|
|
Post by patman post on May 22, 2024 11:33:36 GMT
Cereals, fruit and veg for human consumption are already grown in the UK. I'm not suggesting that there should be no livestock or that all meat eating should be banned — just reduced... What are you suggesting Patman , rationing ? Good god man we left that behind in 1954 . What makes you think I'm suggesting rationing? Food follows fads and fashions in the same way as clothes and music... |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on May 22, 2024 11:43:28 GMT
Seems to me that every little helps. I don't see what's wrong in cutting down on Carbon, Methane even Water Vapour and keeping them out of the atmosphere...
My point is this - if animals take carbon from the atmosphere when they eat, and release it back into the atmosphere when they exhale and excrete. How does having a large number of animals increase the carbon in the atmosphere? I've missed any post that's put that point. But if extra animal life wasn't recycling carbon, and the space they were taking up (including that which reared and kept in buildings), was put over to vegetation that needs carbon dioxide, wouldn't that reduce what's in the atmosphere...? |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 22, 2024 12:39:44 GMT
My point is this - if animals take carbon from the atmosphere when they eat, and release it back into the atmosphere when they exhale and excrete. How does having a large number of animals increase the carbon in the atmosphere? I've missed any post that's put that point. But if extra animal life wasn't recycling carbon, and the space they were taking up (including that which reared and kept in buildings), was put over to vegetation that needs carbon dioxide, wouldn't that reduce what's in the atmosphere...? I guess you could make that argument if your intention is to allow the vegetation to grow without limit - ie nobody eats it and the whole earth is covered in 150 foot of forest. Somebody is bound to have a nibble in the end. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 22, 2024 12:43:09 GMT
My point is this - if animals take carbon from the atmosphere when they eat, and release it back into the atmosphere when they exhale and excrete. How does having a large number of animals increase the carbon in the atmosphere? I've missed any post that's put that point. But if extra animal life wasn't recycling carbon, and the space they were taking up (including that which reared and kept in buildings), was put over to vegetation that needs carbon dioxide, wouldn't that reduce what's in the atmosphere...? Growing animal feed quickly needs good levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and the animal feed will remove that as it grows. The methane emitted will break down in a decade or so and is thus part of a short term cycle. We could dramatically reduce methane and CO2 by completely reforming agriculture but after a few years we would be back into a cycle of decomposition and renewal. Perhaps we should be looking to compost heaps as drivers of AGW. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on May 22, 2024 13:09:33 GMT
We can see vegetarianism has been promoted by the radical socialist system for a lot longer than than one knew about climate change. I used to get it myself because I had friends who were brainwashed into being vegetarian. None of them I would regard as having stable minds. One day they freaked out that I had cooked a lamb chop on their grill since a tiny bit of lamb chop might have contaminated their vegetables. That's the kind of people they are. Yes. The arguments for vegetarianism (ie not killing things etc) often differ radically from the real reasons people actually adhere to it. Somebody worried about killing animals is not going to be concerned about 'contamination' From a sociometric perspective it went from vegetarian until vegetarian became commonplace to now where veganism is the new vegetarian, or just lately where we have seen gluten-free appear out of nowhere. The point of gluten is that it provides a concentration of protein as meat does.
I remember in particular the first time I ever met a vegan. I shared a hall of residence flat of 8 students for the first year and in that flat was the first time I ever met a socialist and the first time I ever met a vegan, and also it was one of the first times I'd ever met a feminist. Life in the shires though was bliss before that. Everyone had roast lamb or beef for a Sunday roast, many ran their own firms and earned enough so the lady looked after house and garden.
Later on in life I move to a place where there are loads of vegetarians and vegans, and then what happened was they started following a "raw food" diet. Raw food was the buzzword, but these raw foodists prescribed a diet that was so philosophically correct that townspeople observed in as little as three weeks of starting such a diet that their brains started to malfunction so much above normal mental malfunction for the area that it was notice by the many. The locals though were the opposite. You see the area farms some of Britain's finest beef and lamb, plus dairy products that get shipped to five star hotels in the US. We get this for cheap though. If you go up our high street there is still a sign advertising 'Raw Food available Here', but it is a pet shop! The fad died out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on May 22, 2024 14:26:20 GMT
What are you suggesting Patman , rationing ? Good god man we left that behind in 1954 . What makes you think I'm suggesting rationing? Food follows fads and fashions in the same way as clothes and music... Well you did suggest we should eat less meat just thought that was what was being suggested , how else would you make people eat less meat ? Not sure food follows fads , people eat what they are used to . |
|
