Meat eaters are destroying the planet, warns WWF report

[Larry Noppius]

I was actually thinking of locally grown poultry (my parents had chickens) but even if the example of tofu was badly chosen, the main point still stands though about the oversimplification of the "meat bad, veggies good" position.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

LBJ doesn't do links (in the main) just prattles on like they know and with "authority" on loads of threads, including the covid ones worryingly

You're a nasty fucker, aren't you? A pointless, nasty fucker.

 

[Spymaster]

You're a nasty fucker, aren't you? A pointless, nasty fucker.

But more than anything else, just wrong. The biggest bullshitter on the boards bar none.

 

[ddraig]

You're a nasty fucker, aren't you? A pointless, nasty fucker.

What's nasty and pointless about my observation? I'm not the only one who has noticed either

 

[Funky_monks]

I was actually thinking of locally grown poultry (my parents had chickens) but even if the example of tofu was badly chosen, the main point still stands though about the oversimplification of the "meat bad, veggies good" position.

I sometimes think that part of the problem with pig and poultry is that they are very far removed now from the situations in which they were domesticated and remained for aeons - as a very useful, decentralised converter of (mostly) waste into food.

Of course, this was not without it's own problems, disease being one.

 

[8ball]

A minor point but outside of a packed lunch I doubt much tofu or even soy is flown anywhere. Road, rail or freight is a far more likely means of transport. Research has shown that emissions from meat produced locally even is worse than most other types of food produced elsewhere as long as it is not flown.

Yeah, there was something earlier about food going about in massive ships and I kind of thought that seems likely a tiny part of the impact, even with that dirty fuel they use.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I was asked a direct question and answered it, and I see little in this poster's position to suggest he thinks otherwise. And you've completely misunderstood the meaning of that emoji.

Getting a lecture about posting etiquette is a bit rich coming from you too, seeing as you just completely ignored the long list of studies that rebutted your claim that I'd made a 'mis-statement of what the science says.' The science backs up exactly what I said.

You didn't actually do us the courtesy of quoting from any of those links, though, did you? I read the headlines, cos that's all you provided.

I know you think this is a petty distinction, but it is this lack of rigour that led you to give the thread its inflammatory title in the first place. And it is a bit rich of you to bang on about how meat eaters are ruining this thread given the title you gave it.

 

[Larry Noppius]

Yeah, there was something earlier about food going about in massive ships and I kind of thought that seems likely a tiny part of the impact, even with that dirty fuel they use.

Ships don't, planes do. But yes, the tofu might have been a bad example (I thought, apparently incorrectly, that it was a food which gets flown a lot). More generally, it's not as simple as "meat bad, veggies good" due to numerous other factors as well.

 

[Poot]

What emissions though?
Methane from ruminants is a massive red herring.

In what way?

 

[Funky_monks]

In what way?

The methane cycle is a natural cycle, methane is very short lived. It is released by ruminants, of course but ever has it been thus, given that their are fewer ruminants on the planet than at any time in history (due mostly to the eradication of wild ruminants and their habitat - see: bison, both European and American) and the increasing efficiency in dairying especially leading to a global drop in cattle numbers.
Incidentally, if farmed ruminants are removed, but the habitat is unchanged, wild ruminants simply take their place. See: deer in southern England.

 

[Larry Noppius]

And it is a bit rich of you to bang on about how meat eaters are ruining this thread given the title you gave it.

I wonder how he'd respond to someone creating a thread titled "Vegans are destroying class consciousness"

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I wonder how he'd respond to someone creating a thread titled "Vegans are destroying class consciousness"

It's all rather odd. Somehow, according to two posters at least, meat eaters are ruining this thread, yet the thread is very specifically about eating meat. We are here to be spoken about, not to speak, evidently. And to be apologetic and remorseful. And to promise to do better.

 

[WouldBe]

Fucking hell, will you stop it with the 'vegigans'? It's not even a word!

What the fuck is this 'vegigans' nonsense?

I've explained it before it's my abbreviation of vegitarian / vegan. It's not hard to work out. It doesn't matter one jot to me whether you're a vegetarian or a vegan or a piscatarian or a fruitarian or however people want to define themselves. So perhaps instead of having hissy fits perhaps you could enlighten me as to what the preferred collective term is for non meat eaters?

Oh, and could you produce some credible science to back up your claim that eating more meat is some kind of practical solution? Thanks.

So your going to ignore evidence from Funky_monks, who works in this field, that livestock produces less GHG than crops?

Can you also not see the at the end of my quote either?

 

[8ball]

More generally, it's not as simple as "meat bad, veggies good" due to numerous other factors as well.

Or as simple as "faraway bad, nearby good", it seems.

 

[Funky_monks]

I've explained it before it's my abbreviation of vegitarian / vegan. It's not hard to work out. It doesn't matter one jot to me whether you're a vegetarian or a vegan or a piscatarian or a fruitarian or however people want to define themselves. So perhaps instead of having hissy fits perhaps you could enlighten me as to what the preferred collective term is for non meat eaters?


So your going to ignore evidence from Funky_monks, who works in this field, that livestock produces less GHG than crops?

Can you also not see the at the end of my quote either?

You don't actually need to believe me, the figures are readily accessible.

 

[Poot]

I've explained it before it's my abbreviation of vegitarian / vegan. It's not hard to work out. It doesn't matter one jot to me whether you're a vegetarian or a vegan or a piscatarian or a fruitarian or however people want to define themselves. So perhaps instead of having hissy fits perhaps you could enlighten me as to what the preferred collective term is for non meat eaters?

You don't need a word. Stop trying to fit people into categories. It's unhelpful and doesn't aid discussion.

 

[8ball]

Stop trying to fit people into categories.

People like categories. Some will eagerly tell you which one they are in within moments of meeting them.

 

[editor]

You didn't actually do us the courtesy of quoting from any of those links, though, did you? I read the headlines, cos that's all you provided.

I know you think this is a petty distinction, but it is this lack of rigour that led you to give the thread its inflammatory title in the first place. And it is a bit rich of you to bang on about how meat eaters are ruining this thread given the title you gave it.

That's because just about all of them have ready been discussed at some considerable length over the duration of this thread and I don't feel inclined to repeat myself all over again.

 

[Larry Noppius]

It's all rather odd. Somehow, according to two posters at least, meat eaters are ruining this thread, yet the thread is very specifically about eating meat. We are here to be spoken about, not to speak, evidently. And to be apologetic and remorseful. And to promise to do better.

For how dare we not sacrifice ourselves, by conforming to their fad diet, on the altar of their covetous and slimy church?!

I am genuinely curious whether editor would have removed the thread, banned the op, or otherwise have employed his administrator powers in such situation though.

 

[editor]

I wonder how he'd respond to someone creating a thread titled "Vegans are destroying class consciousness"

1. I didn't make up the title. It was from the newspaper.
2. What the fuck are you on about?

 

[Spymaster]

People like categories. Some will eagerly tell you which one they are in within moments of meeting them.

 

[editor]

For how dare we not sacrifice ourselves, by conforming to their fad diet, on the altar of their covetous and slimy church?!

I am genuinely curious whether editor would have removed the thread, banned the op, or otherwise have employed his administrator powers in such situation though.

My, aren't you the chopsy one? So full of opinions about me! And only here a short while too.!

For the record, I'm not in the habit of randomly removing threads about current newspaper articles or respected reports, and if I suddenly started on such arbitrary behaviour, the other mods would soon reign me in.

 

[Poot]

So your going to ignore evidence from Funky_monks, who works in this field, that livestock produces less GHG than crops?

You've not taken in anything that was said the last time you made this claim. It's very frustrating.

 

[Larry Noppius]

Or as simple as "faraway bad, nearby good", it seems.

Obviously.

 

[WouldBe]

You've not taken in anything that was said the last time you made this claim. It's very frustrating.

Probably because I'm not gullible.

 

[Larry Noppius]

1. I didn't make up the title. It was from the newspaper.

The fact that someone else made it up in no way makes it any better, it was also your choice to title your thread in the way you did.

2. What the fuck are you on about?

For starters, even if we accept all your claims on the underlying science, the thread would be more accurately about "Meat producers are destroying the planet."

 

[ddraig]

For how dare we not sacrifice ourselves, by conforming to their fad diet, on the altar of their covetous and slimy church?!

I am genuinely curious whether editor would have removed the thread, banned the op, or otherwise have employed his administrator powers in such situation though.

How is not eating meat a "fad diet"?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Probably because I'm not gullible.

The point Poot made is a valid one. A lot of crops around the world are grown to feed to livestock. While cows grazing in a field may not be so destructive, cows locked up in a barn eating soya or corn grown in a field is.

This article is from a few years ago, but sums up the problem in Argentina. It's a very recent and very destructive change there, and one that somehow needs to be reversed. The cause? The workings of capitalism of course - an economy being whipped by international finance.

 

[8ball]

For starters, even if we accept all your claims on the underlying science, the thread would be more accurately about "Meat producers are destroying the planet."

I'm not too sure that works either. It might have been an appropriate description if used about Soviet Russia.

 

[editor]

The fact that someone else made it up in no way makes it any better, it was also your choice to title your thread in the way you did.



For starters, even if we accept all your claims on the underlying science, the thread would be more accurately about "Meat producers are destroying the planet."

Oh, so now you think you can give me a lecture on how to 'correctly' title a thread? The title is just fine, thanks, and very accurately reflects the article it is referencing.