Editor's Blog3 mins ago
Eating Meat And Climate Change
Normally when I come to this site, it's about crosswords. This isn't.
I accept the reality of climate change and I try to do my bit in not destroying our planet. But I am not sure why changing our diet will help significantly. I like to watch nature programmes like Blue Planet and one of the things that's struck me is that animals in the wild, fish etc in the sea eat vast amounts of flesh. What they eat between them must surely dwarf what human beings eat. Or am I wrong on that front?
So,if we cut back but they continue,will it make any real difference. Or should we concentrate on other ways to tackle climate change?
I accept the reality of climate change and I try to do my bit in not destroying our planet. But I am not sure why changing our diet will help significantly. I like to watch nature programmes like Blue Planet and one of the things that's struck me is that animals in the wild, fish etc in the sea eat vast amounts of flesh. What they eat between them must surely dwarf what human beings eat. Or am I wrong on that front?
So,if we cut back but they continue,will it make any real difference. Or should we concentrate on other ways to tackle climate change?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by stevenj. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
'leaving the same population free to increase itself unchecked isn't going to do any good'
You're right. That's why educating people to eat less meat is all the more important. It's happening slowly but picking up pace. I'm not sure the AB demographic is 'woke' to whats happening with younger generations.
You're right. That's why educating people to eat less meat is all the more important. It's happening slowly but picking up pace. I'm not sure the AB demographic is 'woke' to whats happening with younger generations.
//forcing the population to change its eating habits but leaving the same population free to increase itself unchecked isn't going to do any good.//
You beat me to it, mush. Humans do a hell of a lot more to allegedly damage the planet than eating meat. They require heat and light, they like to move about a lot, they run all sorts of electrical gadgets. To suggest that we allow rampant population growth when all of these things are an issue is ludicrous. Nowhere in all the protests about Climate Change have I noted any mention of over-population. As noted, the alleged problems are caused by humans. More humans mean more problems. An extra million every four or five days is simply unsustainable and I'm not changing my habits in order for that to go on unabated.
You beat me to it, mush. Humans do a hell of a lot more to allegedly damage the planet than eating meat. They require heat and light, they like to move about a lot, they run all sorts of electrical gadgets. To suggest that we allow rampant population growth when all of these things are an issue is ludicrous. Nowhere in all the protests about Climate Change have I noted any mention of over-population. As noted, the alleged problems are caused by humans. More humans mean more problems. An extra million every four or five days is simply unsustainable and I'm not changing my habits in order for that to go on unabated.
//That's why educating people to eat less meat is all the more important.//
No. Educating people to knock out fewer children is what's important. Then those they have will not face so many difficulties and they can eat as much meat as they like.
//I'm not sure the AB demographic is 'woke' to whats happening with younger generations.//
I am and I feel sorry for them for seeing the problem *** about face. But nobody wants to tell young people that in parts of the world there are too many people.
No. Educating people to knock out fewer children is what's important. Then those they have will not face so many difficulties and they can eat as much meat as they like.
//I'm not sure the AB demographic is 'woke' to whats happening with younger generations.//
I am and I feel sorry for them for seeing the problem *** about face. But nobody wants to tell young people that in parts of the world there are too many people.
'I'm not changing my habits in order for that to go on unabated.'
Thankfully that attitude is dying out with a generation (or generations) who must find it difficult to change their ways at a late stage in their lives.
GW needs to be tackled across the board. Not just on a meat consumption basis although that is an important element.
Thankfully that attitude is dying out with a generation (or generations) who must find it difficult to change their ways at a late stage in their lives.
GW needs to be tackled across the board. Not just on a meat consumption basis although that is an important element.
I started to read Maydup's post, but only got as far as the first line, specifically the reference to PETA, and decided not to continue.
Any organisation that states, in all seriousness, that animals not giving consent to allow them to be artificially inseminated is sexual abuse, is an organisation that should be roundly ignored, or, if ignored, then derided.
Any organisation that states, in all seriousness, that animals not giving consent to allow them to be artificially inseminated is sexual abuse, is an organisation that should be roundly ignored, or, if ignored, then derided.
Assured by whom ?
If there were no humans there'd be no issue. If there were fewer humans than the world could cope with, there'd be no issue. If there are more humans than the world can cope with then there's an issue. If there's an issue and the cause is getting bigger the issue is getting more critical.
The idea that an occasional steak, lamb chop and pork pie is unacceptable, is an unacceptable claim and demand. One needs to find real points to concentrate on, not ramp up the animosity and divide the world.
If there were no humans there'd be no issue. If there were fewer humans than the world could cope with, there'd be no issue. If there are more humans than the world can cope with then there's an issue. If there's an issue and the cause is getting bigger the issue is getting more critical.
The idea that an occasional steak, lamb chop and pork pie is unacceptable, is an unacceptable claim and demand. One needs to find real points to concentrate on, not ramp up the animosity and divide the world.
The general consensus is that a lot of farm land is there to grow vegetation for the animals that we eat. This means that if we didn't eat meat, this farm land could be used to grow vegetation for humans to eat.
Fact of the matter is i'm not sure how it affects the climate. Apparently cows fart and we use water for beef or something yarda yarda yarda.
Fact of the matter is i'm not sure how it affects the climate. Apparently cows fart and we use water for beef or something yarda yarda yarda.
//..was assured that the rapidly increasing population isn't a major contributing factor to the problem.//
In my naivety I would call that absolute nonsense. The alleged problem is man-made climate change. The clue is in the name. So, if there were no humans the problem would not exist; if the population increases the problem will increase.
The global population is increasing by more than a quarter of a million every day. Every one of those additional people adds to all the activities we are told harm the environment. When the young "woke" people no longer instinctively know everything and they begin to think for themselves they may come to a similar conclusion. They might then realise that, with each passing year and 80-odd million more humans added to the population, persuading them to live on plants will have as much effect as telling them to change their light bulbs.
In my naivety I would call that absolute nonsense. The alleged problem is man-made climate change. The clue is in the name. So, if there were no humans the problem would not exist; if the population increases the problem will increase.
The global population is increasing by more than a quarter of a million every day. Every one of those additional people adds to all the activities we are told harm the environment. When the young "woke" people no longer instinctively know everything and they begin to think for themselves they may come to a similar conclusion. They might then realise that, with each passing year and 80-odd million more humans added to the population, persuading them to live on plants will have as much effect as telling them to change their light bulbs.
'So, if there were no humans the problem would not exist' I'm not sure that's the case is it? I thought there was an underlying trend of increase as we're still emerging from the last ice age?
Ive read reports that the UN expects the annual increase to decline by around 1 million every year having peaked at about 90 million around 1990 (it's currently around 82 million). some interesting facts here:
https:/
Ive read reports that the UN expects the annual increase to decline by around 1 million every year having peaked at about 90 million around 1990 (it's currently around 82 million). some interesting facts here:
https:/
