What a Relief: Cows Not Guilty for Global Warming



by the Left Coast Rebel

To eat, or not to eat - red meat. One thing that I have noticed in the recent history of global warming fear mongering is urban California residents that abstain from eating red meat (read: cows) because doing so contributes to global warming. I kid you not, our society, or at least the left coast version of it, has come down to this.

Perhaps now all of you greenies out there can breathe a non-carbon dioxide sigh of relief. Via London's Telegraph:

In the past environmentalists, from Lord Stern to Sir Paul McCartney, have urged people to stop eating meat because the methane produced by cattle causes global warming.

However a new study found that cattle grazed on the grasslands of China actually reduce another greenhouse gas, nitrous oxide.

Uh, ok, go forth and prosper, to eat red meat. Not so fast. The greenie-teeth gnashers are here to rain on the party:

Authors of the paper, published in Nature, say the research does not mean that producing livestock to eat is good for the environment in all countries. However in certain circumstances, it can be better for global warming to let animals graze on grassland.

The research will reignite the argument over whether to eat red meat after other studies suggested that grass fed cattle in the UK and US can also be good for the environment as long as the animals are free range.

Also, coming soon, cow-whale hybrids. Can I have my tuna/dolphin and hamburger too?:

dolphin and cow.img_assist_custom


Without a little humor in politics today, we would all go insane! Via Memeorandum

2 comments:

  1. I'm not buying it. I will continue to eat steaks as often as I can in order to save our planet.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Vegetarianism is against my religion.

    ReplyDelete

Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.