cows are carbon beneficent.

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Aww

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Cute

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I love cows.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Cute cow!

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Melo

    Cows are carbon grey

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Remember when people thought the world was going to end because of cow farts?

      How did people ever believe that Godless communist climate alarmist propaganda anyway? I guess because they showed movies like "Inconvenient Truth" in schools, which was only released after Al Gore invested in a bunch of "green" companies. Lot of money to be made in "green" products, even if everyone is creating immeasurably more waste to buy it all or if you have to rape the earth to make those "green" products.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Melo

        Ok. My mind shouldn't do it then when I leave it up to it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nobody believes that stuff. The government friendly media publishes lies and then the people in the government use those published lies as justification for saying "everyone believes this therefore we should act on it" even though nobody believes it, not even the people who published it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why didn’t the jannie like this pic?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          the communist butthurt brigade got upset at it and their discord reported you

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The climate cultists still believe in that nonsense. They should prove their convictions by killing themselves and therefore becoming truly carbon neutral for good.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't give a shit about carbon. All of the energy cabal must die. Yes, renewables too, frick off.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      based dark ages luddite moron. Imagine current year society with no guard rails. What a show!

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >WE NEED TO CONSOOOOOOM
        >WE NEED MORE PAJEETS, MORE Black folk, CONSOOOOOM

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >p-please my family is getting killed by raiders
          >don't fret it, anon I'll go get my horse help will be here in 3 hours.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >p-please my family is getting killed by raiders
            >My sister is not a virgin anymore, can you bring your sister to satisfy mbubba and his cousins? Also my house is not big enough for them and I have nothing but my cuckshed to live in. I am worried they will be cold in winter because the windfarm shat itself and isn't outputting enough energy, I think we will need 5 more nuclear plants.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >energy is why I can't afford a house
            What? Also, yes build all the nuclear power plants. Obviously.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    if cows were LE HECKING ENDING THE WORLD.
    that this planet should've been gone millions of years ago.
    these onions want to divert peoples attention to shit that doesn't matter while flying in their jets and destroying nature to create monocrop goyslop.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    we are gonna die anyway so who fricking cares

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Cows are carbon.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >I am the savior of all animals!!!!
    >I am the savior of Mother Earth!!!
    https://www.healthline.com/health/savior-complex#signs

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    enjoy your vCJD

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >cows are carbon beneficent
    Explain please.

    Also, this is at least the second thread you open on this topic, with the same exact image.

    But please, do explain what you mean.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      OP, I asked you a question.
      Whatever it is that you're trying to get across, no one will believe you unless you explain your reasoning properly.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's a spambot you moron.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Maybe, but I can do 1 post troll threads dor shits and giggles too.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous
        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I see that, what about it?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          more greenery does not necessarily imply a carbon sink, you understand that?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://foodplanetprize.org/initiatives/the-savory-institute-re-greening-grasslands-through-grazing/
          https://www.patagonia.com/stories/a-blueprint-for-cooling-earth/story-71916.html

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I expect their following something like Elaine Ingham or mob grazing. Good stuff because it makes money while pleasing hippies.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            well, I expected my OP to answer my question too

            OP, I asked you a question.
            Whatever it is that you're trying to get across, no one will believe you unless you explain your reasoning properly.

            but here we are

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Left looks more productive than right. Left clearly better. Environmentalists are demonstrably anti human by their preference of a barren desert over pastureland.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      OP, I'm still waiting:

      OP, I asked you a question.
      Whatever it is that you're trying to get across, no one will believe you unless you explain your reasoning properly.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's a spambot you moron and I suspect you are too.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >It's a spambot
          prove it, I make 1 post troll threads on /misc/ for fun too

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    BRANDONN GET BACK TO THE HOUSE

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > cows are carbon beneficent
    Unintelligible premise, are you implying animal agriculture is a carbon beneficent? That's just untrue then

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Methane is a serious green house gas.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    would it hurt me if i pet it?

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I can't wait to have that little guy on my grill

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      His skin will also make nice jackets, boots and gloves to keep you warm during the winter too.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >in conjunction with very carefully managed diverse grasslands, and in the right areas
    You put them in marginal land and manage their habits (ie rotate their grazing and spread out their shitting) in ways that produce new diverse grasslands or croplands where marginal land once sat idle.

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >There were 60 million bison in North America before Europeans got here and as far as I know there weren't any climate issues from them.
    You mean when it was called the great american desert known for regular dust storms and mosquito filled wallows?

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >being a barren drought land due to previous generations of herd animal overpopulation is just "building up fertility" until the new socialist deal comes along

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    The climate changing into a dust filled plume every time the wind blows is enough for me.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Geologist here, let me explain some things. Back in the early 2000s a paper was published stating that cows produce more methane than pigs or chickens. This was picked up by certain animal rights groups as "eating meat endangers the climate" because methane is actually a greater greenhouse gas than CO2.

    The problem with their argument is that it's a natural part of the carbon cycle. Cows do not get carbon from space, they get it from the plants they eat, they give off methane when they burp or fart, methane breaks down into CO2 in the atmosphere and is recycled again in plants which are again eaten by cows. They're animal rights groups however, and untrustworthy in how they presented the data.

    The problem comes when we disrupt this cycle. You can say that there's problems with factory farms and there are, but free range grazing cattle is not a significant contributor to climate change. Cows are only a problem when you add fertilizers to the soil, fail to properly dispose of waste and transport feed and meat products using petroleum. Cows in and of themselves are carbon neutral.

    There IS however an additional problem in that, because we've unbalanced the natural carbon cycle any addition of methane is a problem even from something like cow farts, not because cows are intrinsically a problem but because we've fricked the atmosphere so any additional methane is going to be bad. So, the animal rights groups are right, in a sort of explanatory way.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >we've fricked the atmosphere
      no we haven't, adding CO2 to the atmosphere only enhances it. CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas, if it were Mars would have a massive measurable greenhouse effect, but Mars has no measurable greenhouse effect whatsoever.
      stick to the rocks business, you have no training in atmospheric physics.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >no we haven't, adding CO2 to the atmosphere only enhances it. CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas
        Stop. I don't know who's paying you to play ignorant and stupid, but you're doing it too well.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >not because cows are intrinsically a problem but because we've fricked the atmosphere so any additional methane is going to be bad.
      >additional methane
      But you just spent a paragraph explaining how it is not additional methane and it is just methane that would have been released into the atmosphere anyway if you let the plants compost and get eaten by bugs instead of processing them through cow stomachs.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      you're forgetting the deforestation problem too. Converting forested areas into pastures and grassland is a huge problem.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >not because cows are intrinsically a problem but because we've fricked the atmosphere so any additional methane is going to be bad.
      >additional methane
      But you just spent a paragraph explaining how it is not additional methane and it is just methane that would have been released into the atmosphere anyway if you let the plants compost and get eaten by bugs instead of processing them through cow stomachs.

      Plant matter decomposition/insects mostly releases CO2, and cows release methane, which is about 25x more potent a greenhouse gas, even if shorter-lived, and because the atmosphere is already so out-of-whack, we really do not want any more CH4 to complicate things.

      TLDR: cows convert plant carbon into methane, significantly increasing the immediate greenhouse effect compared to the CO2 produced from natural decomposition.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The carbon they sequester in their bones and in the leather and tools we make from their skin and sinew that lasts for decades makes up for the potency of the methane which can also be captured and used for fuel if it were really a major concern.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >makes up for the potency of the methane
          sauce, please

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If its 25x more potent, you would need a 1/25th or 4% carbon sequestration to make up the difference and since up to 40% of the weight of a cow is skin and bones that take more than 25x longer to decay than meat plus the 20% skin that is turned into leather and often preserved for even longer.

            >which can also be captured and used for fuel
            but it's not.
            I too wish that things were different, but they aren't.

            We do capture some environmental methane, its not an urgent issue and we don't need to capture more because we already try to limit fuel sales as it is so as not to depress the costs.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >its not an urgent issue
            I never said it was.
            Cattle increases the methane amount released into the atmosphere. No such cattle, no such increase.
            That's it, that's all that was said.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Cattle increases the methane amount released into the atmosphere.
            But it decreases the overall amount of carbon in the atmosphere by sequestration, no such cattle, no such sequestration.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >which can also be captured and used for fuel
          but it's not.
          I too wish that things were different, but they aren't.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >TLDR: cows convert plant carbon into methane, significantly increasing the immediate greenhouse effect compared to the CO2 produced from natural decomposition.
        moron take
        >Similar bacteria also exist in the environment and produce methane in wetlands, rice fields and landfills. The actual amount of methane released from a single blade of grass wouldn't change if it was just left to decompose, or if it was eaten by a cow and then digested by the bacteria in their gut.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          bacteria also exist in the environment and produce methane in wetlands, rice fields and landfills.
          sure, but that is nature in action on its own. We decide to raise cattle and convert forest areas into pastures.
          >The actual amount of methane released from a single blade of grass wouldn't change if it was just left to decompose
          As said above, it releases mostly CO2.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            This is a super moronic take.
            Domestic cattle herds have essentially replaced the wild ruminants herds that used to dominate grassland ecosystems. Wild bison and elk and buffalo and deer and gazelles also produce methane. The environment doesn't care if methane is coming from domestic or wild ruminants.
            There is virtually no correlation to global domestic cattle numbers and atmospheric methane.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous
          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >There is virtually no correlation to global domestic cattle numbers and atmospheric methane.
            Why would you assume cows to be the only source of methane on Earth?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Anon: Wild bison and elk and buffalo and deer and gazelles also produce methane.
            >You: Duhhhhh derp why you say cows only methane source?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So you're just a moron. Got it.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Like, did you even read my original post? There is nothing intrinsically wrong with cow farts. The problem is the methods we use to produce cattle feed for factory farms, the fertilizers, the shipment of meat and the stockpiling of waste. Your example of wild ruminants is no different from free range cattle. The problem is most of our meat is no longer free range cattle. Factory farms, a low but significant contributor to climate change, now accounts for 99% of our meat production. So I have no idea why you're using wild ruminants as a defense.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Factory farms, a low but significant contributor to climate change, now accounts for 99% of our meat production
            That's because chicken and pork are almost exclusively factory farmed.
            Not so with cattle. There are no factory farms of cattle in my country. Sort your own house out first.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Where from? Here in the US it's 97% of beef cattle.
            https://www.nrdc.org/resources/feedlot-operations-why-it-matters

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You're conflating grain-finishing cattle with factory farming. If a cow lives it's entire life on pasture except for the last few weeks before slaughter, that doesn't make it "factory farmed".

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Domestic cattle herds have essentially replaced the wild ruminants herds that used to dominate grassland ecosystems.
            On a much grander scale far surpassing it and altering entire ecosystems.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous
          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous
          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            what is the low down on palm oil? Is it as bad as the ONIONS?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Rapeseed/canola is one of the least bad. Basedbean is one of the worst. Too much o6 to o3.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >tropical deforestation
            Not my problem

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The goyslop is strong in this one.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why should I care about the ways equatorial morons are destroying their lands? I don't eat foods imported from outside Europe.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Wrong, the biggest losses are due moronic practices in shitholes, and wind farms in the cuckistans.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Wrong
            let me take if from someone on IQfy
            kek

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >altering entire ecosystems.
            So you have never heard of a wallow and think creating entire ecosystems is something new that large herd animals just recently started to do, despite all the geological evidence of ancient depressions in the landscape that clearly altered the ecosystems?
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_wallow

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Muh billion buffalo!
            Never happened. Post evidence that the population of any large ruminants ever approached that number. I'd even take 100 million, which is how many cattle are in the US now.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I never said anything about a billion and It doesn't matter if it took 1 billion or 100 million, they clearly, measurable altered the landscape and ecosystem with their wallowing habits.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Uh huh. Now show that there were 100 million large ruminants in the area that is now the US at any point before we started industrially farming cattle.

            >they clearly, measurable altered the landscape and ecosystem with their wallowing habits.
            So, equally clearly, having more large ruminants will cause more measurable alterations to our ecosystems. And, even more equally clearly, if those large ruminants could not have achieved that population naturally then these are not natural alterations to our ecosystems.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >So, equally clearly, having more large ruminants will cause more measurable alterations to our ecosystems. And, even more equally clearly, if those large ruminants could not have achieved that population naturally then these are not natural alterations to our ecosystems.
            Your naturalism fallacy to attack a strawman aside, the causing more measurable alterations isn't true since we keep them more densely populated, manage them from birth to distribution in fenced in smaller hillier areas with clear access to lagoons and lakes where they can't stampede and stomp around obliterating the trees as easily while constantly cleaning up after them so they aren't pockmarking the entire landscape and with festering watering holes everywhere that make a more widespread ecological impact and invite more pest species to shallow waters without trees around where fish and birds can't as easily interrupt their reproduction.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >we've fricked the atmosphere
      I simply do not care. Protect property rights and everything else falls into place.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So who has rights to the sky? Can I sue people for dumping chemicals into it?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >So who has rights to the sky?
          anon, the thread topic is:
          >cattle
          >their effects on carbon emissions

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Which come in the form of methane gas and end up in the sky wandering onto other people's property space.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >people's property
            philosophy is off-topic in IQfy

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No. science is a philosophy, that type of discussion just goes above your pay grade and its not even a philosophy discussion, property rights involve a lot a of science to survey, measure, diagram, and catalogue and the rights to the sky are public and managed by government agencies with substantial scientific departments who collectively decide how the air space is used through the FAA and what frequencies and magnitude of energy can be emitted in the sky through the FCC and what kind of pollutants can be released into the air with the Clean Air Act and the EPA.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Even natural philosophy?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The belief or not in "property rights" is not "natural philosophy": it's more akin to personal deification, i.e. the right of an individual to exert its "free-will" (even more philosophy, lol) upon nature, a theological concept, fundamentally.
            We are completely off-topic now, and this is my last reply on the matter.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It has nothing to do with free will or nature, its inventing rules of social order that help prevent people from engaging in arguments that can't be resolved without violence, you superstitious moron.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Protect property rights
        this way. please:

        [...]

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    total number of cows in europe: 70 million
    >genocidal globohomosexual pseudo intellectual climate shills: OMG THIS IS DESTROYING THE ENVIRONMENT, KILL THEM ALL IMMEDIATELY
    total number of cows in america: 80 million
    >genocidal globohomosexual pseudo intellectual climate shills: OMG THIS IS DESTROYING THE ENVIRONMENT, KILL THEM ALL IMMEDIATELY
    total number of cows in india: 350 million
    >genocidal globohomosexual pseudo intellectual climate shills: cows? what cows
    total number of cows in africa: 400 million
    >genocidal globohomosexual pseudo intellectual climate shills: dey dindu nuffin!

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *