4 ms·

So following that logic we should eat more meat to reduce global heating and keep it below or at 1.5C increase as urged by the IPCC?

• nashashmi 4y ago
  Following that logic, we should raise more animals, either through public parks/recreations, zoos, farms, or public feeding. Like how India does it. There used to be a documentary on netflix on this. The greatest density of animals and humans, where both help each other survive.
  • uxcolumbo 4y ago
    I don't understand. I was asking you whether you meant that breeding more animals for slaughter would solve our high carbon footprint in the animal agriculture industry? If yes - then it doesn't make sense, since the science community agrees we need to reduce meat and dairy consumption not increase it. And a lot of people in India are vegetarian.
    • nashashmi 4y ago
      Raising more animals does not increase global warming. And eating those animals does not increase global warming. > lot of people in india are vegetarian. Not really. Majority are not vegetarian. only Gujurat is Majority vegetarian. Every where else they are a minority. They have made it a purpose of life to feed wild animals, and live with wild animals. It's quite fascinating.
      • uxcolumbo 4y ago
        > Raising more animals does not increase global warming. And eating those animals does not increase global warming. Raising more animals will mean more resources are required, such as land, water etc. It's more efficient to use that land and use that water to grow food for us. So are you saying the scientific community is wrong by saying that the world needs to reduce meat & dairy consumption?