• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 months ago

    there are literally thousands of pages in the reports you just linked if you can’t show which one you think supports your case I’m not going to be doing all the reading for

    • @jeffw
      link
      English
      111 months ago

      Good. You’ll have plenty of reading to keep you busy. I’m still waiting for your sources where you refute Nemecek btw. To summarize, your arguments so far are the widely debunked “land for cattle feed can’t be used for human food or forests” and “Nemecek is inaccurate because I disagree with their math, despite the article being cited and confirmed by hundreds of other studies.”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 months ago

        the article has been cited but it has never been confirmed. it can’t be because it makes no sense to attribute the weight from pressing soybeans for oil to the livestock industry when the livestock industry is only using the waste.

        • @jeffw
          link
          English
          111 months ago

          Waiting for your evidence lol

          80% of deforestation is for cattle feed. They don’t use waste

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            111 months ago

            you’re just lying now. we know that cattle are fed silage which is waste and crop seconds.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 months ago

        poor nemechek is easy to refute. read it they attribute the water used to raise cotton for the textile industry as water used to produce beef. the methodology is fucked.

        • @jeffw
          link
          English
          111 months ago

          Tell me you didn’t read the study without telling me you didn’t read the study. This is hilarious and you can’t find one legitimate article backing you up