SpeedRacer 1 #1 November 1, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/31/opinion/31niman.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&emc=eta1 Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #2 November 1, 2009 Grass-fed beef FTW.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #3 November 2, 2009 Quote And the claim that meat (especially beef) is closely linked to global warming has received some credible backing, including by the United Nations and University of Chicago. Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrophyHusband 0 #4 November 2, 2009 "Much Brazilian deforestation is connected to soybean cultivation. As much as 70 percent of areas newly cleared for agriculture in Mato Grosso State in Brazil is being used to grow soybeans." the dilema isn't just for carnivores. "Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama www.kjandmegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #5 November 2, 2009 OK I agree with you, but a lot of soybeans are used for animal feed. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #6 November 2, 2009 Is there anything that can be referenced refuting the environmental impact of the livestock industry? It seems to be logical/likely to me. I haven't eaten meat, including fowl or fish, since 1980. It is aesthetically unappealing to me. There are a lot of good, tasty alternatives.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflybella 0 #7 November 2, 2009 This is the real argument. Factory farming is the problem. Thinking that meat should be cheap is the problem. Using 7 lbs of grain for every 1 lb of meat produced is the problem. If we all cut back consumption by 50% (and eliminated ALL fast food) - and refused any meat not from a local/family farmer - then we would make huge strides toward helping our environment - our health - our conscience. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #8 November 2, 2009 Post #2. Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflybella 0 #9 November 2, 2009 Quote Post #2. Geez, I don't get it. Post # 2? Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #10 November 2, 2009 Salad is what food eats.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #11 November 2, 2009 Quote Quote Post #2. Geez, I don't get it. Post # 2? Quote Grass-fed beef FTW. You were more eloquent, though.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #12 November 2, 2009 >"Much Brazilian deforestation is connected to soybean cultivation. As >much as 70 percent of areas newly cleared for agriculture in Mato Grosso >State in Brazil is being used to grow soybeans." >the dilema isn't just for carnivores. Actually it pretty much is. If the above were re-written for vegetarians, it would read "as much as 7% of areas newly cleared for agriculture in Mato Grosso State in Brazil is being used to grow soybeans." That's much less of a dilemma. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #13 November 2, 2009 Quote This is the real argument. Factory farming is the problem. Thinking that meat should be cheap is the problem. Using 7 lbs of grain for every 1 lb of meat produced is the problem. If we all cut back consumption by 50% (and eliminated ALL fast food) - and refused any meat not from a local/family farmer - then we would make huge strides toward helping our environment - our health - our conscience. Thinking that family farms aren't factory farms is not realistic. Factory farming in the sense that you must do things as inexpensively as possible is how so many family farms compete in terms of the cost of their product. There isn't such a huge market for more expensive meat. Besides, I suspect that a good deal of the environmental impact is likely not related to how the animals are fed.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #14 November 2, 2009 According to National Geographic (State of the Earth 2010 special edition P 72) 59% of all US agricultural production is feed for livestock. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
