• capital
    link
    11 year ago

    I don’t know of any other way to put this…

    We have land that we dedicate solely to growing food for animals. Not the waste, not land that is otherwise unusable.

    That is not environmentally friendly when we could feed far more people by NOT doing that or using less farmland to feed our current population.

    Did that make more sense?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      We have land that we dedicate solely to growing food for animals. Not the waste, not land that is otherwise unusable.

      I haven’t disputed this

      • capital
        link
        11 year ago

        You seem to be by repeatedly bringing up the fact that animals can eat parts of the plants we can’t when it makes up a minuscule part of the equation so I though it prudent to really drive home.

        And now I know what part of the problem is give your other comment. I’ve already linked you a study showing how and why we could feed more people on less farmland and I even quoted the important part of it in my comment so you didn’t even have to click.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          I’ve already linked you a study showing how and why we could feed more people on less farmland

          and I don’t find your study convincing

          • capital
            link
            11 year ago

            How convenient.

            Anyway, if anyone else comes by this thread I feel pretty good about my portion. You made it really easy. Thanks!

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              if anyone else comes by this thread I feel pretty good about my portion

              the feeling is mutual.

              have a nice day!