i am more than willing to engage on any positive claim you want to make (i probably agree with a lot of them). what i’m not willing to do is tolerate personal attacks and dogpiling.

more non falsifiable vaguery

the entire problem with your comment is that you are using vague language and not defining your terms. as a result, you have presented unfalsifiable theory.

no one should believe anything you’ve written here.

animal liberation front did some good work. earth liberation front, just stop oil… you get the idea I hope

they can organize among themselves. affinity groups that practice direct action are like my favorite political orgs.

I just want to say I love militant vegans, so long as militant means they are organized and actively creating the world they want to live in. if they are just preaching, I would not say they are militant, just evangelical.

and, to be clear, I’m neither. I just find militancy admirable.

Would fewer non human animals be exploited in a meatless Monday world? Yes.

I wouldn’t count on it

honestly too light

I thought you said it was common knowledge. is it groundbreaking research?

where is it common to have a house beer shot combo?

is it better than hoopla

Feeding calories to livestock and eating them is much less efficient than directly eating plants.

this is largely irrelevant, since most of the plants that are fed to animals are crop seconds or parts of plants that we don’t want to eat. they eat, for instance, cottonseed, which we grow for textiles, and soy cake, which is a byproduct of soybean oil production.

aside, plants love spreading seeds. they probably think it’s better to grow more of them.

ferrier

once again poore-nemecek is infecting the discourse with bad science

they existed long before anyone alive today started buying meat. there is no reason to believe they care if anyone stops.

but they never actually mitigate the differences in methodology between the studies they selected.

it’s absolutely falsifiable: show how the problems of analyzing diverse LCA models have been rectified. they don’t do this, though, they just charge ahead compiling the data.

they temper their own conclusions by pointing out the problems with their methodology. poore-nemecek doesn’t even have the honesty to do that.

quoting their own source material is not an appeal to authority. it’s pointing out flawed methodology.

this doesn’t address what I said. it’s a pure red herring attacking my style instead of the facts.

I strongly prefer to keep each comment to one idea. it helps break up Gish gallops. if you don’t like my style, you’re free to block me and remove me from you Lemmy experience.