1·
5 days agoyou can read the sources that poore-nemecek cite. they are explicit that their research cannot be combined with other LCAs
i am more than willing to engage on any positive claim you want to make (i probably agree with a lot of them). what i’m not willing to do is tolerate personal attacks and dogpiling.
- 8 Posts
- 1.37K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: August 5th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
whose land is it, and what is their prediliction for money?
your case study is over a decade old. do you have any supporting data?
eating meat has no effect on the planet.
The entire point of veganism is that it is an entire order of magnitude more efficient than eating meat.
the definition provided by the vegan society makes no mention of efficiency.
That’s study doesn’t cover people who have some or all of their food subsidized or provided for free, people who hunt fish or trap for their food, nor those who raise their own. it covers nobody who is working poor, only people who pay full retail price for all their food.
I never accepted your definition
your semantic games won’t change the facts
2/3 of crop calories go to humans
non humans cannot be dehumanized. it is tautological.
you can’t dehumanize nonhumans
the papers themselves. look at their LCA references
this land can be given back to biodiversity,
there is no reason to think this is going to happen. they’ll build a mall or a skyscraper.
they’re literally not human
The majority of the plants humans grow through crop-based agriculture are fed to non-human animals
That’s a lie. 2/3 of the world’s crop calories go directly to people. One third of the world’s crop calories go to livestock, but that’s as the other user is mentioning, mostly crop seconds or parts of plants that we can’t eat.
poore-nemecek is based on misreading LCA studies. LCA as a measurement is not transferable between studies. poore-nemececk just went through and did averages. it’s not good science. it’s not even science.
the same plants that are being fed to animals are the plants that we eat too. animals are mostly said crop seconds or parts of plants the people can’t or won’t eat.
11·5 days agothis is posturing and the rhetoric. it is not evidence.
calling me names doesn’t make what I’m saying any less true
if the source material can’t convince you, then live in ignorance