The Anti Meat Agenda’s 4 Biggest Propaganda Pieces Destroyed By Truth
Meat lovers rejoice, you are not destroying the planet!
Stopping eating meat won’t save the planet, here is why
Firstly, does the planet need saving?
A modest increase in temperature along with increased CO2 levels seems like a recipe for life flourishing. Pollution and destruction of habitat and wild life for say example, mining and refining lithium to create batteries for electric cars is a definitely a problem.
In general the planet is probably ok though. Humans, well that’s another issue…
A lot of the climate alarmist movement is centred around the idea that humans are the sole reason for the climate changing. Nobody in climate alarmism has any idea why climate changed pre industrial revolution. All we know now is that pretty much every western country is to blame for everything. Never mind that China emits more greenhouse gases than the rest of the developed word.
But even of those greenhouse gases, if people knew the truth about CO2 their perspectives on these gases would surely change.
However, those in the climate alarmist movement would have you think otherwise. According to them, the world is ending and it’s all because of humans. Apparently stopping to eat animals would save the planet and solve a lot of issues we are facing. Apparently, our meaty diet is destroying the planet?
Common lines include:
– To make a burger it takes 2500+ litres of water
– The food we feed to cattle, humans could eat
– The land we use for cattle could be more efficiently used for crops
– Methane emitted from cow burps/farts is a serious problem
These phrases sound good when one is seeking to be bathing in the glow of climate virtue. However, when unpacked and put against science, they all fall apart. Such is the way with propaganda…
Let’s unpack these climate lies.
1. To make a burger it takes 2500+ litres of water
Firstly, the important distinction here has to be made between different kinds or grades of water.
– Blue water:
Fresh surface and groundwater, in other words, the water in freshwater lakes, rivers and aquifers.
– Green water:
The water held in soil and available to plants. Green water is essentially rain water. It is the largest freshwater resource.
– Grey water:
Is used household water sourced from baths, showers, bathroom basins and laundries and still can be recycled for crops.
– Black water:
Is essentially sewage and includes water from toilets and is un useable before treatment.
There is a big difference between water that has to be irrigated from fresh water sources as opposed to water that is readily available in the soil or falls from the sky as rain.
The energy/nature cost for 1 gallon of blue water and 1 gallon of green water is not the same.
The 2500 litres of water for one burger may be accurate but if 2350 of those litres are coming from green water, then its not an issue. This water is freely falling from the sky.
In fact, a better figure is the fact that for one ¼ pound beef burger you need 122L of blue water. 94% of water used for growing cattle is green water. Then most of the water that enters the cow, leaves the cow with urination.
70% of the world fresh water usage goes to irrigating crops.
For ¼ pound of Californian almonds you need 1097L of blue water, nearly 10x as much!
We can see below how figures can be manipulated. If you don’t split the difference between green and blue water, you can paint cows as the bad guys.
But when you realise most of the water used by cattle is green water and falls from the sky for free as rain compared to growing Almonds where its nearly all blue water.
We see these charts…
Nows let’s balance things out with the truth
See how statistics and numbers can be manipulated to suit a narrative?
The water foot print of one almond is actually something like 3.2 gallons PER ALMOND.
Of those 3.2 gallons, about one third comes from blue water. So approximately 1 Gallon of blue water is required to make one almond. Think about that.
Another one of the climate lies has been unravelled with just this one statistic and looking at the data beyond catchy headlines.
We are not stopping there though.
2. The food we feed to cattle could be fed to humans
Check out these couple catchy lines:
“We could feed an extra 3.5 Billion people if we just ate the stuff we feed to animals.”
Sounds good right, what could argue with that?
“A solution to climate change, we could stop eating animals.”
Well, facts and reality have a good argument against these incredibly virtuous statements.
Firstly we have to look at what is being fed to livestock, can humans actually eat all the produce we feed to cattle?
Short answer, no.
About 84-84% of feed used for livestock across the board is non-human edible. Animals are not eating food that humans could eat. Cattle are upcycling nutrients, making available feed that would otherwise be wasted.
The husks from all those almonds for example, inedible for us, perfect for cattle. So keeping livestock works in symbiosis with crops. If we didn’t raise animals much of what the agricultural industry produces would go to waste!
“Livestock contribute to food security by supplying essential macro- and micro-nutrients, providing manure and draught power, and generating income. But they also consume food edible by humans and graze on pastures that could be used for crop production”
~ Science Direct
Another piece of propaganda destroyed.
3. The land we use for cattle could more efficiently be used for crops
Without ruminants, 2/3 of our food producing land would go to waste.
Why is that?
Of all the agricultural land in the world 2/3 of that land is marginal land meaning crops cannot be grown there.
The remaining 25.8% of land would go to waste if not used by livestock
There is a theme here developing that I hope you can start to see.
Raising livestock works in symbiosis with the systems we have. They convert waste, efficiently use land that otherwise couldn’t be used for food production and produce incredibly nutrient dense food.
Another interesting fact to add to this is that all organic crops grown use fertilisers from manure and other animal products.
Last but not least.
4. Methane emitted from cow burps/farts is a serious problem
The tenacious and world ending cow burps & farts problem.
Is this really the solution here?!
Something tells me that fitting our livestock with devices that ‘catch’ their burps isn’t the solution here.
What actually makes a lot more sense is to look at nature and science to give some clarity so the descent into climate madness is halted.
Methane accounts for 10% of greenhouse gases in the US. Of that 10%, 27% comes from methane from livestock burps.
So 2.7% of green house gases come from livestock burps, and that’s all livestock not just cows.
The thing is, methane from cows and other animals comes from a natural cycle.
Let’s break it down
1. Grass absorbs CO2 from the air via photosynthesis.
2. The cow eats this grass and its carbon. C
3. In the cow, the carbon is turned into methane. CH4
4. Methane is then released into the air.
5. This Methane is then broken down in the atmosphere into water H20 and CO2.
6. Then it rains and the cycle repeats.
Funny, it is almost as if nature has this all figured out somehow…
The cows are not adding new carbon to the atmosphere. The methane they emit is made from the carbon the grass got from the air in the first place.
If you maintain about the same number of cows then the methane levels stay the same. The UK has been decreasing cattle numbers.
Which may not be a good thing! We need to improve our food security.
In the USA the numbers have stayed constant.
This is before we even consider how we want more CO2 in our environment.
Before Europeans settled the USA, there was 50m byson and elk and deer emitting the equivalent methane of 86% of livestock in the USA today.
That’s another climate lie done and dusted!
There we have it, meat lovers rejoice. By consuming meat you are actually contributing to a great ecosystem of efficient usage of our land and resources. You probably won’t need to go carnivore though, like this man has for 7+ years!
This isn’t to say that we can do better and improve this system, however the climate guilt shaming for eating meat is hugely misplaced, as with everything related to The Climate Con.
People should be free to choose what they want to eat. We can make informed choices when we have access to the truth. Why are certain forces pushing people away from eating meat?
The usual reasons for such agendas nearly always boil down to the same things.
Power, money and control.