The_Heretic

No, the point is the methane originating from cows. Methane is 19 times more of a greenhouse gas than CO2. However, wild bovines also generate methane. I've yet to hear anyone suggest we stop global warming by killing off every larger herbivore that might fart. What's more you have bacteria in the continental shelf floor and in virtually every swamp, bog and some recently warming tundras which also give off methane as a byproduct of their metabolic pathways. The bacteria in the Gulf of Mexico have been identified as the cause for some of the Bermuda Triangle aircraft disappearances, when pockets of builtup methane ruptured from the gulf floor all at once to enveleop radial piston engine powered aircraft.

Aditionally, simply stopping the eating of cows means they're be even more of them without any reduction of the cattle population other than the massive starvation die-off around 2200 A.D. after they've damaged even more of the wild grasslands of North America than they would have [look at india if anyone doubt the damage of an unchecked bovine population].

However, the turnover rate of methane in the atmosphere [the time it takes for all methane in the air today to break down] is six years. So if no new methane went into the atmophere you'd only wait six years for it to no longer have an impact. Because so many wild animals and bacteria contribute methane you'd have to watch any additional outputs carefully.

But, as I've explained, the solution to methane from cattle is to harness it for running farm machinery, ergo killing two global warming birds with one stinker of a stone.

__________________
"They're all cattle just markin' time in the slaughterhouse line." -The Heretic, Quill-Fu Theater: Enter The Needle

Insipid

Where are you getting your information? The EPA has lied under the bush administration more than once as well.

The_Heretic

No, that just mens reforming the meat industry towards a more humane treatment of livestock [something I've never opposed]. But to go all vegan is just foolhardy and flies in the face of seven million years of australopithicus/hominid evolution.

__________________
"They're all cattle just markin' time in the slaughterhouse line." -The Heretic, Quill-Fu Theater: Enter The Needle

The_Heretic

There were a few, and Insipid got his ass handed to him in every one. And half the time I wasn't even involved. He ran so fast and loose with the facts that a lot of people called him on his lies and proved it with hard information that he simply pretended not to notice.

__________________
"They're all cattle just markin' time in the slaughterhouse line." -The Heretic, Quill-Fu Theater: Enter The Needle

Titanium Cat

From the IPCC and from the EPA's raw greenhouse gas emission reports.

That's the head of the EPA, a Bush appointee, not the employees under him who have repeatedly disagreed with his decisions such as the California regulation ruling.

__________________
_

Ptech on phyiscs:

The_Heretic

Careful there! He's not good at nuance.

__________________
"They're all cattle just markin' time in the slaughterhouse line." -The Heretic, Quill-Fu Theater: Enter The Needle

Insipid

I'm not sure why you always feel you have to re-live these supposed glory days of the past where everyone proved me to be this pervasive teller of lies. I remember being there and doing quite well in the arguments. In fact the one time i challenged you to a debate in which i'd let YOU pick the judges, you ran from it saying that there was no one on the site capable of evaluating your staggering brilliance. I'm not saying that this is a realization from you that you lost but.....well, yeah, that's what i'm saying. Sorry.

The only one i ever argued with substantially on this matter was you. Also, you always use words like a lot of people but you never claim WHO. Who are you talking about, besides yourself that "handed me my ass?" I remember Poetrychick saying i beat you, i remember mint julip saying i beat you, i remember a fellow gay member (can't recall his name, but he was a meat eater) saying i beat you, but i can't remember this stinging rebuke from countless throngs that you seem to remember.

But don't get me wrong, the validation of other people saying that i won or lost is no indication of whether i did or didn't win. This is not a popularity contest. You're the one who keeps bringing this up, over and over and over. However the fact that you call yourself Heretic but the entire basis of many of your arguments is that "People like me more than you" is kind of amusing.

Insipid

I did a google search on this report and can't find it. I"m not saying you're wrong, just the source of where it comes from is important.

Also, there's rather more concern with keeping bad information away when it comes to helping the meat industry. I just don't believe any science coming from the Bush administration. They've been caught fixing data too many times. Yes, conscientious employees have come forward, but i'm sure far more are keeping quiet to keep their jobs.

Titanium Cat

Here is the UN Livestock’s Long Shadow report.

http://www.virtualcentre.org/en/libr...e/A0701E07.pdf

I have to go now but I will pull up the calculations from the EPA figures and how they differ. The 18% figure is close to the amount of methane livestock produces, but as an overall figure it doesn't contribute that much CO2 which is number 1. The N2O figures are a bit fuzzy because much of N2O comes from fertilizer decomposition which is used for livestock feed production but more and more is going to ethanol now.

But this stuff isn't scientific conclusions or reports being canned by the Bush admin, it's low level reports that actually make the Bush admin look bad because of emission levels.

__________________
_

Ptech on phyiscs:

Insipid

The lates Ipcc report i can find is from 2001. I can't find anything from the EPA refuting that number. Also, Livestocks' long shadow takes into account more than JUST the methane emitted by cows and pigs but the deforestation, the fuel used to produce the methane the damage done by the cows etc. I'm not really sure if one thing is really refuting or buttressing the other.