Are you bothered about your carbon footprint

Humans could all engage in mass suicide, and the planet would be better off. If the Iranians, North Koreans and crazy Russians get their way, a nuclear war could do just that.

 

The only "carbon footprint" these insidious psychopaths want to get rid of......is you!

 

That is exactly correct.....
after all of his trips to Epstein Island B... G.... is now forced to read a script written for him by people who are so proud and so elitist that they will do almost anything to accomplish what they really believe in. They actually do believe in mass sterilization of humans.... and depopulation....... and they may actually be serious in their thinking that that is how they can save the plants and the trees from the billions of us who they consider to be something along the line of "worthless eaters!"

New Mexico biologist and Coach Carl Cantrell has a great reply to the hairball Al Gore Carbon Tax Theory!


www.BAnkingSystemsFlaws.blogspot.ca/

Sooner or later the truth will come out that Muslims actually have a prediction that Israelis and North Americans should publish from the rooftops!!!!

Agreeing with Muslims on this approach to the climate... and to economics.... will really annoy Al Gore and Bill Gates George Soros and Claus Schwaub and many others!!!!


Immigration levels to Canada hit record high in 2022 ..

HOW Is This POSSIBLE in 2023? Deserts become rivers, floods in Saudi Arabia.

 

That doesn't make sense to me. I don't believe it.

 

You are correct fmw... this idea does not make sense at all..... Allan Savory proved otherwise... the hard way!




How to green the world's deserts and reverse climate change | Allan Savory

 

"Nuh uh" is not a valid argument.

Does animal agriculture produce more greenhouse gases than transportation?
"); display: inline-block; height: 24px; width: 24px; transform: rotateZ(-180deg);">




Animal agriculture produces 65% of the world's nitrous oxide emissions which has a global warming impact 296 times greater than carbon dioxide. Raising livestock for human consumption generates nearly 15% of total global greenhouse gas emissions, which is greater than all the transportation emissions combined.Mar 15, 2022

 

Sorry. It makes no sense. I still don't believe it. Posting a chart from the internet doesn't mean much to me.

 

If you have a background in this field and are doing your own research, I would appreciate you sharing your results. One thing I know for sure is that burning fossil fuel creates particulates no one can claim are safe to breath in. Mining the minerals for EVs is not environmentally friendly, and consuming animal products at the levels Americans do today is not healthy.

I live in Los Angeles and people here commute in their single occupancy vehicles while buses and trains are empty. They stop for some drive thru on their way home. They pull up to their beautiful lawns they spray with herbicides that wash to the ocean when it rains. I really don't see to much concern for the environment, even here in liberal land.

Methane is more than 25 times as potent as carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the atmosphere. Over the last two centuries, methane concentrations in the atmosphere have more than doubled, largely due to human-related activities. May 22, 2023

 

Sorry I have no expertise in animal husbandry or emissions. I just have common sense and opinions. I will add that I think the whole global warming thing has gone out of control Just an opinion.

 

I can agree that it is mostly about gaining political power. It would appear that your position has no backing. The "common sense" us used often and rarely makes sense. (Common sense gun laws for example)

 

I can assure you that my common sense makes perfect sense to me. Same with you no doubt.

 

That's why I translated your argument into "nuh uh".

 

OK.

 

Only when I track it in on the carpet.

 

The Climate Panic Brigade has been wrong almost continuously since the 1970's when they warned us the "Next Ice Age" was just around the corner.

 

Have you heard the latest thing the government is researching?

There is a theory that if they shoot Sulfur Dioxide into the upper atmosphere that it will shield part of the heat from the sun and lower the temperatures. This is from the same government that thinks "gain of function research" is cool, which killed well over a million people.

Fooling around with the atmosphere is dangerous. It would not take much of drop in temperatures to cause famines and starvation. It happened back in 1816 when there was no summer. It actually snowed in June, and farmers lost their crops. I believe a volcanic eruption caused that one. The dust in the atmosphere blocked the sun.

 

Yes.
I need to drive my 79 Trans Am more.
Gets maybe 10 MPG.

 

A little. I just don't like needless waste of resources. But the solution is more about policy than my individual actions, frankly. The development of fusion technology, investment in solar/wind/tidal/etc., and more nuclear reactors, are what we really need. It's like if somebody were a vegan. Their individual actions of being a vegan does a miniscule amount for animal welfare in general, but the investment in technology for meat alternative that people actually want to eat would do a lot more.

Probably the biggest thing an individual consumer can do is to eat less meat and not waste food, though.

Sane policy in general would fall into place more if special interests were taken out of politics.

 

Takes a lot more resources to grow meat than to grow plants. Plants are grown to feed animals to produce meat. Definitely you can feed more people using the same resources with a plant-heavy diet than a meat-heavy diet. There are some caveats though. Land unsuitable for farming can be used to graze cows, for example.

 

Unfortunately, most fruit and veg are shipped and flown around the planet and country. Not sure how not eating chicken would help.

 

Go for a balanced diet. Going all plant or going all meat is not a good healthy diet idea. And meat is beef, pork, lamb, poultry, venison, fish, rabbit etc.. Just seems to be cows that get it in the neck. Apparently they fart, so do all the other 200 species of ruminants, yet there's no out cry to get rid of camels, hippos, deer etc..

 

I don't trust murderers, thieves, rapists, democrats, child molesters, or vegans.

 

Transport is another variable, but it's unlikely to be all that different between plant and animal products other than sourcing plants to grow animals. I mean it's obvious if you think about it. Is it more efficient to eat barley, or feed barley to a pig until it grows fat and then eat the pig? Of course just eating the barley yourself gets you more calories per resource. Here's a chart:



Greenhouse gas emissions per 1000 kilocalories (ourworldindata.org)

I'm not necessarily saying "be vegan." All I'm saying is, animal products take more resources, so if people are concerned about carbon footprint, reducing use of animal products helps more than most other things they could do.

 

My position is shared by millions.

 

So is the position that we were born sinners because a snake talked a naked lady into eating an apple thousands of years ago.