Fuck the beef industry

[soup]

I was feeling the same way as you about that documentary after hearing the debunking of it (Rogan and Chris Kresser episode you are referring too as well I assume). But then Rogan invited one of the producers of the documentary (James Wilks) to debate with that same guy Kresser who debunked it, and honestly, Wilks pretty much slaughtered Kresser by not only showing a better understanding of the science behind nutrition but also demonstrating how most of Kresser's points from that previous episode were just wrong. Kresser admitted multiple times during that debate that he had been wrong in the previous episode and Rogan himself said Wilks did a fantastic job and he was considering taking down the previous episode because of all the factual mistakes from Kresser. That's the problem with having a one-sided "debunking", there is no one to keep the debunker in check and he can say whatever the fuck he wants.

I still think there are some issues with the documentary and that it is misleading at times, but referencing the "debunking" episode from Rogan is a terrible source and I'd advise everyone to skip it and listen to the Rogan debate instead. It's 4 hours long, and I'll admit I couldn't sit through it all because I'm not that interested in the topic, but if you are, give that a listen.

Okay perfect I just downloaded that episode I'll give it a listen tomorrow.

 

[Monsieur_Patate]

Okay perfect I just downloaded that episode I'll give it a listen tomorrow.

If you listen to the whole thing let me know if the second half follows the same trend as the first. As I said I couldn't sit through the entire thing, so my description is based on what I heard in the first 90 minutes or so. Maybe Kresser got back on his feet afterwards, but he was not convincing at all in the section I listened to.

 

[ChadThundercock]

Yeah kinda funny how all the co2 emissions are actually coming from beef. 50% of all greenhouse gases in fact.

I don't recycle or really think humans could permanently fuck earth (outside of nuclear war) but I am a vegetarian based off of the fact that I find meat gross. Turns out - I am helping the environment more than those prius drivin, tesla parkin, tree huggin' liberals.

 

[JAHpow]

This is how I also view beef

 

[fries]

Kind of sad that the skiing community has to be so ignorant in the face of a climate crisis which threatens the entire ski industry. Your grand children probably won't be able to ski but at least you were an edgelord on NS back in 2019.

 

[T.L.]

Yeah kinda funny how all the co2 emissions are actually coming from beef. 50% of all greenhouse gases in fact.

I don't recycle or really think humans could permanently fuck earth (outside of nuclear war) but I am a vegetarian based off of the fact that I find meat gross. Turns out - I am helping the environment more than those prius drivin, tesla parkin, tree huggin' liberals.

Care to cite that 50% number?

 

[ChadThundercock]

Care to cite that 50% number?

Ok, ok 45%https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/climate/cows-global-warming.html

 

[ASSholebomber22]

Kind of sad that the skiing community has to be so ignorant in the face of a climate crisis which threatens the entire ski industry. Your grand children probably won't be able to ski but at least you were an edgelord on NS back in 2019.

Approximately 500 million citizens of India still use the streets, rivers, and shorelines of the hometowns as toilets. That is a population of 1.7x the entire US. The rest of the nation is developing quickly, however massive fossil fuel use is the only way this development will occur. And that's just india, roughly 1/6th of the world's population yet not even the most populated 3rd world nation.

Skiers aren't a drop in the bucket, regardless of how hypocritical they are. The people who buy into climate alarmism are not the people who can change their actions to make a dent in the grand scheme of things.

And I get it, I get it. You're gonna say that just because others polute is a terrible reason to do the same, and you'd be correct. But if the crisis is such that it is blown up to be, 1st world nations are just pissing in the smog hurricane that is developing countries.

 

[elcheapo]

I had too look it up, now I feel guilty being a omnivore. Thought it was .001%

 

[chris.goodhue]

I've been thinking about this recently and 100% agree the meat industry is fucked. Do I still eat meat...yes, but definitely have cut down.

The amount of energy it takes to make a burger is absolutely ridiculous and is in no way sustainable.

It's funny how people get so triggered by something like this, it's not a liberal vs. conservative thing, no one is saying you can't eat meat but not acknowledging that these industries are unsustainable is naive IMO.

 

[xxACIDTRIPxx]

Cows aren’t conscious and cannot even process their situation so who gives a fuc

eat steak , maka tha gainz and drink monster

 

[T.L.]

Ok, ok 45%https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/climate/cows-global-warming.html

That's a nyt article behind a pay wall..

What's their source?

 

[ChadThundercock]

Cows aren’t conscious and cannot even process their situation so who gives a fuc

eat steak , maka tha gainz and drink monster

All I need is Sapporo ichiban ramen and steroids

 

[fries]

And I get it, I get it. You're gonna say that just because others polute is a terrible reason to do the same, and you'd be correct. But if the crisis is such that it is blown up to be, 1st world nations are just pissing in the smog hurricane that is developing countries.

I'm not asking for you to reconstruct India's infrastructure or come up with a new renewable energy solution. Just saying we should probably be mindful of our own impact as individuals. There are simple lifestyle changes that we can make to have a lower impact on a daily basis. There is no scientific debate about climate change. It's happening as we speak and it will continue to get much worse over the years. So why should we try to justify it and hide behind other's worse actions?

I also understand the perspective many hold on climate change - that it's not as bad as it seems to be, or maybe beef's impact is hyped up, and so on. What the worst that could happen? You end up healthier and accidentally contribute to less nutrient pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and habitat destruction? I guess my point is that we have nothing to lose by trying, and everything to lose by not. I find it easier to believe that the billion dollar industries who have interest in preserving their profits are at fault, rather than the scientists.

 

[fries]

Cows aren’t conscious and cannot even process their situation so who gives a fuc

eat steak , maka tha gainz and drink monster

They have a central nervous system and are just as conscious as the dogs we have in our homes. Try plant protein

 

[ASSholebomber22]

I'm not asking for you to reconstruct India's infrastructure or come up with a new renewable energy solution. Just saying we should probably be mindful of our own impact as individuals. There are simple lifestyle changes that we can make to have a lower impact on a daily basis. There is no scientific debate about climate change. It's happening as we speak and it will continue to get much worse over the years. So why should we try to justify it and hide behind other's worse actions?

I also understand the perspective many hold on climate change - that it's not as bad as it seems to be, or maybe beef's impact is hyped up, and so on. What the worst that could happen? You end up healthier and accidentally contribute to less nutrient pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and habitat destruction? I guess my point is that we have nothing to lose by trying, and everything to lose by not. I find it easier to believe that the billion dollar industries who have interest in preserving their profits are at fault, rather than the scientists.

The worst that could happen is governments impose sanctions drastically limiting recreational activities and the use of public land in order to curb emissions due to climate hysteria. Recreational activities that pollute will absolutely be on the chopping block and either outright limited or taxed to the point where only the wealthy can participate.

YES, collectively we should limit as much waste as possible. But there will always be debate on what is neccessary and what isn't.

I just don't want to be shit on 'for the greater good' when entire cultures don't give 2 shits about our efforts.

 

[Monsieur_Patate]

The worst that could happen is governments impose sanctions drastically limiting recreational activities and the use of public land in order to curb emissions due to climate hysteria. Recreational activities that pollute will absolutely be on the chopping block and either outright limited or taxed to the point where only the wealthy can participate.

YES, collectively we should limit as much waste as possible. But there will always be debate on what is neccessary and what isn't.

I just don't want to be shit on 'for the greater good' when entire cultures don't give 2 shits about our efforts.

You're making assumptions about tomorrow's use of fossil fuels by developing economies to justify today's use by developed countries?

"It's ok for developed countries to keep polluting because developing countries will be doing even more harm in the future as they develop, so whatever efforts we make today on our side will be nullified by these guys".

Cleaner energies are being improved every day, and it is very possible that as developing markets evolve they switch to cleaner energies much sooner than we did in their process, simply due to the fact that they have options we didn't have. Developing countries need support to adapt using cleaner energy and not fossil fuel as we did, but assuming that they will inevitably end up polluting so much that our efforts are useless is a dangerous assumption.

Today's debate is not really about imposing sanctions on recreational activities, but about switching our energy to a cleaner source, and consume responsibly, including the way you eat. At the end of the day, no one needs to become vegan, but eating slightly less meat would be beneficial to everyone, both from a health and environmental standpoint. I certainly agree that imposing anything on anyone is a bad idea, real change will come from educating people and industry regulations, but not individually restricting freedom.

 

[milk_man]

Tell us more about what your enlightened professors have imprinted on your mind

 

[brogoldenhair]

not sure if this had been said already, but "its not the cow its the how". We need to cut down on beef consumption, but if raised sustainably (intensive rotational grazing, soil regenerative practices), cows can actually improve the carbon sequestration of the pasture (through encouraging certain species, plus grazing means more plant growth=more co2 taken in) to a point where they offset their own carbon equivalent footprints. Keep your pastures healthy and youll get methane consuming bacteria living in the grass that sequester most methane productions. Fuck factory farms, keep beef alive

 

[milk_man]

OP should i have a 1/4 lb or 1/2 lb burger tonight?

 

[ALMIGHTYSOSA]

yall b eatin human meet n aint even kno it nasty ass

 

[Monsieur_Patate]

OP should i have a 1/4 lb or 1/2 lb burger tonight?

Either way is fine, as long as you limit consumption to no more than about three portions per week. Three portions is equivalent to about 12–18oz cooked weight.

That's not my advice btw, but from the American Institute for Cancer Research.

 

[fries]

not sure if this had been said already, but "its not the cow its the how". We need to cut down on beef consumption, but if raised sustainably (intensive rotational grazing, soil regenerative practices), cows can actually improve the carbon sequestration of the pasture (through encouraging certain species, plus grazing means more plant growth=more co2 taken in) to a point where they offset their own carbon equivalent footprints. Keep your pastures healthy and youll get methane consuming bacteria living in the grass that sequester most methane productions. Fuck factory farms, keep beef alive

A study found that greenhouse gas emissions were only reduced by 9% from more efficient livestock production methods.The authors concluded that cuts in greenhouse gas emissions necessary to meet the global temperature target “imply a severe constraint on the long-term global consumption of animal food."

Large scale implementation of sustainable beef just isn't practical or effective compared to switching to a plant-based food system. Vegan diets, for example, can have reduce over 50% of the greenhouse gas emissions from a typical omnivorous diet.

sources cited:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212267216311923#bib113

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/animal/article/trends-in-greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-consumption-and-production-of-animal-food-products-implications-for-longterm-climate-targets/91787694CF01DE216351A7EF3B89D72D

 

[ALMIGHTYSOSA]

stey away big bih nasty

 

[soup]

Yeah kinda funny how all the co2 emissions are actually coming from beef. 50% of all greenhouse gases in fact.

I don't recycle or really think humans could permanently fuck earth (outside of nuclear war) but I am a vegetarian based off of the fact that I find meat gross. Turns out - I am helping the environment more than those prius drivin, tesla parkin, tree huggin' liberals.

That's a false number. It's only about 15% when you account the industry as a whole from start to finish which includes grain production, transportation of the meat, production of meat, and then also the co2 from farts and burps. It's a false number that gets thrown around but it actually has no scientific proof. You can try to prove me wrong I challenge you.

This is the problem with this shit, I am not opposed to vegan or vegetarian diets and yes, meat production is in parts not a sustainable practice. But. The stats, the numbers, the facts that get tossed around as proof most of the time have no validity and don't represent the actual truth. Be careful when you say things like this. 50% of greenhouse gases from beef? What the fuck does that even mean. You say your vegitarian because your saving the planet more than a Prius driving hippy? I don't understand your logic.

 

[soup]

I had too look it up, now I feel guilty being a omnivore. Thought it was .001%

View attachment 947493

And this is actually the entire meat production process as a whole I cluding transportation, wheat and grain production, packaging. The number is substantially lower it's somewhere around .1 or lower from the actual cows spitting out farts. Vegans just like throw that 15% number around because it sounds insane.

 

[ChadThundercock]

That's a false number. It's only about 15% when you account the industry as a whole from start to finish which includes grain production, transportation of the meat, production of meat, and then also the co2 from farts and burps. It's a false number that gets thrown around but it actually has no scientific proof. You can try to prove me wrong I challenge you.

This is the problem with this shit, I am not opposed to vegan or vegetarian diets and yes, meat production is in parts not a sustainable practice. But. The stats, the numbers, the facts that get tossed around as proof most of the time have no validity and don't represent the actual truth. Be careful when you say things like this. 50% of greenhouse gases from beef? What the fuck does that even mean. You say your vegitarian because your saving the planet more than a Prius driving hippy? I don't understand your logic.

Lick my ass, fuck this planet. It can burn.

 

[soup]

Lick my ass, fuck this planet. It can burn.

Well no. Just don't blame something that's not the real problem. It's industry and transportation. Beef is contributing but it's not a major factor like many people have been told.