with a non-Hodgkins lymphoma in my throat. The doc told me that it wasn't from smoking; that they didn't know what actually caused it. But, particularly being in my throat, it was good enough for me. I quit that moment and haven't had a single cigarette since. Unlike sex, the craving lasted about a year before vanishing. I am in my 70s now and I still crave sex. The two are not similar. Smoking is a chemical addiction. Craving sex is built into your DNA for the simple reason that genetic variants that don't crave sex go extinct. For the rest of this planet's life forms, the more effort you put into having sex, the better your chances of reproductive success.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Farming doesn't produce enough greenhouse gasses to make a difference in anything.

 

[Crick]

Farming doesn't produce enough greenhouse gasses to make a difference in anything.

Growing crops can actually help IF it produces more photosynthetic mass than whatever existed there before. It is ranching livestock that causes the problem. Here is an explanation from Google AI

Raising livestock for food increases greenhouse gases in a few ways:

• Methane from digestion
  Ruminant animals like cows, sheep, and goats produce methane when they digest food through a process called "enteric fermentation". This methane is released into the atmosphere through burps and flatulence. A single cow can belch around 220 pounds of methane per year. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas that's 28 times more effective at warming the atmosphere than carbon dioxide.
  
  
  
  
• Nitrous oxide from manure and fertilizers
  Nitrous oxide is another powerful greenhouse gas that's emitted from manure and chemical fertilizers used on crops for cattle feed. Manure is often stored in open lagoons that can overflow or leak, releasing harmful substances like bacteria, antibiotics, pesticides, and heavy metals into the environment.
  
  
  
  
• Land-use change
  Meat production often requires large grasslands, which are often created by cutting down trees. This releases carbon dioxide that was previously stored in the forests.
  
  
  
  
• Shrimp farms
  Shrimp farms are often built on coastal land that was previously covered by mangrove forests. These forests absorb large amounts of carbon, and when they're cut down to create shrimp farms, the stored carbon is released into the atmosphere.