Meat made from recycled carbon dioxide

Haha - you never know. HN is going to live on forever and some sentient AI will parse this content and agree that it is illogical to use meat & diary to feed the world as there are other foods that require far fewer resources ;)

So the latest report from UN's IPCC says this:

“In addition to climate mitigation gains, a transition towards more plant-based consumption and reduced consumption of animal-based foods, particularly from ruminant animals, could reduce pressure on forests and land used for feed, support the preservation of biodiversity and planetary health, and contribute to preventing forms of malnutrition (i.e. undernutrition, micronutrient deficiency, and obesity) in developing countries. Other co-benefits include lowering the risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and reducing mortality from diet-related non-communicable diseases.”

From: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/

An Oxford Uni study said this:

“Imbalanced diets, such as diets low in fruits and vegetables, and high in red and processed meat, are responsible for the greatest health burden globally and in most regions. At the same time the food system is also responsible for more than a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions, and therefore a major driver of climate change.”

From: https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/news/201603-plant-based-di...

So the message is clear - shifting to a more plant-base diet is the single biggest way an individual can do to reduce their environmental impact.

> Yep. That's what I linked you to, above. How chicken nuggets are made.

I misunderstood. I thought you meant plant based chicken nuggets, which they weren't, hence why it was confusing.

I'm talking about Quorn nuggets (Mycoprotein) - look at how they are produced compared to how nuggets made from animal flesh are made. Looks way cleaner and not as disgusting.

And they are also healthier:

"Clinical trials on Quorn show that it can improve satiety and help people control cholesterol, blood sugar, and insulin levels."

From: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-health-effects-of-mycop...

So the point is - these products will help people who like chicken nuggets or burgers - transition to a more plant-based diet. Nobody is telling you to eat them.

You clearly think animals are just like potatoes and can be treated accordingly - like an object. Whether they have to endure pain or suffering doesn't matter to you - as long as you get your cheese and meat.

> Oh, wait, you think because I don't want to eat your fake nuggets, that can only mean I want to eat the chicken ones?

Who said anything about you having to eat plant based nuggets? This whole discussion wasn't about what you - cheese_goddess - personally eat. It was about how to feed the world sustainably and without effing up our biosphere. Our current system is not sustainable, because of animal factory farming. Getting protein from animals at this scale is illogical. And on top of that - it's cruel.

> Black and white thinking, typical of fanatics with little understanding of the world beyond their gurus' teachings.

What guru? And what teachings are you talking about?

I follow 2 principles:

1) Evidence based - I rely on our scientific community. The conclusion from those credible sources, i.e. IPCC, UN, PCRM, Oxford Uni, and many others, clearly state a move towards a plant-based diet is required to help avert a climate crisis and environmental damage.

2) Observational data... i.e. I've been to farms and more importantly watched enough videos of factory farms and slaughterhouses. It's cruel and you can see the pain & fear in the animals eyes. Do you really think killing a baby sheep just because we want to taste its soft and juicy flesh when it's not necessary for our survival is morally justified? Is it morally justified to kill another sentient being for taste pleasure?

Also, let's look up the definition of fanatic - according to a dictionary it means "a person exhibiting excessive enthusiasm and intense uncritical devotion".

The way you argued and the way you continue to ignore scientific evidence points to an 'intense uncritical devotion' and you choosing your current username - cheese_goddess - seems to suggest you match this line 'exhibiting excessive enthusiasm'.

Again - I encourage you to switch off your bias towards the false image you have of veganism (= reduced or no cruelty) and look at the scientific evidence instead.

Where did I say that? I would suggest you read more carefully and not just place words in other people's mouths.

I said a 'more plant-based diet', which means a reduction in meat consumption. And guess what - if more people would choose to follow this advice given by those organizations listed previously - it would mean fewer animals would have to be killed, which in turn means less cruelty towards animals overall and environmental destruction, i.e. a more vegan planet.

And read the official definition of veganism I posted earlier. It's not dogmatic, but rather promotes pragmatism. It says to avoid exploiting animals when practically possible, which means that it's unavoidable to eat meat when you need it to survive and there are no other foods available.

> The food industry is responsible for the destruction of the environment

Yes agreed. Our food system is not sustainable - that's why it needs to change.

> Because you don't really care about the environment, about animal suffering, or about peoples' lives.

If I don't care about animal suffering or the environment, why have I given up supporting the meat & dairy industry and stopped consuming their products? Doesn't make sense, does it?

> Pfffhahaha. That's just a laughable attempt to try and turn the tables on me.

How am I turning the tables? You called me a fanatic and being part of a cult. I merely explained, based on the official definition of fanatic - your behavior and comments show traits of being a fanatic, someone who isn't able to shift their opinion, even if there is ample evidence to show their opinion is flawed. Your opinion seems to be a) meat industry doesn't destroy the environment, b) animals don't suffer or feel pain.

> It doesn't work because I don't have any ideology

Definition of Ideology: "a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture"

Based on your comments, your ideology seems to be that animals are here to serve us, it's OK to exploit and kill them regardless of consequences. It's OK for them to suffer so we can have our cheese & meat. Tradition trumps logic and critical thinking. Many people have that view about animals - so wouldn't you say you're part of that group - sharing the same content of thinking?

> You only care about one singular subject: meat. Meat meat meat meat meat.

What do you mean? I don't follow. I mentioned several subjects. So for your benefit, let me list them again:

- Protecting the Environment

- Animal rights - not taking their life against their will

- Not supporting an industry that makes factory farm workers suffer from PTSD

> But you are. Because you're a fanatic, a zealot, a follower, a cult member. You don't like it? Get used to it.

So a 'follower' of scientific evidence means I'm part of a cult and I'm a fanatic?

A fanatic usually doesn't change their opinion when presented with evidence. Show me the evidence that:

A) animal factory farming doesn't create environmental damage

B) animals are like plants - i.e. animals don't suffer and that's why it's OK to kill and exploit them.

I used to eat meat when I was a teenager - but then changed my opinion when I saw what damage my eating habits caused.

Sorry to say this, but the term fanatic applies more to your current behavior - as you ignore the evidence.

Please explain how my replies were spitefully unpleasant?

I'm trying to have a meaningful debate.

I presented you with ample evidence - even your own articles you posted and yet you've not answered most of my questions.

Instead you resort to snotty comments like this one.