Only that we waste a ton of space that we could grow crops for humans to eat instead of feeding it to animals and wasting 90% of the energy. So saying 8 billion people need a lot of food while arguing for animal agriculture is very contradicting.
Not even talking about all the greenhouse gases and the way we treat animals.
Maybe you should engage with some of the arguments these pretentious, condescending jerks are having because your comment has the same energy but none of the arguments.
This is the thing - all you need to do is suggest that everyone eating less meat would be good for the environment, and people like you utterly lose their minds. It’s weird.
That resource and logistics management problem is a direct result of people eating so much meat, the production of which is inherently inefficient for the purposes of feeding people. Of all the resources that we spend on maintaining and growing an animal, we only get back what goes into growing its muscles. The vast majority is wasted in maintaining the animal so that it doesn’t shrivel up and die before slaughter. Scale back meat production and you get a lot more food for a lot less resources, energy and land. You can’t get that efficiency otherwise. It’s precisely about what we eat.
I’m almost impressed by how much completely unsubstantiated ad hominem you managed to cram in there. Personally I couldn’t have guessed any of that from the comment you replied to. But if you wish to be taken seriously, maybe focus instead on the actual arguments next time.
I don’t think that anyone in this chain of replies has argued for flat out ending all animal meat production. Sure, plenty of vegans are motivated primarily by animal ethics and thus want to categorically ban growing animals for food, but here almost everyone seems to be talking about the sustainability aspect of modern mass animal agriculture, myself included. Although less ethical scruples is a welcome byproduct in my opinion.
I’ll take lab grown meat seriously when it’s been proven to be financially competetive and most importantly scalable. Technofixes have a bad track record of turning out to be mostly just investor bait. Kinda like all the bullshit high-flying transportation concepts as solutions to problems where just slightly better urban planning and prioritizing public transit, cycling etc. would work wonders.
Plant based food on the other hand has been most of what we have been eating for most of history. It wasn’t that long ago when meat was still considered a relative delicacy, back when scarcity necessitated efficiency. That’s the kind of efficient, sustainable, healthy and local (so logistically simple) food production system we should try to strive for in my opinion.
It seems unlikely that eating lab-grown meat, for example, will be as efficient, in terms of CO2 emissions, as simply being vegan in a reasonable time frame. And it is currently not something that exists in a reasonable scale, so it’s not a “religious zealot view” to advance the current most practical, efficient, and easiest solution.
And some people who are vegan would not necessarily be against lab-grown meat, but it depends on who you ask
So you don‘t have any arguments, then why are you complaining?
This would be the same logical contruction like: „There are rational choices to better the killing of kids, but I won‘t tell you, because you have to do your own research. My viewpoint is universally right, because I say so.“
It is interestingly funny to read something you are trying to attach to me, but instead is applying more to your messages.
I don‘t know how much hate you need to compensate conitive dissonance, but I wish you the best.
It is really telling how YOU tell ME what i believe, how I feel and how there is no sense in talking to me.
Who really is the fanatic?
I really think you are just upset about all the downvotes (when i engaged there were none btw). Not my fault and i do not hate you or other people simply because they continue doing what they grew up with. I can however hate animal cruelty and i can call out bs when i see it.
Exactly. Vegans promote a false dichotomy due to their religious fanaticism, intentionally ignoring all of the ways we can already mitigate the vast majority of the problems of meat production through legislation and existing technology.
At the end of the day they’re functionally equivalent to anti-abortion activists, pushing an extremist, arbitrary view of which lives humans are or are not allowed to end.
Equating people not being all good with the mass suffering and slaughter of sentient beings with religious fanaticism sure is a take, sure is interesting how hot it is it is so many places though wonder what a big cause of that might be?
Blindly promoting the false dichotomy just like I mentioned, ignoring all of the research on the ways that technology and legislation can reduce the vast majority of the effects mentioned in the data you cite, while also clearly revealing your religious, dogmatic reasons for ignoring all of that research in the first sentence of your non sequitur screed.
Just like my crazy aunt in her anti-abortion Facebook rants. But do you have the self-awareness to realize that?
So, I do get where you are coming from - but there are some things to consider. Firstly: while domestication and animal husbandry are pretty old, factory farming and such is very recent and has given everything a pretty new touch. While I think it’s still valid to bring up as an argument, “X has existed as a pillar of our life for thousands of years” is usually not a great argument in and of itself, the same could easily be used to argue for slavery and a lot of other fucked up shit in history.
Besides that, there is sustainability. Yes grass-fed cattle can actually be sustainable, and allow for utilising land that is otherwise not usable to produce food. Also there is plant matter and “waste” from farming and food production more broadly, that can be utilised in feeding livestock sustainably, which would otherwise be composted anyway (and in some cases, gets pre-composted pretty well by said animals). So, yes, there are ways to produce meat and other animal-derived products sustainably … but that is usually a bit of a cop-out, trying to divert attention from how the vast, vast majority of meat production is not sustainable in mostly water and CO2 numbers.
Personally speaking, I am also not vegan and not an animal rights activist - but claiming it is simply a continuation does miss some aspects.
Dude… you are literally claiming A) that I am vegan when I explicitly wrote that I am not, and B) that I am “not open to alternatives”, when I myself mentioned two aspects concerning how animal raising can be done sustainably, only that that is not what our current system favours due to reasons of maximising profitability.
This subject is very clearly a sore point for you. It might behove you to figure out why that is, rather than spontaneously attacking people that are essentially siding with you.
I mean, if you want to give livestock better living conditions, then you also must pay obviously more. This would reduce your consumption on meat, if you don‘t want to pay more. That‘s why I’m asking.
The amount of available meat to buy would also be reduced, because if livestock gets more room and freedom to live, there would be less livestock inside the farms and therefore less meat in the stores.
Factory farming has never been done sustainably. Give an example if you disagree. Or are you one of those homesteader guys who thinks he can raise two cows and four sheep on an acre alongside your field of corn and miniature orchard?
Just because things are the way they have been for ages, does not mean they are correct.
It is a brutal, awful practice and completely unnecessary.
I am not being condescending or pretentious when I say these things. I understand that it is very, very hard to alter what you’ve done your entire life, and harder still to see the issues with those things.
Those 8bn humans could be sustained by a fraction of the environmental impact, suffering to life, and land usage if they were on a plant based diet.
Something I pretty much never see pointed out is that we don’t need billions of humans. Our governments keep encouraging us to have children, but they should be working to end the culture of pressuring people (especially women) into having children because they’re somehow incomplete without them. There should be more programs offering access to birth control and family counseling services. This endless and meaningless growth is as harmful to us as it is to the rest of our planet.
Our economic systems only work with infinite growth because otherwise what would be the point of lending money if it won’t grow interest. It’s essentially a giant pyramid scheme. And that requires new blood to provide labour and consumers. This is incredibly dumb on a finite planet with limited resources, but that’s mainstream economics for you.
Also if the population shrinks too fast, then the pyramid becomes unstable with not enough younger people to take care of all the old people (while also maintaining the economy).
This is clearly a sensitive topic for you, so believe me when I say that I’m only talking about myself here. Yes, humans have included meat in their diets for thousands of years, but the recent changes that I feel shift the paradigm are: the scope and scale of industrial farming, the brutal conditions animals now face, and the fact that we have a good enough concept of human dietary requirements that people can finally make the choice to remove animal products from their diets in a healthy way.
Removed by mod
Only that we waste a ton of space that we could grow crops for humans to eat instead of feeding it to animals and wasting 90% of the energy. So saying 8 billion people need a lot of food while arguing for animal agriculture is very contradicting. Not even talking about all the greenhouse gases and the way we treat animals.
Maybe you should engage with some of the arguments these pretentious, condescending jerks are having because your comment has the same energy but none of the arguments.
yup we need to eat food. It does not have to be meat centric or involve meat.
Removed by mod
This is the thing - all you need to do is suggest that everyone eating less meat would be good for the environment, and people like you utterly lose their minds. It’s weird.
That resource and logistics management problem is a direct result of people eating so much meat, the production of which is inherently inefficient for the purposes of feeding people. Of all the resources that we spend on maintaining and growing an animal, we only get back what goes into growing its muscles. The vast majority is wasted in maintaining the animal so that it doesn’t shrivel up and die before slaughter. Scale back meat production and you get a lot more food for a lot less resources, energy and land. You can’t get that efficiency otherwise. It’s precisely about what we eat.
I’m almost impressed by how much completely unsubstantiated ad hominem you managed to cram in there. Personally I couldn’t have guessed any of that from the comment you replied to. But if you wish to be taken seriously, maybe focus instead on the actual arguments next time.
Removed by mod
I don’t think that anyone in this chain of replies has argued for flat out ending all animal meat production. Sure, plenty of vegans are motivated primarily by animal ethics and thus want to categorically ban growing animals for food, but here almost everyone seems to be talking about the sustainability aspect of modern mass animal agriculture, myself included. Although less ethical scruples is a welcome byproduct in my opinion.
I’ll take lab grown meat seriously when it’s been proven to be financially competetive and most importantly scalable. Technofixes have a bad track record of turning out to be mostly just investor bait. Kinda like all the bullshit high-flying transportation concepts as solutions to problems where just slightly better urban planning and prioritizing public transit, cycling etc. would work wonders.
Plant based food on the other hand has been most of what we have been eating for most of history. It wasn’t that long ago when meat was still considered a relative delicacy, back when scarcity necessitated efficiency. That’s the kind of efficient, sustainable, healthy and local (so logistically simple) food production system we should try to strive for in my opinion.
It isn’t a zealot view to want to cause less suffering. When you have a choice to not eat meat and you choose to eat meat you’re the problem.
Removed by mod
It seems unlikely that eating lab-grown meat, for example, will be as efficient, in terms of CO2 emissions, as simply being vegan in a reasonable time frame. And it is currently not something that exists in a reasonable scale, so it’s not a “religious zealot view” to advance the current most practical, efficient, and easiest solution.
And some people who are vegan would not necessarily be against lab-grown meat, but it depends on who you ask
Go reread their comment and try to find where they are being rude. Your second paragraph is just an odd projection.
What are these “rational choices” you are speaking of?
Removed by mod
So you don‘t have any arguments, then why are you complaining?
This would be the same logical contruction like: „There are rational choices to better the killing of kids, but I won‘t tell you, because you have to do your own research. My viewpoint is universally right, because I say so.“
It is interestingly funny to read something you are trying to attach to me, but instead is applying more to your messages.
I don‘t know how much hate you need to compensate conitive dissonance, but I wish you the best.
If you want to check for conginitve dissonance, here is the Wikipedia Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
Removed by mod
What is
5+4?Removed by mod
It is really telling how YOU tell ME what i believe, how I feel and how there is no sense in talking to me. Who really is the fanatic?
I really think you are just upset about all the downvotes (when i engaged there were none btw). Not my fault and i do not hate you or other people simply because they continue doing what they grew up with. I can however hate animal cruelty and i can call out bs when i see it.
Removed by mod
I am grateful to have witnessed a dying breed
your* religious food…
Comment disregarded due to spelling error.
Try again.
Exactly. Vegans promote a false dichotomy due to their religious fanaticism, intentionally ignoring all of the ways we can already mitigate the vast majority of the problems of meat production through legislation and existing technology.
At the end of the day they’re functionally equivalent to anti-abortion activists, pushing an extremist, arbitrary view of which lives humans are or are not allowed to end.
Equating people not being all good with the mass suffering and slaughter of sentient beings with religious fanaticism sure is a take, sure is interesting how hot it is it is so many places though wonder what a big cause of that might be?
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4372775/ - keep on with your god given right to boil the planet though!
Blindly promoting the false dichotomy just like I mentioned, ignoring all of the research on the ways that technology and legislation can reduce the vast majority of the effects mentioned in the data you cite, while also clearly revealing your religious, dogmatic reasons for ignoring all of that research in the first sentence of your non sequitur screed.
Just like my crazy aunt in her anti-abortion Facebook rants. But do you have the self-awareness to realize that?
Nope.
Watch you don’t eat too much of your false dichotomy, you gotta leave room in your stomach for all that animal slurry :)
Don’t worry, I always leave plenty of room for my animal slurry. ^_^
So, I do get where you are coming from - but there are some things to consider. Firstly: while domestication and animal husbandry are pretty old, factory farming and such is very recent and has given everything a pretty new touch. While I think it’s still valid to bring up as an argument, “X has existed as a pillar of our life for thousands of years” is usually not a great argument in and of itself, the same could easily be used to argue for slavery and a lot of other fucked up shit in history.
Besides that, there is sustainability. Yes grass-fed cattle can actually be sustainable, and allow for utilising land that is otherwise not usable to produce food. Also there is plant matter and “waste” from farming and food production more broadly, that can be utilised in feeding livestock sustainably, which would otherwise be composted anyway (and in some cases, gets pre-composted pretty well by said animals). So, yes, there are ways to produce meat and other animal-derived products sustainably … but that is usually a bit of a cop-out, trying to divert attention from how the vast, vast majority of meat production is not sustainable in mostly water and CO2 numbers.
Personally speaking, I am also not vegan and not an animal rights activist - but claiming it is simply a continuation does miss some aspects.
Removed by mod
Dude… you are literally claiming A) that I am vegan when I explicitly wrote that I am not, and B) that I am “not open to alternatives”, when I myself mentioned two aspects concerning how animal raising can be done sustainably, only that that is not what our current system favours due to reasons of maximising profitability.
This subject is very clearly a sore point for you. It might behove you to figure out why that is, rather than spontaneously attacking people that are essentially siding with you.
Removed by mod
You keep thinking these people have this as a religious view when they have told you they are not vegans.
Are you willing to reduce your consumption on meat to better all these negative things of traditional livestock farming, which you mentioned?
Removed by mod
I mean, if you want to give livestock better living conditions, then you also must pay obviously more. This would reduce your consumption on meat, if you don‘t want to pay more. That‘s why I’m asking.
The amount of available meat to buy would also be reduced, because if livestock gets more room and freedom to live, there would be less livestock inside the farms and therefore less meat in the stores.
Removed by mod
I’m sorry, but you wrote your comment only one day ago, so it didn’t took me two days.
I don’t know If I can still assume that you are a rational being. So I wish you the best.
Removed by mod
Factory farming has never been done sustainably. Give an example if you disagree. Or are you one of those homesteader guys who thinks he can raise two cows and four sheep on an acre alongside your field of corn and miniature orchard?
deleted by creator
Just because things are the way they have been for ages, does not mean they are correct.
It is a brutal, awful practice and completely unnecessary.
I am not being condescending or pretentious when I say these things. I understand that it is very, very hard to alter what you’ve done your entire life, and harder still to see the issues with those things.
Those 8bn humans could be sustained by a fraction of the environmental impact, suffering to life, and land usage if they were on a plant based diet.
Removed by mod
Excellent retort. Please share more of your insight.
Human population needed to be fed 10+k years ago:
> 1,000,000vs now
10,000,000,000Which just means it has never been the way it is now. Those two numbers on a finite planet are represented by the pic perfectly.
Something I pretty much never see pointed out is that we don’t need billions of humans. Our governments keep encouraging us to have children, but they should be working to end the culture of pressuring people (especially women) into having children because they’re somehow incomplete without them. There should be more programs offering access to birth control and family counseling services. This endless and meaningless growth is as harmful to us as it is to the rest of our planet.
Removed by mod
Our economic systems only work with infinite growth because otherwise what would be the point of lending money if it won’t grow interest. It’s essentially a giant pyramid scheme. And that requires new blood to provide labour and consumers. This is incredibly dumb on a finite planet with limited resources, but that’s mainstream economics for you.
Also if the population shrinks too fast, then the pyramid becomes unstable with not enough younger people to take care of all the old people (while also maintaining the economy).
people need to eat, but do they need to eat THAT?
Its not as easy to go eat the wild ones, and people frown at eating from the human population. Those are all the options in the graphic.
well damn, i guess ill have to eat a shoe since there’s only a picture of a shoe in my pantry
Good luck! Some of the soles can be a real challenging chew.
Or I guess if you want to be extra literal you could eat the picture?
Thanks for saving cows, chicken, and pigs from extinction.
This is clearly a sensitive topic for you, so believe me when I say that I’m only talking about myself here. Yes, humans have included meat in their diets for thousands of years, but the recent changes that I feel shift the paradigm are: the scope and scale of industrial farming, the brutal conditions animals now face, and the fact that we have a good enough concept of human dietary requirements that people can finally make the choice to remove animal products from their diets in a healthy way.
Removed by mod
I’d love to hear what I’ve specifically said that’s bullshit.
Removed by mod