Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)WL
Posts
0
Comments
574
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Lmfao that's your argument?? It's in "not even wrong" territory, literally what on earth are you talking about lol

    Coal pollution is also higher now than when renewable energy was first invented, therefore renewables wouldn't help us! /s

  • Being vegan requires less production. And animal waste, runoff, and methane are all major sources of pollution that being vegan eliminates. It takes less water, land, and plants for a vegan diet than it does to feed animals for agriculture.

  • My point is proven science, you didn't ask for a source you just claimed the opposite, so you're on the same footing as me.

    Except for my point is obvious, between the methane and animal waste run off, the water required for animal agriculture, the waste products unused from meat production, and the fact that you have to grow even more plants to feed the animals instead of eating the plants directly, I don't see why on earth you wouldn't see how being vegan has a smaller footprint.

    Read a scientific study in-between your theory, sometime.

  • I remember Hasan saying "Russia won't invade, this is just the US manufacturing consent" the week before Russia invaded. Then right after they invaded it was all "it was only a matter of time, and here's why it's NATO's fault." It's almost like their "material analysis" is just retrospective bullshit lol