| Farsala said: Does that mean half a billion animals fewer are being born too? After all no need for them to the industry. |
Of course it would do yeah, they're not after turning those battery farms for chickens into petting zoo's because of any changes that might happen.... on that note.
This site looks terrible, the formatting of the article is first year of college stuff and the source for the stuff is an even worse looking site suggesting that a trend could be drawn from this to a change on a grand scale of things, it's nothing but looking at some garbage data and trying to spin a number that looks good for their bottom line., if you actually read this paragraph not only is there a basic typo mistake in it but also the sentence structuring is that of an angered teenage tweet instead of research or study material
"
The meat industry is one of the biggest polluters of the earth’s atmosphere. 51% of all greenhouse gasses come from farming and animal agriculture and the demands on the planet in terms of the space that it takes up and the drain on resources are huge.
Animals bred for meat use a huge amount of water, a single cow consumes 50 gallons of water on a normal day.
If the trend continues and the number of animals that are slaughtered each year reduces by the same amount, it won’t be long before the meat industry represents only a tiny proportion of the foods that we consume every day."
Reading that last line made me think.... is this site for real? And we see a disclaimer at the end in very small text suggesting the site is just opinions and entertainment not to be taken as a substitute for any professional advice of any kind.
the site it comes from has "Collective Evolution (CE) believes in creating change by thinking outside the box. We aim to challenge the current status quo by shaking up how we currently think about the world. "
So yeah that article is trash but why Vince you might think? there is a number there, the actual number of animals being killed has reduced in the last 10 years right, so that must be less meat being eaten?
That is the same as to suggest that there are less aeroplane flights today than there was 40 years ago which must mean that there are less people traveling by planes.... The article fails to mention things which have also changed in the last 11 years since 2007, the increased efficiency of mechanically recovering meat to use, addition of Ash into more and more pet foods as they can reduce the meat content with anything up to 25% in certain pet foots, also GMO is still a huge thing, the size of a cow being butchered today is going to be massively larger than one killed in 2007, there have been a ton of reports that the size of animals have actually started to change certain portions and servings of meats even because of this.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-new-steak-cuts-larger-cattle-20171207-story.html
Steak literally so big that they need to cut it up more to make use of the giant animal size... so yeah you might kill a certain number less of livestock, but that livestock is absolutely fed and bred to the absolute limits of how much meat can be on a single animal and then we take that and butcher it in a way to literally whip every single gram of meat from the bone, to grind up the bones eyes and offal and mix that with ash to feed to our pets.
To try to spin a reduction in the number of animals being butchered to vegans not eating them is again the same as suggesting that the reduction in the number of Warehouse sized supercomputers suggests that we are moving away from relying on computers in 2018..... and not the absolute obvious fact that your cell phone today is on par with a super computer from the 90s.
read a few posts from say.... this article right here
Then look at the fact that it is from 10 years ago and they're talking about their awesome desktops which are 30mhz in power and speaking about super computers then.... 10 years ago which are
Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive
