University bans all beef from campus...........
Discussion
JapanRed said:
Before I start I’ll declare that I eat plenty of meat but am concerned about climate change.
I have read that eating less meat, particularly beef, is the best way any of us can reduce our impact on the climate. This would apparently be better than flying less, and by driving electric cars.
I think we all should try to eat LESS meat but I’m not sure banning meat is the answer. I’m trying to reduce my meat intake but have no intention of going completely veggie.
You can read all sorts of things. Being written down doesn't make them true.I have read that eating less meat, particularly beef, is the best way any of us can reduce our impact on the climate. This would apparently be better than flying less, and by driving electric cars.
I think we all should try to eat LESS meat but I’m not sure banning meat is the answer. I’m trying to reduce my meat intake but have no intention of going completely veggie.
Currently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
The alternative being pushed is arable crops on petrochemical fertilizer, plus irrigation, plus chemical herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, and plain old pest extermination. This is the environmental disaster. Our topsoil turning to dust. But no-one lives anywhere near their food any more, so the lies go unchallenged.
grumbledoak said:
You can read all sorts of things. Being written down doesn't make them true.
Currently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
The alternative being pushed is arable crops on petrochemical fertilizer, plus irrigation, plus chemical herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, and plain old pest extermination. This is the environmental disaster. Our topsoil turning to dust. But no-one lives anywhere near their food any more, so the lies go unchallenged.
So what's your solution? We stop eating non meat and concentrate on meat? Are all the experts simultaneously wrong? I am genuinely interested as I like to see both sides of arguments and I know we are all guilty of confirmation bias to an extentCurrently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
The alternative being pushed is arable crops on petrochemical fertilizer, plus irrigation, plus chemical herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, and plain old pest extermination. This is the environmental disaster. Our topsoil turning to dust. But no-one lives anywhere near their food any more, so the lies go unchallenged.
Edited by biggbn on Tuesday 13th August 12:53
biggbn said:
grumbledoak said:
You can read all sorts of things. Being written down doesn't make them true.
Currently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
The alternative being pushed is arable crops on petrochemical fertilizer, plus irrigation, plus chemical herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, and plain old pest extermination. This is the environmental disaster. Our topsoil turning to dust. But no-one lives anywhere near their food any more, so the lies go unchallenged.
So what's your solution? We stop eating non meat and concentrate on meat? Are all the experts simultaneously wrong? I am genuinely interested as I like to see both sides of arguments and I know we are all guilty of confirmation bias to answer extentCurrently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
The alternative being pushed is arable crops on petrochemical fertilizer, plus irrigation, plus chemical herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, and plain old pest extermination. This is the environmental disaster. Our topsoil turning to dust. But no-one lives anywhere near their food any more, so the lies go unchallenged.
southendpier said:
It's all to do with what you believe rather than what you do. Providing your politics are right and you've made a few token gestures then you can absolve yourself.If you're a pensioner who never drives, never goes on holiday, never turns the heating on and lives off 7 frey bentos pies a week then you're a climate criminal (hangings too good etc) if you claim that it's all a load of rubbish. If you jet all over the world live in a big swanky house and zip about in your brand new EV then you're a climate warrior providing you can claim to be vegan and join the right facebook groups.
RTB said:
It's all to do with what you believe rather than what you do. Providing your politics are right and you've made a few token gestures then you can absolve yourself.
If you're a pensioner who never drives, never goes on holiday, never turns the heating on and lives off 7 frey bentos pies a week then you're a climate criminal (hangings too good etc) if you claim that it's all a load of rubbish. If you jet all over the world live in a big swanky house and zip about in your brand new EV then you're a climate warrior providing you can claim to be vegan and join the right facebook groups.
especially if you are a millionaire luvvie living in Hollywood like Emma Thompson.If you're a pensioner who never drives, never goes on holiday, never turns the heating on and lives off 7 frey bentos pies a week then you're a climate criminal (hangings too good etc) if you claim that it's all a load of rubbish. If you jet all over the world live in a big swanky house and zip about in your brand new EV then you're a climate warrior providing you can claim to be vegan and join the right facebook groups.
jet across first class to talk crap rather than do a speech via video .. righto
El stovey said:
biggbn said:
grumbledoak said:
You can read all sorts of things. Being written down doesn't make them true.
Currently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
The alternative being pushed is arable crops on petrochemical fertilizer, plus irrigation, plus chemical herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, and plain old pest extermination. This is the environmental disaster. Our topsoil turning to dust. But no-one lives anywhere near their food any more, so the lies go unchallenged.
So what's your solution? We stop eating non meat and concentrate on meat? Are all the experts simultaneously wrong? I am genuinely interested as I like to see both sides of arguments and I know we are all guilty of confirmation bias to answer extentCurrently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
The alternative being pushed is arable crops on petrochemical fertilizer, plus irrigation, plus chemical herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, and plain old pest extermination. This is the environmental disaster. Our topsoil turning to dust. But no-one lives anywhere near their food any more, so the lies go unchallenged.
biggbn said:
So what's your solution? We stop eating non meat and concentrate on meat? Are all the experts simultaneously wrong? I am genuinely interested as I like to see both sides of arguments and I know we are all guilty of confirmation bias to answer extent
What makes you assume that there is one solution, or that one should be imposed? That approach, favourite of the self styled "announced", is always disastrous.We should start by accepting facts, instead of accepting large sums of money from vested interests as academia and the media are currently doing.
We should remove subsidies for growing cheap calories. This distortion of the markets is one driver of this crap policy - simply trying to find a way to make us/anything eat more of the crops grown mostly for the subsidy.
And we should eat food produced locally, not food grown wherever it is cheapest and flown around the world for maximum profit. Geography and the seasons will dictate which crops or animals we grow.
We don't need to worry about running out of oil; we need to worry about running out of soil. Arable monocrops are "take, take, take".
From a linked story - how f
king patronising can you get?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2019/01/17/o...
Oh, now we're just serving egg and chips, it's for the working class students you see, they can't deal with any sort of unfamiliar food. That's what they all eat isn't it? Egg and chips? And turkey twaddlers? Twiddlers? Find out what those are.
king patronising can you get?https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2019/01/17/o...
Oh, now we're just serving egg and chips, it's for the working class students you see, they can't deal with any sort of unfamiliar food. That's what they all eat isn't it? Egg and chips? And turkey twaddlers? Twiddlers? Find out what those are.
Geffg said:
If we all stop eating beef what happens to all the cows? Will we need to have a cull every so often which is surely a waste or do we just not breed so many but we still need to for milk!
How does not eating cow help the planet? All this climate crap bores me stupid.
Doesn’t the world just have a natural cull every so often with ice age, dinosaurs etc!
You say that like milk is actually a fundamental requirement...How does not eating cow help the planet? All this climate crap bores me stupid.
Doesn’t the world just have a natural cull every so often with ice age, dinosaurs etc!
alfaman said:
especially if you are a millionaire luvvie living in Hollywood like Emma Thompson.
jet across first class to talk crap rather than do a speech via video .. righto
I'm not sure what to believe regarding the science of climate change and the current variability seen. I'm going to base my level of panic on the behaviour of those making the most noise about it. When the experts start behaving like it's an imminent disaster then I'll start panicking, as it is, the vast majority of climate campaigners, climate experts etc etc appear to have a carbon footprint at least an order of magnitude higher than mine. jet across first class to talk crap rather than do a speech via video .. righto
grumbledoak said:
What makes you assume that there is one solution, or that one should be imposed? That approach, favourite of the self styled "announced", is always disastrous.
We should start by accepting facts, instead of accepting large sums of money from vested interests as academia and the media are currently doing.
We should remove subsidies for growing cheap calories. This distortion of the markets is one driver of this crap policy - simply trying to find a way to make us/anything eat more of the crops grown mostly for the subsidy.
And we should eat food produced locally, not food grown wherever it is cheapest and flown around the world for maximum profit. Geography and the seasons will dictate which crops or animals we grow.
We don't need to worry about running out of oil; we need to worry about running out of soil. Arable monocrops are "take, take, take".
Thanks for this, interesting.We should start by accepting facts, instead of accepting large sums of money from vested interests as academia and the media are currently doing.
We should remove subsidies for growing cheap calories. This distortion of the markets is one driver of this crap policy - simply trying to find a way to make us/anything eat more of the crops grown mostly for the subsidy.
And we should eat food produced locally, not food grown wherever it is cheapest and flown around the world for maximum profit. Geography and the seasons will dictate which crops or animals we grow.
We don't need to worry about running out of oil; we need to worry about running out of soil. Arable monocrops are "take, take, take".
And apologies for my wording, I am genuinely interested in all potential solutions, if that didn't come across, apologies
Edit, I have no fear of running out of oil, sooner the better.
Is there not also a school of thought that says less livestock farming would help less arable farming and that is what livestock eat, or is that to simplistic?
Edited by biggbn on Tuesday 13th August 13:09
Torygraph said:
Prof Corner, who used to be head of the London College of Fashion, has championed ethical designs and describes herself as a “fashion activist”.
Fashion, the mechanism by which people are led to replace perfectly serviceable consumer goods more frequently than remotely necessary, at great environmental cost?grumbledoak said:
biggbn said:
So what's your solution? We stop eating non meat and concentrate on meat? Are all the experts simultaneously wrong? I am genuinely interested as I like to see both sides of arguments and I know we are all guilty of confirmation bias to answer extent
What makes you assume that there is one solution, or that one should be imposed? That approach, favourite of the self styled "announced", is always disastrous.We should start by accepting facts, instead of accepting large sums of money from vested interests as academia and the media are currently doing.
We should remove subsidies for growing cheap calories. This distortion of the markets is one driver of this crap policy - simply trying to find a way to make us/anything eat more of the crops grown mostly for the subsidy.
And we should eat food produced locally, not food grown wherever it is cheapest and flown around the world for maximum profit. Geography and the seasons will dictate which crops or animals we grow.
We don't need to worry about running out of oil; we need to worry about running out of soil. Arable monocrops are "take, take, take".
grumbledoak said:
You can read all sorts of things. Being written down doesn't make them true.
Currently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
You’re saying “it’s a well organised campaign funded by food processing giants” do you have any evidence of this? Currently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
I’m no expert but I’ve looked for evidence to support your position and couldn’t find any.
Brads67 said:
Geffg said:
If we all stop eating beef what happens to all the cows? Will we need to have a cull every so often which is surely a waste or do we just not breed so many but we still need to for milk!
How does not eating cow help the planet? All this climate crap bores me stupid.
Doesn’t the world just have a natural cull every so often with ice age, dinosaurs etc!
They won't be bred for food. No cull required. The not eating meat will extend to dairy and hence dairy cattle.How does not eating cow help the planet? All this climate crap bores me stupid.
Doesn’t the world just have a natural cull every so often with ice age, dinosaurs etc!
The problem is
kers gradually consuming all natural resources.TX.
The world, every X 100 million years or so will just re-set itself- it'll have an ice age,get too hot, too cold- wipe everything out and life can start again.
the problem is- we think in our stupid small human timeline- not in the timeline of a planet that is 6.5 billion years old.
A student with large ear hoop ear piercings, a really meaningful tattoo and a love of veganism, ain't changing that by not having a burger.
you could argue- why doesn't every uni just take local kids from the local town, to cut down on travel emissions, say of mummy and daddy driving down in the range rover to bring tarquin his laundry ?
why not just employ teachers who only travel on foot, by push bike, or by yogurt powered yurts with wheels ?
why not ban all football- its pointless and surely the travel emissions of getting millions of nylon clad fat people about the UK each week to watch the reds or the blues, as is flying a bunch of players around all the time, is detrimental to the planet ?
why not stop families having more than one child ? that seems sensible ?
the list of this nonsense goes on forever........................
the problem is- we think in our stupid small human timeline- not in the timeline of a planet that is 6.5 billion years old.
A student with large ear hoop ear piercings, a really meaningful tattoo and a love of veganism, ain't changing that by not having a burger.
you could argue- why doesn't every uni just take local kids from the local town, to cut down on travel emissions, say of mummy and daddy driving down in the range rover to bring tarquin his laundry ?
why not just employ teachers who only travel on foot, by push bike, or by yogurt powered yurts with wheels ?
why not ban all football- its pointless and surely the travel emissions of getting millions of nylon clad fat people about the UK each week to watch the reds or the blues, as is flying a bunch of players around all the time, is detrimental to the planet ?
why not stop families having more than one child ? that seems sensible ?
the list of this nonsense goes on forever........................
biggbn said:
grumbledoak said:
You can read all sorts of things. Being written down doesn't make them true.
Currently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
The alternative being pushed is arable crops on petrochemical fertilizer, plus irrigation, plus chemical herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, and plain old pest extermination. This is the environmental disaster. Our topsoil turning to dust. But no-one lives anywhere near their food any more, so the lies go unchallenged.
So what's your solution? We stop eating non meat and concentrate on meat? Are all the experts simultaneously wrong? I am genuinely interested as I like to see both sides of arguments and I know we are all guilty of confirmation bias to an extentCurrently there is a pack of lies being told about meat generally. Water, methane, deforestation, etc. Any reason they can find that they think will work. It is a well organised campaign, funded by the processed food giants. They would like nothing better than to ban their competition.
The only sustainable form of agriculture we know is meat on pasture.
The alternative being pushed is arable crops on petrochemical fertilizer, plus irrigation, plus chemical herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, and plain old pest extermination. This is the environmental disaster. Our topsoil turning to dust. But no-one lives anywhere near their food any more, so the lies go unchallenged.
Edited by biggbn on Tuesday 13th August 12:53
At least, that is what this particular university Supreme Overseer has done.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff