Become vegetarian and save the planet!!! and all the rest of that BS. Latest fear porn continues.

[jack121]

 

As governments drag their feet over the fictional disease of climate change, people are looking for actions they can take — and eating more bland and boring veggies is a place the UN wants us all to start.

 

 

The UN claim that animals account for about 14.5 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, more than all the world’s cars and trucks combined, and that the world will be eating 14 percent more meat by 2030. That means more demand for pasture and feed crops, more deforestation and more climate problems, which means giving up meat altogether can seem like the only option to saving the world. No more burgers, no more curries, no more pizza, it's all about the veg now. Veg and more veg. Veg you to death.

 

 

 

One reason for troublesome meat’s side effect is that it’s more efficient for people to eat plants directly than to feed them to livestock. Chickens need 2 pounds of feed to produce each pound of weight gain, pigs need 3 to 5 pounds, and cattle need 6 to 10 — and a lot of that weight gain is bones, skin and guts, not meat. As a result, about 40 percent of the world’s land is now used to grow animal feed, with all the costs such as  deforestation, water use, fertilizer runoff, pesticides and fossil fuel use as a consequence.

Peeps in rich countries would have to get used to eating much less meat, that is unless they are royal, politicians, or wef members. If no crops were fed to livestock the world could only make enough for a three-ounce piece of meat or cheese each day. By comparison, the average North American now chows down on about 70 grams of animal protein a day — well above their UN declared protein requirement — and the average European on 51. 

 

 

 

That’s a reduction in meat — but it would bring environmental benefits. Because livestock would no longer eat crops, the world would need about a quarter less cropland than it uses today. That surplus cropland could be allowed to regrow into forest or other natural habitat, benefitting both biodiversity and getting rid of all that pesky carbon.

The gut microbes that let grazing animals digest grasses release methane farts in the process — and methane farts are a potent and deadly greenhouse gas. Methane from animals accounts for about 40 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions. Animal scientists are working on ways to reduce the amount of deadly methane produced by grazers, it remains a serious problem.  The UN suggests eating more testosterone reducing, wimpifying, limp veg is the only way forward.

 

 

 

Completely eliminating livestock, for example, would allow some of the land now devoted to feed crops and pastures to revert to native vegetation. Over 25 to 30 years of regrowth, this would tie up enough CO₂ to reverse the global warming challenge. Add to that the rapid reduction in smelly methane no longer emitted by mischevious livestock, and the gains become even more attractive, to the upper class snobs.

Tedros states: “We need to be moving in the opposite direction than we are now. The things that are aggressive, experimental, bold policies — not ones that try to slightly reduce meat consumption by only 50 percent or so.”

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2022 by jack121

[Grumpy Owl]

I keep seeing this on the Birmingham Mail homepage, and will likely be on other Reach-controlled 'news' sites.

 

 

Two highly dubious claims there, "save cash" - how come these 'plant-based' burgers are more expensive than actual 'meat-based' ones?

 

   

 

In theory, without the associated costs of rearing livestock, this plant-based rubbish should be much cheaper, but it isn't, so that tells me this is all part of a massive scam.

[jack121]

20 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

I keep seeing this on the Birmingham Mail homepage, and will likely be on other Reach-controlled 'news' sites.

 

 

Two highly dubious claims there, "save cash" - how come these 'plant-based' burgers are more expensive than actual 'meat-based' ones?

 

   

 

In theory, without the associated costs of rearing livestock, this plant-based rubbish should be much cheaper, but it isn't, so that tells me this is all part of a massive scam.

 

Then there's always the steroid cocktails and dangerous drugs they inject the cattle with, fuck knows what effect that has on the human body. Then all the pesticides, dna tampered genetically modified crap, irrigation with fluoride water, they do to the vegetables.

That's why nowadays more peeps are ill now than at any other time in this country's history. Despite this supposed high tech world we live where everything is better, more modern, faster, cutting edge, advanced, and then by some strange inexplicable contradiction the nhs concentration camps are recording more peeps are dropping dead of heart attacks strokes parkinsons disease cancer, than at any other time, even going back to the time before we had any kind of rudimentary medicines. And it's all deliberatly being done, more money for the pharma whores, more fear porn for the tv, more money for the mr 10%'s of the world IE the lying politicians. People die, and the upper class get rich off it.

 

 

 

[Human10]

On 10/8/2022 at 8:46 AM, jack121 said:

 

As governments drag their feet over the fictional disease of climate change, people are looking for actions they can take — and eating more bland and boring veggies is a place the UN wants us all to start.

 

 

The UN claim that animals account for about 14.5 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, more than all the world’s cars and trucks combined, and that the world will be eating 14 percent more meat by 2030. That means more demand for pasture and feed crops, more deforestation and more climate problems, which means giving up meat altogether can seem like the only option to saving the world. No more burgers, no more curries, no more pizza, it's all about the veg now. Veg and more veg. Veg you to death.

 

 

 

One reason for troublesome meat’s side effect is that it’s more efficient for people to eat plants directly than to feed them to livestock. Chickens need 2 pounds of feed to produce each pound of weight gain, pigs need 3 to 5 pounds, and cattle need 6 to 10 — and a lot of that weight gain is bones, skin and guts, not meat. As a result, about 40 percent of the world’s land is now used to grow animal feed, with all the costs such as  deforestation, water use, fertilizer runoff, pesticides and fossil fuel use as a consequence.

Peeps in rich countries would have to get used to eating much less meat, that is unless they are royal, politicians, or wef members. If no crops were fed to livestock the world could only make enough for a three-ounce piece of meat or cheese each day. By comparison, the average North American now chows down on about 70 grams of animal protein a day — well above their UN declared protein requirement — and the average European on 51. 

 

 

 

That’s a reduction in meat — but it would bring environmental benefits. Because livestock would no longer eat crops, the world would need about a quarter less cropland than it uses today. That surplus cropland could be allowed to regrow into forest or other natural habitat, benefitting both biodiversity and getting rid of all that pesky carbon.

The gut microbes that let grazing animals digest grasses release methane farts in the process — and methane farts are a potent and deadly greenhouse gas. Methane from animals accounts for about 40 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions. Animal scientists are working on ways to reduce the amount of deadly methane produced by grazers, it remains a serious problem.  The UN suggests eating more testosterone reducing, wimpifying, limp veg is the only way forward.

 

 

 

Completely eliminating livestock, for example, would allow some of the land now devoted to feed crops and pastures to revert to native vegetation. Over 25 to 30 years of regrowth, this would tie up enough CO₂ to reverse the global warming challenge. Add to that the rapid reduction in smelly methane no longer emitted by mischevious livestock, and the gains become even more attractive, to the upper class snobs.

Tedros states: “We need to be moving in the opposite direction than we are now. The things that are aggressive, experimental, bold policies — not ones that try to slightly reduce meat consumption by only 50 percent or so.”

 

 

 

And eliminating elites would solve climate crisis... 

[jack121]

21 hours ago, Human10 said:

And eliminating elites would solve climate crisis... 

 

Yep! With their 100 bedroom palaces and castles, with a dozen cars in the garage, and they're always disappearing off on luxurious expensive holiday whenver they feel like. One royal probably consumes the resources similar to hundreds of working class people. Look at the jubilee that cost you 2 billion pounds ! !

[Nemuri Kyoshiro]

For starters, I don't believe a word the UN says. As @jack121points out, it's the top 1% that consume resources way out of proportion to what they actually need. The UN is unelected, just like the WEF and all the rest of the NGOs that proliferate like cockroaches to determine how the rest of us should live. And what are these theories based on? Facts? Studies? Like hell they are; they are based on computer models cooked up in Imperial College by vermin like that Ferguson creature and his bolshie mates. I seriously doubt they are living on plant burgers.

 

 

[northern star]

As with everything, this well meaning venture has been hijacked by the demonic deep state/woke/fake Green agenda.

 

Absolutely nothing wrong with being vegetarian or vegan, most of us dont make a loud song and dance about it, its just a personal choice. Probably about a third of India lives on a vegan diet and has done for centuries, mainly out of geographical necessity (too hot to store meat and dairy products), without the word vegan, vegetarian or organic even being used. But the DS wants to cause division and hatred, and they employ their lackeys, the Extinction Rebellion etc, to make it look we are all are total crackpots, and stir up anger by causing massive disruption in the lives of the normal working people. Why dont they disrupt the big business operations if they really want to have an effect? Same with climate change, they could protest outside the Chinese Embassy, the worlds biggest polluter. But nah, that would take balls. Any sudden changes to zero carbon and total reliance on renewables will lead to the end of farming and mass starvation, and people freezing.

 

Mass production of animals for junk food is something which should be urgently addressed on an environmental and health level, let alone a moral one. Maybe caring animal food production is an option, on a less barbaric scale, where people eat less meat and fish and dont deplete resources or cause great unnecessary distress to sentient beings. Thats the issue, not forcing people to give it all up and making them eat dubious plant based synthetic crap and insects.

 

Amazed the Green movement isnt speaking up about this. Its a totally unbalanced and insane approach which is being taken by the so called influencers. These things should be done gradually, literally organically, winning the hearts and minds, educating people into healthier living options which will benefit us all in the future. They are doing the opposite and losing public opinion, which can only backfire and be counter-productive to any genuine grassroots ecological movement.

 

 

 

Edited October 12, 2022 by northern star

[alexa]

They are certainly trying to get their message across, saw this on an advert......

 

 

 

[screamingeagle]

"The planet is fine the people are fucked"

 

just another arogant behaviour from "us"

[alexa]

Meat consumption should be slashed to the equivalent of two burgers a WEEK to avoid a climate crisis, study claims

A new report led by Washington, D.C-based World Resources Institute calls on meat-eating members of the public to do their bit to reduce global warming.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-11355749/Eat-two-burgers-week-save-planet-study-says.html

[webtrekker]

Why not just 'Kill yourself now and save the planet?'

 

 

 

[Tinfoil Hat]

6 hours ago, alexa said:

Meat consumption should be slashed to the equivalent of two burgers a WEEK to avoid a climate crisis, study claims

A new report led by Washington, D.C-based World Resources Institute calls on meat-eating members of the public to do their bit to reduce global warming.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-11355749/Eat-two-burgers-week-save-planet-study-says.html

 

Backed up by then with zero facts, naturally! 

 

They want us stuffed to the rafters with Frankenveg, so that they can giggle at us over their fillet mignon! 

[Nemuri Kyoshiro]

2 hours ago, webtrekker said:

Why not just 'Kill yourself now and save the planet?'

 

 

 

Why not round up the millions of eco-freaks and the filth that funds them and off them instead?

[Grumpy Owl]

Who would have thought you could create mashed potatoes from plants?

 

[dumbcritic]

On 10/9/2022 at 1:27 PM, Grumpy Owl said:

I keep seeing this on the Birmingham Mail homepage, and will likely be on other Reach-controlled 'news' sites.

 

 

Two highly dubious claims there, "save cash" - how come these 'plant-based' burgers are more expensive than actual 'meat-based' ones?

 

   

 

In theory, without the associated costs of rearing livestock, this plant-based rubbish should be much cheaper, but it isn't, so that tells me this is all part of a massive scam.

 

Plant based production is pricier as the products are made on a smaller scale. Also, animal agriculture is massively subsidised, which drives down costs, but that isn't a good thing. 

 

https://www.greenmatters.com/p/prevent-future-pandemics-animal-agriculture-subsidies https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/14/global-farm-subsidies-damage-people-planet-un-climate-crisis-nature-inequality

 

 

Edited October 29, 2022 by dumbcritic

[dumbcritic]

On 10/27/2022 at 12:39 PM, Tinfoil Hat said:

 

Backed up by then with zero facts, naturally! 

 

They want us stuffed to the rafters with Frankenveg, so that they can giggle at us over their fillet mignon! 

 

There is plenty of data, like this https://journals.plos.org/climate/article?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0000010

 

[Tinfoil Hat]

2 minutes ago, dumbcritic said:

 

There is plenty of data, like this https://journals.plos.org/climate/article?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0000010

 

 

Oh, thank you for that. I've seen data previously. Also, data from the scientists who say there's no such thing as a global warming going on & we're more likely to have an ice age in the predictable future, so thanks, but no thanks, and particularly since so much vegetation now is genetically meddled with, as is the land that crops are grown in. All that and the effects on the planet & it's population need to be factored in to any equation.