Good point. Also keep in mind the 5.5% of livestock emissions simply replaced the emissions by hundreds of millions of bison/buffalo, elk, deer, etc that we wip

Good point. Also keep in mind the 5.5% of livestock emissions simply replaced the emissions by hundreds of millions of bison/buffalo, elk, deer, etc that we wiped out. So the livestock contribution is pretty much zero if you offset it with the loss of bison/buffalo, etc emissions. And we have been in a global warming trend for thousands of years. Most of north america ( including NYC ) was under a sheet of ice, in some places sheet of ice 2 miles high. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas It's disappointing to me that the nytimes would use climate change as a tool to push a highly environmentally and biologically destructive lifestyle like veganism. I wonder how many of the authors of the article has even farmed a day in their lives. And the article reeks of ideology rather than news. Where is the news in the article? It's just pushing vegan propaganda which harms more young people everyday than nonsense like anti-vax movement. Vegans have starved their babies to death thinking that veganism is a healthy human diet. But I doubt they'd get as much backlash as the netflix '13 steps' producers did. The most environmentally and biologically friendly human diet is the omnivore diet. It has been since humans began and it will be while humans exist. Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is a well established idea. I wish journalists would simply report news rather than pushing destructive ideologies, especially since they haven't a clue what they are talking about most of the time. They aren't an expert in almost anything they write about. So why not stick to reporting? Why give "advice"?