Bye bye MEAT! How will the post-meat future look?

[Spymaster]

Fucking capitals.

Athens and Rome, in days of yore.

 

[CNT36]

But you have no problem being bothered enough to lecture me on the supposed shortcomings of my argument?

Maybe I should have written kabbes point rather than the point. But ok then
I don't think Butcher on his own will have much effect on the mass market. It slightly increases the range of individual choice itself a flawed way of combatting climate change. That choice however may lead to a small number of people reducing their meat intake, switching to less environmentally damaging meat and thinking about where their meat comes from. It wouldn't be as effective at reducing meat intake as those people going vegetarian but may help a little. More butchers like this may rather than the alternative may lead to slightly better outcomes.

 

[kabbes]

Search results for query: "eat less meat"

www.urban75.net

Then what you think is exactly what I said you think. Namely, you think that you are only arguing for people to eat less meat.

My point is that regardless of what you think you are arguing for, the practice of your argument is to assert that people should stop eating meat. Your practice is inconsistent with your stated intent.

 

[editor]

Then what you think is exactly what I said you think. Namely, you think that you are only arguing for people to eat less meat.

My point is that regardless of what you think you are arguing for, the practice of your argument is to assert that people should stop eating meat. Your practice is inconsistent with your stated intent.

Jesus. Cod psychology.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Jesus. Cod psychology.

That's more Jeff's department.

 

[editor]

Maybe I should have written kabbes point rather than the point. But ok then
I don't think Butcher on his own will have much effect on the mass market. It slightly increases the range of individual choice itself a flawed way of combatting climate change. That choice however may lead to a small number of people reducing their meat intake, switching to less environmentally damaging meat and thinking about where their meat comes from. It wouldn't be as effective at reducing meat intake as those people going vegetarian but may help a little. More butchers like this may rather than the alternative may lead to slightly better outcomes.

So your solution is to make meat so expensive that it'll force poorer people to abandon it, apart from the occasional treat?

But even that will have nigh-on zero impact on the vast consumption of cheap meat that's slopping out of an ever increasing number of mega-factory farms, so there's unlikely to be any net gain for the environment.

There needs to be a mass downward shift in the amount of meat being consumed. Piddling about with niche, expensive micro farms isn't going to make any real difference at all, even if it makes some people feel better about themselves.

 

[friedaweed]

Says the man posting cut and pastes of articles promoting Meat Tax

 

[Funky_monks]

That is shit as well. But two wrongs don't make a right smearing vegans as cultists is crap

Nobody is - people are referring to Jeff.
His posts read like you've cut bits out of some PETA leaflets and stuck em in here, whilst adding in some abuse and hysterics. It's almost like he comes on here to abuse, rather than engage.

All hyperbole, no discussion.

 

[Funky_monks]

Says the man posting cut and pastes of articles promoting Meat Tax

Jesus, that's fucking insane.

Somebody trumpeting the fact that inflation has made meat more expensive and also calling for a meat tax now says advocating for more expensive meat is classist.

 

[editor]

Says the man posting cut and pastes of articles promoting Meat Tax

It wasn't my idea, it came from the University of Oxford.

I'm all for it along with, you know, many of the other measures that have been mentioned - and some people making a fucking effort to eat less meat and quit shouting down scientific studies and repeating meat industry shills.

A meat tax is probably inevitable – here’s how it could work

To slash emissions, slow the loss of biodiversity and secure food for a growing world population, there must be a change in the way meat and dairy is made and consumed.

www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk

Oh, was it you posting up ad hominem bullshit about me being in a 'dad band' earlier? Grow the fuck up. Back on ignore you go.

 

[Spymaster]

It's almost like he comes on here to abuse, rather than engage.

Almost

 

[CNT36]

So your solution is to make meat so expensive that it'll force poorer people to abandon it, apart from the occasional treat?

But even that will have nigh-on zero impact on the vast consumption of cheap meat that's slopping out of an ever increasing number of mega-factory farms, so there's unlikely to be any net gain for the environment.

There needs to be a mass downward shift in the amount of meat being consumed. Piddling about with niche, expensive micro farms isn't going to make any real difference at all, even if it makes some people feel better about themselves.

Nope, where have I proposed a solution?

You're right it makes less difference than you and I going vegetarian or Jeff Robinson going vegan and however good anyone feels that equals about two eigths of fuck all.

 

[Funky_monks]

The whole thread is crap because it is ostensibly about climate change but the underlying morality is actually antagonism towards killing animals. Now, there’s nothing problematic in having antagonism towards killing animals. But when that is the moral foundation, to argue from a climate change framework creates bad faith. If there is one thing that humanity’s giant balls-up of ecological custodianship should have taught us, it’s that you should be very, very, very careful about introducing massive shocks to the system. For humans to abandon meat eating overnight would place completely unpredictable stresses on the ecological system. We have no idea what kind of unplanned perturbations it would create. So if your primary interest is ecology, you wouldn’t be arguing for an immediate end to meat eating. You’d be arguing for more ecologically friendly farming practices, more research into these effects and a gradual reduction of those elements producing GHG across the system as a whole.

I do keep attempting to drag it back to climate change but there's very little engagement with the research I've posted up in that vein of late, it's all about trying to bend a few scientific papers to fit a code of ethics for some on here.

 

[Funky_monks]

Nope, where have I proposed a solution?

You're right it makes less difference than you and I going vegetarian or Jeff Robinson going vegan and however good anyone feels that equals about two eigths of fuck all.

It's almost like man made climate change has mostly got to do with burning fossil fuels or something...

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Lots of whining about how mean I am, no refutation of any of my points. Pas ca change.

 

[editor]

Nope, where have I proposed a solution?

You're right it makes less difference than you and I going vegetarian or Jeff Robinson going vegan and however good anyone feels that equals about two eigths of fuck all.

So how do you think you might be able to get people to dramatically reduce their meat intake? Assuming that is you believe what the vast body of science is saying and aren't choosing to believe in the meat industry shills?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I have lived in cities my whole adult life, but I grew up in a small market town in a farming area. I had a generally low opinion of the local farmers I interacted with. They came across to me mostly as narrow-minded, selfish tory-voting wankers. These were small farmers, generally, mostly family-owned outfits.

I still find it quite hard to shake off that prejudice, but it is only through working with small farmers like them that we have a hope of promoting better practice. And I do now appreciate the various financial pressures farmers are under. I will still criticise them for their selfish toryness, and getting them to appreciate and empathise with the problems of city-dwellers is also a big task. We need be able to meet somewhere in the middle. This is a systems problem that needs tackling at a range of levels.

 

[Spymaster]

Lots of whining about how mean I am, no refutation of any of my points.

Nobody is whining about you being mean; they're laughing at you for being a vituperative knob.

And every single one of your "points" has been addressed forensically and vapourised. You're just pretending otherwise.

 

[friedaweed]

It wasn't my idea, it came from the University of Oxford.

I'm all for it along with, you know, along with many of the other measures that have been mentioned - and some people making a fucking effort to eat less meat and quit shouting down scientific studies and repeating meat industry shills.

A meat tax is probably inevitable – here’s how it could work

To slash emissions, slow the loss of biodiversity and secure food for a growing world population, there must be a change in the way meat and dairy is made and consumed.

www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk

Oh, was it you posting up

ad hominem bullshit about me being in a 'dad band' earlier? Grow the fuck up. Back on ignore you go.

You said it was forever last time.



How many air-miles did your last tour tot up?

 

[friedaweed]

Nope, where have I proposed a solution?

You're right it makes less difference than you and I going vegetarian or Jeff Robinson going vegan and however good anyone feels that equals about two eigths of fuck all.

Well said.

 

[Funky_monks]

I have lived in cities my whole adult life, but I grew up in a small market town in a farming area. I had a generally low opinion of the local farmers I interacted with. They came across to me mostly as narrow-minded, selfish tory-voting wankers. These were small farmers, generally, mostly family-owned outfits.

I still find it quite hard to shake off that prejudice, but it is only through working with small farmers like them that we have a hope of promoting better practice. And I do now appreciate the various financial pressures farmers are under. I will still criticise them for their selfish toryness, and getting them to appreciate and empathise with the problems of city-dwellers is also a big task. We need be able to meet somewhere in the middle. This is a systems problem that needs tackling at a range of levels.

Yeah, I have similar experiences given that I'm essentially working class and chose to work within agriculture - but that's moot really.

Whether farmers vote Tory or not has little to do with agricultural systems and/or climate change.

 

[CNT36]

So how do you think you might be able to get people to dramatically reduce their meat intake? Assuming that is you believe what the vast body of science is saying and aren't choosing to believe in the meat industry shills?

I'm not sure on the best course of action. It's one of the reasons I'm on the thread.

 

[Funky_monks]

It's also mad that in spite of posting reams of peer reviewed scientific research (with very limited reposting of sources) and pointing out the opinions of literally thousands of scientists who study this particular thing differ from the opinions expressed in The Guardian newspaper, some people still think there's an overwhelming consensus supporting their views.

This is why the Dunning Kruger stuff I posted earlier was so relevant, this could literally be a textbook example.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yeah, I have similar experiences given that I'm essentially working class and chose to work within agriculture - but that's moot really.

Whether farmers vote Tory or not has little to do with agricultural systems and/or climate change.

Yes, true enough.

One thing I will say for the farmers around me back then is that a lot of them hated fox hunting. They hated it for selfish reasons - because fox hunters would damage their farms as they blundered through - but they hated it nonetheless. It's a myth that fox hunting had wide support in the countryside. It never did. (Again, not really relevant... )

 

[bcuster]

The thread is about eating less meat. The increase in global warming that eating meat causes is only one reason to eat less meat. The cruelty inherent in eating flesh is another reason; I'd argue that it is the best reason.

I appreciate the frankness of Jeff's arguments regarding the true nature of meat eating.

 

[Funky_monks]

Yes, true enough.

One thing I will say for the farmers around me back then is that a lot of them hated fox hunting. They hated it for selfish reasons - because fox hunters would damage their farms as they blundered through - but they hated it nonetheless. It's a myth that fox hunting had wide support in the countryside. It never did. (Again, not really relevant... )

Loads of them hated the hunt - that was the interesting thing about the ban, it actually turned some from disliking the hunt to supporting it because of perceived meddling in the affairs of the countryside.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The cruelty inherent in eating flesh is another reason; I'd argue that it is the best reason.

And that's a perfectly sound position. I don't think that cruelty is necessarily inherent to the eating of flesh, but I think it's possible to have an honest disagreement over that.

It's a shame English has this stupid double-vocabulary dating back to feudal times. imo it's better not to switch to Germanic terms to make points about meat-eating. It would be better if we didn't have this dual vocabulary and the words for the animals as living beings and food were the same.

 

[Funky_monks]

The thread is about eating less meat. The increase in global warming that eating meat causes is only one reason to eat less meat. The cruelty inherent in eating flesh is another reason; I'd argue that it is the best reason.

I appreciate the frankness of Jeff's arguments regarding the true nature of meat eating.

No this thread is not about that. Read the OP.
This thread is about mass produced highly processed meat substitutes being the answer to climate change effects of farming, including as a tool to advance rewilding.
It's therefore about two things: agriculture effect on climate change and ecosystems.

 

[Funky_monks]

And that's a perfectly sound position. I don't think that cruelty is necessarily inherent to the eating of flesh, but I think it's possible to have an honest disagreement over that.

It's a shame English has this stupid double-vocabulary dating back to feudal times. imo it's better not to switch to Germanic terms to make points about meat-eating. It would be better if we didn't have this dual vocabulary and the words for the animals as living beings and food were the same.

It's just an attempt to make it emotive as an argument.
The Germans quite happily use "fleisch" (as would English people at one point "meat" being food generally). See also the Welsh "cig".

There's an awful lot of anthropomorphism going on. Nature is not a Disney film.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's just an attempt to make it emotive as an argument.

Yes, that's why it's best avoided. Different argument, but many people celebrate English's dual vocabulary. I think it just gets in the way of clear communication. Be better off without it.