Huffington Post Has Seen the Face of Evil: The Bacon CheeseburgerBreatharianism would work better; they should try it. All of them. And even that would work better if they don't exhale.
The Middle East in chaos driven by ISIS jihadists, the southern border of the U.S. overrun by a tsunami of illegal immigrants carrying contagious diseases and threatening our sovereignty, the Balkans endangered by a reinvigorated imperialist Russia: all are fountainheads of danger for Americans. But then comes the cheeseburger.
On Friday, the main headline on the Huffington Post posited the theory that vegetarianism reduces your carbon footprint (please excuse the technical terminology) a “ridiculous amount.” The progressive website offers a helpful solution to one of the great evils of the day: “As the economic, political and personal costs of doing nothing to mitigate climate change skyrocket, there's one lifestyle change that slashes dietary greenhouse gas emissions in half: Veganism.”
Breitbart News has reported on a number of scientists who claim the climate hasn’t warmed in 16 years and that some call global warming an unsubstantiated hypothesis. HuffPo has cited a survey that alleges climate change is costing the U.S. billions of dollars and poses a growing national security threat. "Reducing the intake of meat and other animal based products can make a valuable contribution to climate change mitigation," the report argues.
A study by the Environmental Working Group claims that, if all Americans went vegan, it would be equivalent to removing 46 million cars from the road. However, this would only provide a "moderate dent in overall carbon emissions.”
Wednesday, July 2, 2014
HuffPo Solves A Non-Crisis
From BreitBart Big Journalism:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
A study by the Environmental Working Group claims that, if all Americans went vegan, it would be equivalent to removing 46 million cars from the road
Vegans and vegetarians contradict the evolution of our ancestors.If we were meant to be vegans,our bodies would have been adapted to only consuming flora and our stomachs would've been unable to digest meat,much like herbivores.
If atheism is dependant on evolution for it's ideology then atheists must accept the consumption of meat as part of man's evolution.
If theism does not depend on evolution for it's worldview,then theists are free to choose to be vegans or meat-eaters.
"A study by the Environmental Working Group claims that, if all Americans went vegan, it would be equivalent to removing 46 million cars from the road"
B.S. These idjits have no idea how costly ground crops really run without herbivores doing their thing over the crop.
Stuff like beans, sprouts, rices and grains require a lot of work to prep the land, keep it growing, harvest the crops, then replenish the soil with all the nutrients pulled out. Currently all done with fossil fuels. Going vegan would massively increase all of that, and cut out the food chain parts that do not require as much, like raising animals for meat.
What's a lot better for the land is to raise herbivores like on grasslands and rotate them through pastures, then eat them. See Joel Salatin. His Polyface Farm destroys all sorts of bad practices and myths.
Toss the FDA, close down the CAFOs and give solid incentives for small, local farmers. That would reduce fuel consumption, if that's what they really care about.
But no, that decentralizes food production and lessens the Federal stranglehold over our lives, so they can't have that.
A pox on their house.
Much animal agriculture is done on land that is not useful for cropping. Here in the Missouri Ozarks pastures are too small for efficient cropping, but are ideal for small animal operators. So Missouri has more cattle than any state except Texas.
Back when I was an Atheist, I was also a vegetarian for two decades... until I saw that vegetarianism is not the healthy regimen that it is claimed to be. And further, it is an elitist pursuit to differentiate oneself from the Herd, i.e. a classist worldview.
The claims of animal cruelty are overblown; cruelty reduces yield as a practical consideration. Animals that do poorly are an economic loss, and it would be stupid to allow that in your operation. That's not to say that it does not occur. But among other things it is illegal. Not to mention a moral failure.
"That's not to say that it does not occur. But among other things it is illegal. Not to mention a moral failure."
All the more reason to return to our vigorous Christian roots.
The Bible says the Lord gave the Earth to men to be stewards over it. Stewardship is a different concept than hedonistic, materialistic ownership.
There's a sovereign King of kings we will report to, a Lord that expects us to use our talents with wild abandon, to reap the tares and the wheat before the threshing, to tend to the vineyard in all seasons, to be ready to make our reckoning whenever; that's our dominion, our stewardship.
Post a Comment