How does Vegatarianism stop global warming?

[Glass_House]

If it ever gets to a stage where eating animals becomes illegal, i'm going to start eating Vegetarians.

Oh good call.

 

[Dys]

Okay, I have no idea if this has been explained yet, so I'm just going to do it.

Yes, it is probably true that you can at least a good part of the global warming if you stop eating meat. This is because of how the food chain works. In each step of the food chain, about 90% of the energy is lost (though the percentage is a bit lower when eating meat). So for meat to give you the same energy that a random wheat or vegetable will, a lot more resources have to be used.

AHA, someone with an opinion based on fact! It had to happen eventually.
Unfortunately that is only true when comparing organic vegitations. Yes a whole lot of energy is lost through meat (~10% of light energy is absorbed by plants, and then a little more than that in each step of the food chain). However, energy being lost isn't necissarly contributing to global warming, as it is largely lost as heat and movement (some is lost as CO2 due to respiration, but not a lot). So, basicially what the 90% energy loss means is that to get the same energy from meat that you would from vegetables/fruits/whatever, the sun has to input a lot more energy.

In real world examples, mass produced vegies use a lot of pesticides, fuel driven machines and land compared to livestock, so in actual fact the effect on the environment is more significant (I won't say global warming because no two 'experts' can agree on the phenomenon, I'll restrict it proven effects that are related to any global warming or greenhouse effect that may or may not be present). Of course eating organic grown fruits/vegies lessens this, but likewise so do organic and free range meats, so really one cannot cut down on their effect on the environment by being a vegitarian, it is simply twisted to look that way by people with an agenda.

 

[Alleged_Alec]

Okay, I have no idea if this has been explained yet, so I'm just going to do it.

Yes, it is probably true that you can at least a good part of the global warming if you stop eating meat. This is because of how the food chain works. In each step of the food chain, about 90% of the energy is lost (though the percentage is a bit lower when eating meat). So for meat to give you the same energy that a random wheat or vegetable will, a lot more resources have to be used.

AHA, someone with an opinion based on fact! It had to happen eventually.
Unfortunately that is only true when comparing organic vegitations. Yes a whole lot of energy is lost through meat (~10% of light energy is absorbed by plants, and then a little more than that in each step of the food chain). However, energy being lost isn't necissarly contributing to global warming, as it is largely lost as heat and movement (some is lost as CO2 due to respiration, but not a lot). So, basicially what the 90% energy loss means is that to get the same energy from meat that you would from vegetables/fruits/whatever, the sun has to input a lot more energy.

In real world examples, mass produced vegies use a lot of pesticides, fuel driven machines and land compared to livestock, so in actual fact the effect on the environment is more significant (I won't say global warming because no two 'experts' can agree on the phenomenon, I'll restrict it proven effects that are related to any global warming or greenhouse effect that may or may not be present). Of course eating organic grown fruits/vegies lessens this, but likewise so do organic and free range meats, so really one cannot cut down on their effect on the environment by being a vegitarian, it is simply twisted to look that way by people with an agenda.

This is true. However, because of how we harvest our vegetables (with huge machines and pesticides and fluff like that) it makes quite a difference. If you feed those vegetations to animals first before eating those, you will need to farm a lot more vegetation for the same amount of energy on our tropic level.

And I don't say that this is the solution for our problems either. However, it would be a step in the right direction if we decreased our consumption of animals.
On a similar note: there are many ways to decrease the amount of pesticides used. For example using natural pesticides (pest eating insects)and shifting crops every harvest.

You're also right that this is just another way for them to propagate their own agenda. However, they do have a point.

 

[skutbag]

'Vegetables/grains are grown on an industrial scale and so this makes them AS damaging to produce as meat'
- Well, no. Because what do you need to grow to feed livestock? I mean, duh.

'Vegetarians are themselves unconvinced of their argument so have to convert everyone else'
- Well, sometimes. I'd like to meet anyone who's so cocky to think "My life is perfect, I wouldn't change a thing, everything I do is good for me and the rest of the world'. We all have doubts, surely? Sorry if some veggies are clubbing you over the head with pictures of factory farmed animals- but if you're so convinced you're doing the right thing then whats the problem? You say 'Yes, that's where my food comes from, and I'm happy with the consequences.' Is it the issue you're angry with, or the person arguing with you?

'Population control is the key'
- Hmmm. It's becoming apparant that there aren't enough resources in the world to support a ballooning human population. But who is going to sign up and be voluntarily sterilized? Anyway, a lot of developed countries have aging populations which suggests that people think it's too much expense to have children: as always, money's the best incentive! Anyway, pop. control is a huge issue on its own and too in depth to start on here.

'Eating meat is the natural way of things'
- As has been noted before: we live in a world of our own design. Okay, so we've been fortunate to evolve into the #1 place on earth- but that's it. We can't blame the cows if it all goes wrong, can we?

 

[Dys]

Okay, I have no idea if this has been explained yet, so I'm just going to do it.

Yes, it is probably true that you can at least a good part of the global warming if you stop eating meat. This is because of how the food chain works. In each step of the food chain, about 90% of the energy is lost (though the percentage is a bit lower when eating meat). So for meat to give you the same energy that a random wheat or vegetable will, a lot more resources have to be used.

AHA, someone with an opinion based on fact! It had to happen eventually.
Unfortunately that is only true when comparing organic vegitations. Yes a whole lot of energy is lost through meat (~10% of light energy is absorbed by plants, and then a little more than that in each step of the food chain). However, energy being lost isn't necissarly contributing to global warming, as it is largely lost as heat and movement (some is lost as CO2 due to respiration, but not a lot). So, basicially what the 90% energy loss means is that to get the same energy from meat that you would from vegetables/fruits/whatever, the sun has to input a lot more energy.

In real world examples, mass produced vegies use a lot of pesticides, fuel driven machines and land compared to livestock, so in actual fact the effect on the environment is more significant (I won't say global warming because no two 'experts' can agree on the phenomenon, I'll restrict it proven effects that are related to any global warming or greenhouse effect that may or may not be present). Of course eating organic grown fruits/vegies lessens this, but likewise so do organic and free range meats, so really one cannot cut down on their effect on the environment by being a vegitarian, it is simply twisted to look that way by people with an agenda.

This is true. However, because of how we harvest our vegetables (with huge machines and pesticides and fluff like that) it makes quite a difference. If you feed those vegetations to animals first before eating those, you will need to farm a lot more vegetation for the same amount of energy on our tropic level.

And I don't say that this is the solution for our problems either. However, it would be a step in the right direction if we decreased our consumption of animals.
On a similar note: there are many ways to decrease the amount of pesticides used. For example using natural pesticides (pest eating insects)and shifting crops every harvest.

You're also right that this is just another way for them to propagate their own agenda. However, they do have a point.

Eh, It can be a good thing if it's organicly grown vegetables/fruits, however livestock don't get fed pesticide reliant foods, they are often grass or grain fed, which is far easier to grow than crops for human consumption, and it is generally a waste of time and money to use pesticides on, so in that regard it isn't really an even playing feild.

If both meat and crops were done organicly, crops would produce less CO2, however the space required compared to free range meats (especially small animals like chickens or fish) would be astronomical, as would the price (organic fruit and veg is very expensive relative to other foods). Really their is no environmental benifet to being a vegitarian over conscienscous omnivore (or carnivore if you really hate your body), it can be an improvement over what a lot of people do, but they could just as easily make similar improvements without cutting meats out of their diet completely (although even I can't try and claim that larger animals, specificially beef, are comparable in terms of environmental friendlyness in ideal situations).

It bothers me that people tend to think of this as a black and white, right and wrong issue, it's refreshing to debate with someone who is willing to consider both facts and logic without retreating to the safety of unrealistic, steriotypical beleifs. In short, the kind of vegitarian that most people are is no better for the environment, planet or animals (I'll spare you the rant on how many insects, small mammals and birds are killed during crop harvests) than people who eat an average non-vegitarian diet.

 

[Quotation Marx]

"For every expert that says humans are the cause of "climate change" there are 10 more who say we aren't." -Bradley A. Blakeman

Where's the substantial evidence of humans as the cause? Or the proof that those statistics aren't made up? And besides, bad side to global warming or climate change? Many would like to see snow, and increased heat melting ice caps means more water which is more rain which helps grow more plants and absorb more Carbon dioxide creating such an event that somewhere it will reach a peak and slide back, whether natural or artificial, but the same materials will go back out, and it will never stop adjusting itself.

 

[James Cassidy]

Just saw 2(2!) commercials that implied that eating meat was causing Global Warming(which will trigger the next ice age btw).I've heard all the reasons for this (ie:deforestation,methane gasses,etc) but I don't understand how if I stop eating meat this will help.I mean all those animals and grazing land won't disappear magically and they'll just continue to breed and increase their numbers contributing more gasses to the atmosphere.Someone want to field this?What happens to all the animals if everyone on Earth stopped eating meat right now?What's the plan activists?

Global Warming is a joke. Not even a funny one at that. It doesn't exist and these so called "experts" will say anything to get you to believe.

I thought the Global Warming experts say that animals were the ones that cause it since humans AND animals are large producers of methane gases. Also, trees and fauna of any kind soak up those methane gases, not create them. SO now they change their minds and it is reversed?

For all people that believe in Global warming, you actually think it exists cause another person tells you to no matter how ridiculous the facts are and then some of you have the nerve to pick on religious people? You are just as bad as they are.

It's moments like these that make me think the human race is dying. If you can believe crap like that...then congratulations you took a step backward in evolution.

You know, as I said it before it will be funny as hell if we are all standing in the middle of an ice age and people are still spewing "Global Warming."

This planet we know as earth has survived shit a hundreds times worse than us. This planet will out live the human race.

 

[HerrBobo]

If people wanna just eat veg, cool, its a lifestyle choice, go for it. Howvere, it is un-natural, so do not preach to me about it.

So you know what is natural?
A real "natural" life for you would be to die @ childbirth because of a pesky bacteria infection or bad hygiene later on or no medicine or a short, brutish nomad lifestyle or dying because of starvation well long before your 80th birthday. THAT would be NATURAL.

We are not living in a natural world anymore, we are living in an artificial, human-created environment, where everyone can grow old and die of "natural" causes instead of leading a hard nomad hunter-gatherer-lifestyle like the last 10,000 years before penicillin and all the other things like tap water, electricity and superior medical care were invented...

If you wanted to eat meat in a nomad's world, you had to go to great lengths or be quite rich.
Today, even the poorest jerk can just go to the supermarket, because we have a huge un-natural supply of cheaply mass-produced meat for you to swallow there.

If you think that eating something that has been pumped full of growth hormones is healthy, go ahead, yummy-yummy, fill your tummy.

After all, you are what you eat,
You are what you think,
And you are what you do.

We have canine teeth, we a designed to eat meat. End of story. Plus, you go live in your nomadic hut if you like. I'm happy in my apartment with hot water and a telly; its called advancement.

 

[James Cassidy]

Not so much today... we have meat about 3 times a day in quantities, that cannot be really healthy... the meat itself is full of growth hormones... mmh, tasty...

Did you know that when you cook and eat an egg you are actually eating chicken embryos? Yeah.

The plants are full of hormones as well, barely anything is "naturally" grown anymore, but you know what they say: "Never think while you are hungry."

Di you also know that fish contains tons of mercury that is poisonous to the body? That is why eating too much fish is bad for you.

I have even eaten duck liver before and it is very tasty. I have eaten plenty of things that some might not stomach an actually it is very good.

Our bodies need meat and we need the protein. You can't live without it. Some people take protein sublimates, but truth be told the body needs the real ting, not some substitute. Eventually, the body rejects unnatural pills of protein. Despite it being hormonally grown, it is still real meat.

Animals do it, nature does. If nature does it too, then it is a natural process. If you humans don't do what natures does, then you can consider yourself unnatural.

 

[SamLowry]

This planet we know as earth has survived shit a hundreds times worse than us. This planet will out live the human race.

It surely will. The only question is: In what condition?


Follow me into a thought experiment:
Think of a really, really big city, which is totally hostile to life and kills quite instantly, if someone is exposed to the outside just for a few seconds. But in this big, empty wasteland, there is one single, big house that provides everything the last band of survivors might ever need: Breathable air, good clean water, all kinds of nutritious food...

They live in that big house and it treats them well. They belong there, it is their home. They couldn't live anywhere else. But the survivors get cocky. Their credo becomes: "What do I care?" And they start burning their shelter-house, one tiny bit at a time... at first, it doesn't matter, everything stays in order, because there are so few of the survivors, so they don't make a great impact...

But as time goes by, they are getting more and more ignorant of the consequences of their actions and accelerate their shelter-burning each day till one day it reaches the point where the former balance in the big house ultimately fails because they created a major leak and everybody inside dies a slow, painful death.

How do we call the behaviour of the shelter inhabitants?
And yes, the house stands for planet Earth.

 

[SamLowry]

Did you know that when you cook and eat an egg you are actually eating chicken embryos?

Oh, really? What else is new?
I said: Eating _less_, but hi-quality organic meat is much more reasonable, than eating (too) large quantities of cheaply-produced mass-market trash meat.

The plants are full of hormones as well, barely anything is "naturally" grown anymore, but you know what they say: "Never think while you are hungry."

Welly-welly-well-well-well, as we both are posting on the internet, it's reasonable to say we both are from highly developed post-industrialized countries like North America and Europe, where people don't suffer from Starvation, but from OBESITY.

Considering we all are full to the brim with food, we should be able to think quite well...
But then there's always ignorance, they say...

I have even eaten duck liver before and it is very tasty. I have eaten plenty of things that some might not stomach an actually it is very good.

Good. And how is all that related to the topic @ hand?

Our bodies need meat and we need the protein. You can't live without it. Some people take protein sublimates, but truth be told the body needs the real ting, not some substitute. Eventually, the body rejects unnatural pills of protein. Despite it being hormonally grown, it is still real meat.

See above.

Animals do it, nature does. If nature does it too, then it is a natural process. If you humans don't do what natures does, then you can consider yourself unnatural.

Let me show you the fault in your reasoning:

A lot of animals only eat plants. If nature does it too, then it's a natural process. If humans don't do what nature does, then you can consider yourself unnatural!

See?

Btw, humans are NEITHER carnivores, NOR herbivores - they are OMNIVORES.

 

[Ironic]

-Because cows release methane gas in their bodily and fecal emissions, whilst insignificant on their own, is a LARGE contribution when totalled up.

-Because there are a lot more cows on this planet than there would be if we didn't eat them, therefore lots more methane emission.

-Because deforestation to feed said cows and produce more methane, just compounds the problem.

SO REALLY vegetarians should be lobbying that we continue eating their meat, because otherwise we're going to have to commit cow-genocide in favour of pro-environment concerns.



(The same can be said to Free-range foods campaigners. Sure, the animals are more cheerful before their inevitable doom, but their diet isn't as carefully controlled to produce less methane, and so the PLANET is suddenly a lot less happy, so, make a choice. The happiness of your prey, or the toasting of your planet... it's not easy being green.)

Applaud Kermit for that.


PS>

Incidentally, this sums up my ideas towards the logic of vegetarianism perfectly [http://survivingtheworld.net/Lesson293.html].

 

[Quotation Marx]

This planet we know as earth has survived shit a hundreds times worse than us. This planet will out live the human race.

It surely will. The only question is: In what condition?


Follow me into a thought experiment:
Think of a really, really big city, which is totally hostile to life and kills quite instantly, if someone is exposed to the outside just for a few seconds. But in this big, empty wasteland, there is one single, big house that provides everything the last band of survivors might ever need: Breathable air, good clean water, all kinds of nutritious food...

They live in that big house and it treats them well. They belong there, it is their home. They couldn't live anywhere else. But the survivors get cocky. Their credo becomes: "What do I care?" And they start burning their shelter-house, one tiny bit at a time... at first, it doesn't matter, everything stays in order, because there are so few of the survivors, so they don't make a great impact...

But as time goes by, they are getting more and more ignorant of the consequences of their actions and accelerate their shelter-burning each day till one day it reaches the point where the former balance in the big house ultimately fails because they created a major leak and everybody inside dies a slow, painful death.

How do we call the behaviour of the shelter inhabitants?
And yes, the house stands for planet Earth.

You're characterizing it as evil. That's not an accurate representation, but instead a slanted symbolism.

Follow me into a thought experiment:
Think of a really, really big city, which is totally hostile to life and kills quite instantly, if someone is exposed to the outside just for a few seconds. But in this big, empty wasteland, there is one single, big house that provides what people need to survive. Breathable air, drinkable water (Not necessarily clean), and edible food (Not necessarily nutritious or varying).

They grow happy here, first wary and at odds with the being that inhabit it, the shadows around, but they quickly learn. They build tools from the material and speak to one another to work in groups. They discover fire and begin clearing away the darkness, making it warmer and safer. They become friends with some of the beings there, keeping them as pets who stand at their side and help clear more of the shadows and discomfort. Over the years the house creaks and groan but it has not yet fallen. Some are paranoid, fearful of it all, rationing the ever returning supplies, trying to take control, seeking power so that they may hold the illusion of safety. But others shrug it off. They are happy, and the house has seen worse. It has become their home, and it has not collapsed. They feel safe, as they use the stores and question the outside world, barely venturing out, and never far, but curious. This is one world, and it may not be safe forever, maybe another house is out there, or something useful. All the while Paranoia yells that they shouldn't eat that, or act that way, that they should follow Paranoia who speaks what they see from their little window, believing they are right.

 

[Ironic]

Spoiler

This planet we know as earth has survived shit a hundreds times worse than us. This planet will out live the human race.

It surely will. The only question is: In what condition?


Follow me into a thought experiment:
Think of a really, really big city, which is totally hostile to life and kills quite instantly, if someone is exposed to the outside just for a few seconds. But in this big, empty wasteland, there is one single, big house that provides everything the last band of survivors might ever need: Breathable air, good clean water, all kinds of nutritious food...

They live in that big house and it treats them well. They belong there, it is their home. They couldn't live anywhere else. But the survivors get cocky. Their credo becomes: "What do I care?" And they start burning their shelter-house, one tiny bit at a time... at first, it doesn't matter, everything stays in order, because there are so few of the survivors, so they don't make a great impact...

But as time goes by, they are getting more and more ignorant of the consequences of their actions and accelerate their shelter-burning each day till one day it reaches the point where the former balance in the big house ultimately fails because they created a major leak and everybody inside dies a slow, painful death.

How do we call the behaviour of the shelter inhabitants?
And yes, the house stands for planet Earth.

You're characterizing it as evil. That's not an accurate representation, but instead a slanted symbolism.

Follow me into a thought experiment:
Think of a really, really big city, which is totally hostile to life and kills quite instantly, if someone is exposed to the outside just for a few seconds. But in this big, empty wasteland, there is one single, big house that provides what people need to survive. Breathable air, drinkable water (Not necessarily clean), and edible food (Not necessarily nutritious or varying).

They grow happy here, first wary and at odds with the being that inhabit it, the shadows around, but they quickly learn. They build tools from the material and speak to one another to work in groups. They discover fire and begin clearing away the darkness, making it warmer and safer. They become friends with some of the beings there, keeping them as pets who stand at their side and help clear more of the shadows and discomfort. Over the years the house creaks and groan but it has not yet fallen. Some are paranoid, fearful of it all, rationing the ever returning supplies, trying to take control, seeking power so that they may hold the illusion of safety. But others shrug it off. They are happy, and the house has seen worse. It has become their home, and it has not collapsed. They feel safe, as they use the stores and question the outside world, barely venturing out, and never far, but curious. This is one world, and it may not be safe forever, maybe another house is out there, or something useful. All the while Paranoia yells that they shouldn't eat that, or act that way, that they should follow Paranoia who speaks what they see from their little window, believing they are right.

]

You both missed out a crucial detail.

AND IN THEIR IGNORANCE, THEY CAREFULLY TREAD THE LINE OF PROGRESS, WITH THE RISK OF FALLING INTO THE OBLIVION OF IGNORANCE AND FAILURE ON ONE SIDE, AND THE RISK OF HUGGING TO THE WALL OF PARANOIA IN SAFETY, EVER WOBBLING, WITH ONLY A TILT NEEDED IN EITHER DIRECTION TO CONDEMN THE INHABITANTS OF THE GREAT AND POWERFUL META-MANSION!

Sorry for the caps, it was necessary.

 

[KSarty]

Deforestation for cattle-growing space. Not good. Also, rearing an animal takes a lot of food that we could just eat ourselves.

If they ate more food than they replaced, we would have stopped raising them a long time ago. Cows for instance only need grass and water.

 

[Scarecrow38]

Cattle may reduce the number of trees, but I think there is alot more to be worried about with respect to global warming.

 

[Ironic]

Deforestation for cattle-growing space. Not good. Also, rearing an animal takes a lot of food that we could just eat ourselves.

If they ate more food than they replaced, we would have stopped raising them a long time ago. DAIRY Cows for instance only need grass and water.

Fixed this for you.

Most meat-producing cows are fed high starch, high energy feed pellets, to bulk them up quickly to get to your plate

Also, I think im going to stop posting, I just looked at my posts and I realised that im not actually helping either argument...

>:/

Oopz.

 

[Quotation Marx]

Go ahead and keep posting. I don't think Gahndi would mind

"I believe in equality for everyone, except reporters and photographers." -Mohandas Gandhi

 

[Nigh Invulnerable]

"With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people? It sure sounds like it." -James M.Inhofe

I find this quote so hilarious, because as far as I can tell the United States are the only country in the world in which there's still doubt as to whether global warming is actually happening.

EDIT: It wasn't clear from my original post, but everywhere else people are pretty sure it is, in fact, happening.

Except that it isn't happening. I just read through "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming" and there is zero evidence for anything more than a shift of tenths of a degree. Prove to me that 'global warming' is happening everywhere and then maybe I'll give a crap about animals and vegetarianism.

 

[Quotation Marx]

Hey, Nigh Invulnerable, they still haven't told me a bad side to global warming.

"We're all capable of mistakes, but I do not care to enlighten you on the mistakes we may or may not have made." -Al Gore

It might be one of dem mistakes though.