science doesn’t make moral judgement. killing can’t be scientifically “bad”
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.
- 14 Posts
- 3.01K 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.
2·16 hours agofields used to grow grass could be used either for other (human-edible) crops
some. I doubt that’s true for most grasslands.
1·16 hours agoI’m not antivegan
from the abstract
We then analysed the potential of replacing food-competing feedstuff—here cereals, whole fish, vegetable oils and pulses that account for 15% of total feed use—with food system by-products and residues.
a distinct minority of animal feed competes with human food
they were selectively bred to provide milk for us.
the only thing dairy milk is “meant” for is “whatever the farmer wants”. it could meant to drink or sell or give to the calves.
you are stretching definitions to meaninglessness. no one likes torture.
where are the animals it prevented from dying?
and the feed grown “for animals” is largely a byproduct of plants grown for people. it’s incredibly dishonest.
this is (at least partially) based on poore-nemecek. it’s bad science gaining entrenchment.
1·4 days agoI derailed any possible discussion about “Plants feel pain” before it ever came up
it seems you strongly prefer to attack things I haven’t said than to deal with what I do say
I can’t eat corncobs or stalks. feeding it to cattle so I can eat cheese and beef is a conservation of resources
none of what you said addresses the facts that I raised. you are attacking things I didn’t say and positions I don’t hold.
1·5 days agoyour badgering me. you need to calm down and be respectful.
when the studies that are being compiled specifically have instructions on them that they are not to be compiled with other studies it is bad science
I’m not your puppet. I’ve answered this sufficiently.
Every time you show up to talk about this paper, you just say it “misuses LCA”
false
LCAs are not transferable between studies, and poore-nemecek ignores this guidance, compiling multiple LCA studies into their “meta-analysis”. it’s bad science.
this paper misuses LCA studies to draw hyperbolic conclusions. it’s bad science.
it’s called animal husbandry