It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Meat must be rationed to four portions a week

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Meat must be rationed to four portions a week


www.guardian.co.uk

People will have to be rationed to four modest portions of meat and one litre of milk a week if the world is to avoid run-away climate change, a major new report warns.

The report, by the Food Climate Research Network, based at the University of Surrey, also says total food consumption should be reduced, especially "low nutritional value" treats such as alcohol, sweets and chocolates.
(visit the link for the full news article)



+4 more 
posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   
...and the biggest sham in the world marches on.

I am absolutely dumbfounded at how many people continue to buy into the myth of Global Warming. Even more troubling is seeing it continue to be used as a tool for mass control & coerced behavioral change.


Tara Garnett, the report's author, warned that campaigns encouraging people to change their habits voluntarily were doomed to fail and urged the government to use caps on greenhouse gas emissions and carbon pricing to ensure changes were made.

SCREW YOU!

I am completely befuddled at how people who express such massive outrage over even the mildest of percieved personal freedom restrictions aren't screaming at the tops of their lungs over the mere suggestion that we should be forced into eating less meat or changing our lifestyle over bunk science with far more evidence against Global Warming than evidence in support of the trashed theory.

www.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:16 AM
link   
And the lunacy continues.

Honestly, how many people can still believe this GW garbage? It's insane!

I'll be increasing my daily intake of meat and milk from now on by the way.




posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Then I guess the world is going to suffer because I refuse to give up meat, it tastes too good.

Now if only I could convince my fiance that global warming is in fact a sham.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   
If all of these cows doing what they do is supposed to be responsible for GW than shouldn't we be eating more meat? Like, a whole lot more? We must eat them faster than they can reproduce. Maybe have a national BBQ to fight GW?

*edited to remove phrase "beating more meat" as that is clearly another topic altogether.

[edit on 30-9-2008 by thisguyrighthere]



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Solid. I'll be buying meat from the black market then.

*cue comical imagination of a dodgy looking guy with a long overcoat with bacon strips attached to the inside*



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   
and the health recommendation for a growing child is a pint of milk a day for the calcium for there growing bones.....

` sorry son after 4 days you can`t have anymore milk`



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   
It's great !

Global Warming and the other zionist garbage is being dismissed faster than the goons can spin it.

Aw, diddums. Did the sheepies get too smart too fast ?

Answer: No. We were never sheep. It's you ziocons making the same mistake AGAIN .. by overestimating your pathetically inadequate selves and underestimating us.

Get back to your caves ! Better still, get off OUR world ! And take your stupid Global Warming and other lies with you !



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:34 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Anyone who would believe in this crap should be eaten themselves!!! What a joke... What a bunch of losers!!! It's none of the flipping business how much meat we eat... They can go to he...



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   
I don't eat meat and I hardly get through a litre of milk a week. Will I be able to sell my rations or swap them?

As for eating too many foods with "low nutritional value", I agree; there's too many people that eat too much and eat too much #. What makes all this worse is that staggering amount of food wastage perpetrated by the consumer and the food industry itself.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


So it is safe for me to assume that you place no value on personal freedoms? Isn't it a man's right to eat whatever he pleases regardless of nutritional value? What other freedoms do you believe should be restricted?



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:51 AM
link   
The problem is twofold here.

The first problem is that it's from the guardian, a notorious "luvvie" paper, and one which is swamped with right-on liberals who think they know what's best for us better than we do ourselves.

The scond problem is that this advice makes very good sense, but it is presented in a way which links it to GW - which makes everyone go "oh, for gods sake, not again, just shut up and leave me alone" rather than making the very good point that if people want to be healthier, then they should cut down on meat and dairy, and live more as our parents/grandparents did after WWII.

Personaly, I cut back on meat a few years ago and now feel pretty healthy in the sense of what I eat.

The report also said that alarmist theories about meat production, and that everyone should become veggie or vegan to help combat "climate change" were rubbish, so I think people should really read the whole article before succumbing to the temptation of a knee jerk reaction.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


So it is safe for me to assume that you place no value on personal freedoms? Isn't it a man's right to eat whatever he pleases regardless of nutritional value? What other freedoms do you believe should be restricted?


White shoes after Labor Day!

I generally believe the western world consumes too much of everything and wastes far too much. I'm also concerned with the idea that Big Business has the freedom to sell food that has so little or even no nutritional value at all. To me, that's not food, that's something else; that's selling nothing but flavour. I'm not keen on the way consumers are often mislead or just blatantly lied to about what they eat, the way nutritional information is hidden away or made inaccessible.

Also, I really don't like talking in absolutes as you're doing. I'm staggered that you can conclude that I support "no" personal freedoms at all from the post you replied to.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Aha! I found the solution to this problem:






As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski

The scond problem is that this advice makes very good sense, but it is presented in a way which links it to GW - which makes everyone go "oh, for gods sake, not again, just shut up and leave me alone" rather than making the very good point that if people want to be healthier, then they should cut down on meat and dairy, and live more as our parents/grandparents did after WWII.

Personaly, I cut back on meat a few years ago and now feel pretty healthy in the sense of what I eat.

The report also said that alarmist theories about meat production, and that everyone should become veggie or vegan to help combat "climate change" were rubbish, so I think people should really read the whole article before succumbing to the temptation of a knee jerk reaction.


I agree completely. Whether or not people believe in global warming, it still makes sense to address the way we live; we just consume and waste too much. It's the same with oil arguments, even if you think there's going to be the same amount of oil around in a 100 years as there is today, doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking around to find alternatives or ways to make things more efficient &c.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


I was merely trying to determine if you were opposed to all freedoms or if you merely were picking & choosing them.

Clearly I disagree with you whole heartedly. The corporations wouldn't make foods like that if there wasn't a demand from consumers for them. I'm pretty big on free market capitalism & on a man's right to use his hard earned dollars to purchase whatever he wishes, including junk food, as long as that purchase doesn't infringe on the basic rights of others.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Well I thought it was the other way around, The Bush administraiton always condemned the theory of Global warming. And Zionist for the theory. Rather odd that is.



BTW, Why is global warming not real, because Americans have to pay tax, is that it? If money heated up the world, It will still be cool.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   
The article is merely suggestive. But it has been posted as if it is law going into effect tomorrow.

Now there are a bunch of people running around thinking we are going to have meat rationing.

But to ask people to voluntarily do it is not a bad idea. It is about the level of healthy consumption anyways.

And I doubt anyone would cut back on children. A decent parent would give their kid their milk anyways.

We have way too much economy based on the dairy and beef industry for legislation to ever be passed like this, unless something else was involved like the sudden dying off of millions of cattle.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Global Warming is a Hoax, but gee-whiz, the New World Order is as real as it comes!

I love these forums.

Somewhat on topic; Sure, eat what you want, but lowering the amount we take in wouldn't be terrible.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join