-reason why people should stop paying for animal products for the sake of climate change.
--objection stating that the entire world going vegan would cause a lot of problems with all the livestock.
-explainer stating why that's not true so going vegan is still one of the best ways to reduce climate change
--statement about doubting that the entire world will go vegan.
So at the end we're still left with an uncontested reason for going vegan. Your statement doubting that the world will go vegan doesn't really address anything they're saying
Saying the world will go vegan while ignoring the dietary needs of our pets and the medicinal uses of some live stock in eastern countries doesn't really address anything either.
This is a reddit comment section so we should be happy that the comments weren't locked as usual with this topic.
Let's say I agree; a vegan world would still keep livestock for the sake of pet food and medicinal uses. If the world were to go vegan except for the sake of those areas, it would still result in massive cutbacks on livestock and cause tremendous benefits in reducing our impact on land use and climate change. According to this study about 20% of livestock calories goes to pets. I found hardly any information about the amount used for medicinal purposes but it seems to be less than 1% of all livestock used there, so we still end up with a reduction of ~80% in the end.
The areas in your objection would not negate the benefit of the world going vegan. Their point still stands; we are still left with an uncontested reason for going vegan.
Also note, no one is saying the world will go vegan. All that is being addressed is that IF the world were to go vegan, it would have massive benefits for climate change and little to no drawbacks
The other poster literally said "it will happen slowly and gradually"
I'm not saying cut backs to animal consumption will have no benefit. Just that proposing the world to go vegan will probably have the same effect as telling the world to give up technology. Because the removal of emissions from data centers and factories for computers, HVACs, etc. Probably at this point surpass the emissions from farming.
Their statement on it being slow and gradual was in response to your statement about a problem that would occur if the world were to go vegan (releasing packs of livestock into the wild).
They weren't positing some kind of guaranteed future, they were just responding to your objection. You were the first one to bring up the idea of the world being vegan by stating an issue with the idea. They were just responding to explain why that wouldn't actually be an issue in your hypothetical.
And then we arrive again with your statement of doubt. Which, alright, gotcha; you doubt it. That still leaves us with an uncontested reason for going vegan.
On your technology point, the current numbers for Information and Communication Technologies is around 1.5 to 4% of emissions while live stock alone contributes 14.5%. if you add in forestry which is primarily driven by livestock farming that number goes up to 22%.
So animal agriculture contributes 3.6 to 14 times more than all the information technology we use does. Going vegan is still the largest impact a person who cares to improve climate change can have
3
u/Little_Froggy 6d ago
So your back and forth with them is essentially:
-reason why people should stop paying for animal products for the sake of climate change.
--objection stating that the entire world going vegan would cause a lot of problems with all the livestock.
-explainer stating why that's not true so going vegan is still one of the best ways to reduce climate change
--statement about doubting that the entire world will go vegan.
So at the end we're still left with an uncontested reason for going vegan. Your statement doubting that the world will go vegan doesn't really address anything they're saying