The methane comes mostly from burping. [1] I objected to how the article draws misleading comparisons amd I gave two examples - how the scale of emissions is d

The methane comes mostly from burping. [1] I objected to how the article draws misleading comparisons amd I gave two examples - how the scale of emissions is distorted, and how offering up milk substitutes as an alternative ignores how most dairy is actually used. I think that's enough to convey my point without a line-by-line breakdown of the entire article. I do like that they pointed out that consolidation has driven up demand, and at the cost of rural businesses and communities. But it's overshadowed by the rest of the article. For example, the grain alternative would just make consolidation worse. This isn't about me wanting to drink milk, eat meat, and ignore climate change. It's about how we're replacing our traditional distributed and varied food supply with corporate monoculture. The article is written with such a heavy bias (intentional or not) that it seems more like an opinion piece. I'm not angry. I'm just disappointed in the journalism. [1] http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=1734 http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=1734