slug.com slug.com

8 6

Satellites detect California cow burps, a major methane source, from space. SERIOUSLY? Is this part of our coming food famine? The methane from thawing permafrost is astronomical by comparison but of course NO PEEP about that.
[news.yahoo.com]

toronto_Georgia 8 May 1
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

8 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

There exists land that is unfit for crops but fit for grazing, and it should be harnessed. There is 2.2 times as much grazing land as cropland, and agriculture is 38% of world land.

Land can support more people with wheat than with beef, by a factor of 16. Sugar cane is more efficient
than wheat by a factor of 16.

The choice of crop is decided chiefly by water.

1

Feedstock additives exist that neutralize methane.

Cows are the domestic animal with the most world biomass. Cows are essential to the economy.

Wetlands emit more methane than cows.

Methane has an atmospheric half life of 9 years. It's not a permanent problem.

1

Statistically insignificant.

2

The communists have been going on and on about eating meat for at least the last 35 years. I took a college class on environmental science (I need that science class in order to get my degree). They didn't talk much about live stock emitting methane gas very much at that time; but the subject did come up. Mostly they are against meat eating because the amount of food (meat) we harvest for human consumption is less than the aggregate amount of resources needed to produce the meat in the first place.
The environmentalists (see communists - generally speaking)talk about the size and value of arable land/soil used; the crops grown on that land, the costs associated with that process etc. The upshot of the whole narrative is that we put a LOT more valuable resources into meat production than we get out of it in the form of meat for our own consumption.
The problem of cow farts was only a footnote - or a short addendum to the research on feasibility or cost benefit analysis of eating beef, pork...etc.
The figures are correct. It is true that we put much more into producing meat than we get out of it. But its all based upon a false premise that "we could be feeding x number MORE hungry people if we stopped eating meat here in USA and in all other developed nations.
The whole narrative is designed to imbue guilt and shame upon the "rich white western civilization" eating quite literally "high on the hog" whilst the rest of the world (so called 3rd world) starves for lack of enough food sufficient to prevent their starving. The truth is that there is enough food produced around the globe sufficient that there should be NO ONE dying of starvation or mal-nutrition. The real cause of mass starvation is political - period. That's it; plain and simple and TRUE.
Today we get some chatter about cow farts polluting the air...again a solution looking for a problem!

2

Stop cow fart and save the planet. EAT STEAK.

3

Facts are irrelevant.

4

LOL Sanity4Sweden made a comment about the cow burps the other day and a mask to capture the gas made in Britain.[rumble.com]

He's right on the farting. Note, however MASK. Let's just MASK every living creature to show our dominance over them. Gotta keep them obedient. As to Charles investing, he never was that smart even as a young man we knew he was somewhat short on brainpower. Nobless Oblige gone terribly wrong. When you've never had to earn a living you sure have plenty of time to analyze the peasants.

@toronto_Georgia my 1st thought was the WW1 mustard gas masks for horses lol

2

Doesn’t fit the narrative…

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:334983
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.