It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


"Eating Beef More Destructive to Environment than Driving a Car"

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 02:39 PM
Mmmmm...what about all the genetically modified organisms (GMOs) or genetically engineered organisms (GEOs) found in meat, veggies, fruit and just about everything else!

Yay...The dark Backward, extra appendage thing! If I eat more of these products maybe I too, can grow a third arm....It sure would help me keeping deadlines on my art projects! ^_~

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 10:28 AM
Al Gore ignores eating meat creates global warming

Glenn Beck on how Al gore is a hypocrite. This shows how rotten Gore is. Gore is all about grabbing taxes. Do not eat meat if you want to stop global warming, but just tell that to Gore.

posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 04:10 AM
give chicken turkey or ham a chance

idk tho

i guess even eating plants would be a sin if you gonna say eating meat is a sin. they are both earths two most advanced lifeforms.

we have to develop that food pill of nutrients similar to the way it was in the jetsons cartoon lol

posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 09:36 AM

Originally posted by anhinga

Brief, interesting study being done on the effects of meat-eating & the environment. The numbers prove a large difference in energy-consumption on such a small scale... I'll look for greater, short-term impacts -- anybody have some stats like that 'around' -- please post them & thanks for checking the thread!

The article also mentions some facts I, and the study, left out that will obviously up the difference in energy-usage.

The environmental footprint of producing just over two pounds of beef is greater than that of driving a car for three hours, according to a Japanese study reported on "New Scientist."

The researchers found that it took 169 megajoules of energy to produce 2.2 pounds of beef (the equivalent of 4 average-sized steaks or nearly 9 quarter-pound burgers). This is the same amount of energy that would be consumed by leaving a 100-watt bulb burning for 20 days.

One-third of this energy went into producing and transporting the animals' feed.

In addition to energy consumption and greenhouse emissions, animal agriculture produces a great amount of pollution and consumes substantially more water than plant agriculture. Some of this effect arises merely from the fact that eating animals is less efficient than eating plants -- a single animal must consume vast quantities of plants before it is slaughtered, which means that all the energy, water and other resources used to produce those plants are ultimately going to the production of a much smaller quantity of food.

Lol. You idiots are unbelieavable. Considering most animals are slaugtered by hand these days.. And only hoisted and restrainted by machine.. How the hell does it take so much energy to produce meat?

I think someone has a BIAS against meat eaters.

posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 12:20 PM
reply to post by TyrannyofAmerica

Do you even care to read the material offered to you, before you unleash your condescending and silly ego upon the ATS members? The quote included in your own post already includes information that should clarify things even for the most simple-minded.

posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 08:47 PM
I'm pretty damn sure I could do more damage to beef with my car rather than vice versa.

top topics
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in