Submitted by vpuetf t3_10dy0q7 in Futurology
APEHASKILLEDAPE t1_j4o4osx wrote
No and we need to stop this nonsense about eating bugs. If this is something you find appealing then great but for those of us who don’t, never gonna happen.
KorewaRise t1_j4ose9x wrote
fun fact. its a massive misconception that "they want you to eat bug". their usually ground into a flour like substance. stuff like cricket flour already exists and its incredibly healthy.
when hear of "meat replacement" you probably think bug steaks but it'd really be like a bread or something that has an incredibly high protein content. and even if its bug steaks, we really need to take in just how BAD the meat industry is. shit is responsable for 14.5% of the worlds carbon emissions or 60% of all food related emissions, the meat industry is very unsustainable.
Pubelication t1_j4pl2sv wrote
57% of that 14% is livestock, plant-based is 29%.
Let's pretend that all livestock disappears. Where the fuck do you think the emissions from livestock, which are mostly caused by transportation and farming machinery are going to go? Those people will need to eat something. In Europe for example, the only place that vegetables grow from Oct to Mar are in the very south (Spain, Italy, Greece), and heated greenhouses with artificial lighting. Livestock is available year-round locally and virtually unaffected by weather.
KorewaRise t1_j4rp3cx wrote
oh wow its almost like we're trying to find alternatives that pollute less, require less overhead and logistics. but based off this comment section y'all don't give a shit, you just want meat no matter the consequences
Pubelication t1_j4rprmi wrote
Okay, but like I mentioned, fruits/vegetables require much more logistics as they don't grow year-round, whereas a pig dgaf about winter if it has a pen.
KorewaRise t1_j4rtskp wrote
it also needs to shit, fart, eat, drink water, breathe, etc. animals need a metric fuck ton more resources than plants.
live stock uses 36% of all crops we grow for animal feed.
80% of ALL agricultural land goes toward livestock or their food.
it also takes YEARS to actually eat it, a fucking sweet potatoe takes like 90 days to grow.
we could easily feed the world 4 times over if we didn't have such a meat addiction, but we rather destroy the planet than quit eating as much meat.
nameTotallyUnique t1_j4q6bq9 wrote
Well for the 29% plant based to make since a big percentage of that is feeding the livestock. Else i would like to see the source on livestock emmision being smaller then plantbased.
Pubelication t1_j4q7gr5 wrote
It's not smaller, it's 57% vs 29%.
But if all people eating meat stopped, the emissions from plant farming to replace those calories would skyrocket. The only way to lower plant-based food emissions is to not ship it, which would mean almost the entire northern hemisphere would have no fruits or vegetables half the year, or they'd have to be grown in heated and artificially lit greenhouses, which again creates emissions.
It makes more sense to not ship meat around as much and buy local. In Europe that's caused by some countries subsidizing certain meat types and exporting them.
nameTotallyUnique t1_j4qakc1 wrote
Thanks for the clearup.
Well alot of the food to raise livestock is shipped anyhow. Yes shipping anything that can produced locally doesnt make to much sense. But i would assume that the emmissions of transportation of it using containerships is small compared to the production.
If all peole stopped eating meat we would certainly save emmission even if transported. And ofc plant based emmissions would go up. Same as if everyone stopped eating advocates and eat apples instead the emission for apples would go up but the total emmision that was for applea and advocatoes would deastical go down.
But yes eating locally makes sense and it's another debate. Plant based can easily be produced locally aswell.
harooh t1_j4q0bjd wrote
but my chicken nuggets!
berrytas t1_j52omf5 wrote
you're so brainwashed, it's insane. meat is the most nutrient-dense food on the planet and is no more climate-harsh than vegetables will become if they replace those fields. humans have prized meat for 100,000s of years, but because its been trendy for 5 years, now you'll eat roaches. makes sense.
KorewaRise t1_j53b50v wrote
just because its been done for a long time doesn't mean its good.
​
>you're so brainwashed, it's insane.
ironic. you say this three days later as you know you're not arguing in good faith and if this thread was still active others would dog pile you too. piss off you fetid excuse
Floveet t1_j4pds8t wrote
If meat is 14% what makes for the majority ? Is it the biggest one or one of the issue only and there s something bigger ? If there is something bigger and more reponsible for carbon emissions, how about focusing on that then? How about big corp and factories ?
KorewaRise t1_j4pf369 wrote
btw almost all cars emit almost the same as the meat industry does. everyone all gong ho about going ev, by going all ev it would have the same impact as eating less meat. climate change is a multifaceted thing we cant just tackle 1 angle and call it a day. we need to hit them all and get net negative asap (but thats easier said than done when all politicians have this same mindset).
idk what it is with this mentally of only being able to focus on 1 thing at a time.
Mindrust t1_j4rmr5k wrote
Seriously, don't understand why this is being pushed so hard recently. It will never be a thing in first world countries.
SlouchyGuy t1_j4oyihk wrote
We already eat them - shrimp, crabs, crawfish
Devlos00 t1_j4p463r wrote
Who is we? I don’t eat those things.
ToothlessGrandma t1_j4p5u6x wrote
Neither do I, and I wish people would stop calling them bugs. That's a clear attempt at gaslighting the situation. The average person doesn't think of those things when someone says bugs.
Never once in my entire life have I thought of sea creatures as bugs.
dehehn t1_j4p66q3 wrote
Insects are descended from marine crustaceans.
w0mbatina t1_j4pafqy wrote
Yeah and cows are descended from fish, but you dont see them on a seafood platter.
dehehn t1_j4pbryf wrote
Except spiders actually look like crabs. Cows don't look like fish.
Pubelication t1_j4q2qzh wrote
> Except spiders actually look like crabs.
Yeah, if you're looking through a bottle of vodka.
dehehn t1_j4qzp8v wrote
Uh. No. They're both 8 joint-legged creatures with bulbous bodies and exoskeletons. Compared to a fish and a cow they are extremely similar.
If ya'll want to convince yourself that eating crabs isn't gross I understand it. But it's pretty funny hearing you all act like they're not very close.
I'm happy you enjoy your ocean bugs.
DreamerMMA t1_j4pbu11 wrote
Surf and Turf.
ToothlessGrandma t1_j4p6e10 wrote
Who cares man. Nobody is calling shrimps bugs. That's your attempt at trying to make eating them more manageable. It's not going to work though.
Like I said, I've never in my life heard anyone refer to shrimp as bugs. You just can't all of a sudden start referring to them like that. It's not how the world works.
dehehn t1_j4pbzzg wrote
A lot of people think shrimp and crabs look like bugs. Myself included. Part of the reason I don't like crabs. And I hate shrimp when they have heads and feet still attached.
Don't know why you think I want you to eat bugs. I never said that. I don't want to eat insects or crab. I think all invertebrates are gross.
Mindrust t1_j4rn3j8 wrote
The difference is those things all live in the ocean, and not crawling on my leg at 3 AM when I'm in bed.
sersarsor t1_j4pepg6 wrote
It's like trying to stop global warming. People in developed countries will never settle for anything that has the appearance of being worse than what they're used to. But honestly, apart from the fact that you think they're disgusting, why won't you eat bugs?
APEHASKILLEDAPE t1_j4pgurv wrote
Because their bugs,
GTholla t1_j4pjmzm wrote
had bedbugs and fleas each at one point in my life, now have a phobia towards bugs. I'm also autistic and have sensory issues for food. I'm not certain I could eat bugs without having an attack of some kind.
frankly I find your take very antagonisic. for most, its nowhere near as deep as 'this is below me and I am used to better than this!!'. rather, it's 'those are insects, and I associate insects with decay, which triggers a primal disgust reaction in me'.
sersarsor t1_j4pko8w wrote
>for most
The situation you described as your own does not apply for the majority of people and is only anecdotal. There are a lot of primal instincts that are no longer helpful in modern controlled environments. Overall, I think if humans were more open-minded to eating things such as other parts of livestock (innards), sea creatures, and insects, we'd be able to drastically reduce our carbon footprint per capita.
swingtuck t1_j4sv5kb wrote
How would you feel about eating shit if they made it into edible meat-like patties and bread with lots of protein?
sersarsor t1_j4t67dp wrote
Well considering recycled urine is a thing, and used on the space station, your proposition isn't very far fetched. See below for more information:
https://www.nasa.gov/content/year-in-space-crew-will-drink-730-liters-of-recycled-urine-and-sweat
swingtuck t1_j4xf8ob wrote
Well that changes things guys, they recycle piss in the space station, so line me up for some shit patty burgers to save the Earth while Bill Gates has a fresh steak from a cow.
sersarsor t1_j4y89ty wrote
If we keep destroying our natural environment, one day we'll have to use technology to process to make food from thing you won't accept. At that point you can either choose to be malnourished or be more open and explore new diets.
swingtuck t1_j52v8i2 wrote
> If we keep destroying our natural environment, one day we'll have to use technology to process to make food from thing you won't accept
More so if suckers like you keep jerking off about eating bugs for the benefit of the ultra wealthy.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments