Cowspiracy: The Astonishing Hypocrisy of Climate Alarmists

On belching you mean.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The need for most of which has never existed - unless agribusiness profits are classified as a "need". Which they are, quite often, for some reason, but not here.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Point of order:
SciFo members have been infracted for posting videos without supplying their own arguments. Videos a lot shorter than an hour and a half, too.

You can refer to the video, but you are the thread starter. It's your case to make.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

OK then. It might be better to arrange a concise thesis in the OP than just post over an hour long video.


:EDIT:

I didn't get to see Dave's post...

 

Most certainly, AGResearch is more credible than a pirated denier video that keeps getting pulled for copyright violations.

 

In what way is the video a denier video? Why aren't you listening to our resident expert on cow flatulence?

 

Well, now it's just snow.

 

The thesis of the documentary is stated in under a minute, starting at the 4 minute mark.

 

29 November 2006 – Cattle-rearing generates more global warming greenhouse gases, as measured in CO2 equivalent, than transportation, and smarter production methods, including improved animal diets to reduce enteric fermentation and consequent methane emissions, are urgently needed, according to a new United Nations report released today.

“Livestock are one of the most significant contributors to today’s most serious environmental problems,” senior UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) official Henning Steinfeld said. “Urgent action is required to remedy the situation.”

Cattle-rearing is also a major source of land and water degradation, according to the FAO report, Livestock’s Long Shadow–Environmental Issues and Options, of which Mr. Steinfeld is the senior author.

Source: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?newsID=20772#.WF6OLn0XfUI

The astonishing hypocrisy is that virtually all climate alarmists refuse to mention the most obvious solution: Governments worldwide should be promoting plant-based diets and hefty taxes on meat consumption.

 

Shouldn't this be in the Breaking Moos section?

 

The most appropriate section would be one dedicated to true science breaking taboos.

 

In my casual, undocumented reading of climate alarmists I have found that most, possibly all, have been equally critical of our intensive farming methods, meat eating and cattle rearing. Hence, no hypocrisy. Case closed.

However, if you apply the term alarmist to anyone who accepts AGW then you are just a dangerous fool. Case closed.

Do you see the pattern?

 

I'm all for promoting plant-based diets (although since I am not in favor of powerful, authoritarian governments, I don't think taxing people is the way to accomplish that, for several reasons.)

 

<---------belches one helluva lot more'n 'e farts.

It seems as though all decomposition of primary producers produces methane. When the process is anaerobic, more seems to be produced, whether in a swamp or some soils or an herbivore's gut.

(eat your spinach and beans)
(blazing saddles anyone?)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

It's not hypocrisy. Climate activists, which I assume you agree with, since you brought this livestock matter to our attention, support any measures to reduce greenhouse gasses, including methane. Meat happens to be a life-sustaining issue, and taking any measure that might result in more difficult access to meat is political suicide, and a class issue. The nature of these issues are very different, even if they seem to fall under the same category. The government does in fact promote eating more plants.
https://www.choosemyplate.gov/start-small-changes

 

Well said.

 

If you're not for wise government and the rule of law, then you're for anarchy. Right now, the environmentally catastrophic meat, dairy and egg industry are heavily subsidized by taxpayers, which is the exact opposite of what justice demands. Justice requires that polluters should be paying damages to repair the environment that they are destroying. What you're really advocating is Ayn Randism, which is rightly labeled the first demon's message. http://truthinverity.org/three-angels-messages/

 

If you believe that, then you need to watch the Cowspiracy documentary for an eyeopening experience.