Originally Posted by Steve Babbs
A bit of research would clearly show it's not nonsense and I speak as a meat-eater. I doubt you'd find a serious scientist who disagreed but let's not stop science getting in the way of bashing people trying to reduce their carbon footprints. And yes I know mine is huge. Well done to the 'veggies' and non-fliers. I'm trying to have a more vegan diet. I have to admit I'm not doing so well on the not flying bit though.
No, its straightforward nonsense. You can only grow vegetable crops by vegetable monoculture or the yield is laughable. You can grow meat in much higher biodiversity. Ask me which is better....
Unless there are Tories about you can even grow meat in the presence of foxes and badgers.
What you can't do in either case is support the numbers of people on the planet now let alone projected growth (how I hate that word beloved of economists and politicians bankrupt of wisdom or creative intelligence). And once you've said "OK, we have to reduce the numbers of people to sustainable" you've removed the desirability of intensive farming of vegetable monoculture and very much increased the desirability of pastoralism.
Which plainly leaves the only argument for vegetarianism - let alone veganism - as being the propaganda that eating meat is wrong. Which is a religious construct based on the idea that man is superior to animals (because once you accept that man is just an animal, eating meat becomes as acceptable for man as for any other animal.) Eating meat is natural. Eating vegetables is natural. Ideas of right and wrong in a moral sense belong in diet only in relation to conservation of species - avoidance of extinction.