Well, that's not really possible. Meat is bad coming and going, objectively speaking. The only thing meat does have going for it is the energy provides, but at the cost of poor health and hurting literarily everyone. If meat producers weren't so greedy, and produced less, a lot less, only what was necessary, a lot of the harm that comes with meat could be mitigated, not the health risks, just the carbon contribution.
btw, any time I am mentioned, me personally, what I know or don't know, or what I am, etc. etc., a fallacious argument is being constructed. Fallacy is unpersuasive, fwiw.
> The only thing meat does have going for it is the energy provides
Meat doesn't simply provide energy, it's a very nutritious food source. Livestock can and should be part of making our agriculture more sustainable.
> but at the cost of poor health and hurting literarily everyone.
Yes, we've established that you think the meat is bad, except you've not actually provided any evidence that it is bad.
> If meat producers weren't so greedy, and produced less, a lot less, only what was necessary, a lot of the harm that comes with meat could be mitigated, not the health risks, just the carbon contribution.
If any industry that contributes to greenhouse emissions produced less of what is causing those greenhouse emissions, that'd be a net good, probably. It's a balancing act between what people need for survival and what's good for the earth itself. Obviously you think that meat should be produced at a small fraction of the rate it's being produced at now, but I think that's got little to do with the environmental impact given how demonstrably dogmatic you've been throughout this conversation.
> btw, any time I am mentioned, me personally, what I know or don't know, or what I am, etc. etc., a fallacious argument is being constructed. Fallacy is unpersuasive, fwiw.
You've literally said that vegans are likely more healthy than I am and that I'm just trying to justify my lifestyle. When confronted with actual facts, you rejected them as bunk science. The cognitive dissonance you're experience is apparent.
Well, that's not really possible. Meat is bad coming and going, objectively speaking. The only thing meat does have going for it is the energy provides, but at the cost of poor health and hurting literarily everyone. If meat producers weren't so greedy, and produced less, a lot less, only what was necessary, a lot of the harm that comes with meat could be mitigated, not the health risks, just the carbon contribution.
btw, any time I am mentioned, me personally, what I know or don't know, or what I am, etc. etc., a fallacious argument is being constructed. Fallacy is unpersuasive, fwiw.