"The case for shortening the food chain is based on bad science.... It’s bad for environment? Check out this response by James Rebanks to Cambridge University b

"The case for shortening the food chain is based on bad science.... It’s bad for environment? Check out this response by James Rebanks to Cambridge University banning meat:" which then basically says "how about addressing the primary causes of climate change, divesting your investment portfolio of fossil fuel burning activities" that's something called whataboutism. the planet absolutely cannot raise enough cows to feed 5B people, in some theoretical world where not just affluent westerners eat a lot of red meat. It takes about 1800 gallons of water to produce one pound of meat, that alone is an enormous stress on ecosystems, not to mention the vast amounts of land to raise not just the animals but all the plants that they eat. it's kind of common sense, you can have humans eating the plants, or you can have humans eating the cows that consume the plants. In the latter case you have a lot more "beings" on the planet consuming things. im a huge meat eater myself but I'm not going to complain if the world continues to move away from factory-farmed meat as a primary dietary element because it's going to have to happen anyway.