You’re saying a study cited 6000+ times is so bad but you can’t produce a single well cited article that critiques it yet it is so obviously bad that anyone – without a degree in environmental science or statistics – can easily go throw the cited LCA studies and go “fuck this shit stinks”? Give me a fuckin break.
I thought you were the one advocating for better methods? Pretty lazy advocate lol. I’m just challenging you and … nothing.
Surely within the 6000+ articles that cite it there must be a great study going to town on Poore and Nemecek, then.
It’s a “glib comment” you’re making to further discredit the study. I could be wrong but I don’t think you’ve posted any actual studies that talk about what’s wrong with the Poore Nemecek article. It was published in 2018 so there should be plenty.
Instead, you say you “detailed” what’s wrong with the study when you, at best, gave a short overview. Then you made exaggerations to further discredit the study. You also say the study is so bad “it doesn’t take a degree in statistics or environmental science” to understand why it’s so bad.
You could very well be right but I just see someone puffing up their chest and not actually using intellectual methods to convey their point of view while expertly pretending to be doing that.
For someone who seems so righteous and careful about saying the right thing, I think it’s funny you end with “telling 8 billion people to eat more or less of something” when that’s an obvious exaggeration on your part. Global meat consumption is highly skewed. For example, apparently, the US consumes 21% of the world’s meat (world population review, which cites FAO, 2010) yet accounts for about 4% of the world population.
I wouldn’t call this “detailing the problems.” You wrote a few paragraphs and possibly listed a few.
How much of cattle feed is cottonseed? In the US only or worldwide? What are alternatives? Would they be better or worse?
They’re pretty bad but you can get lucky. I had a long-ish relationship come out of them. I’ve had a ton of long term flirts that came out of them. It’s fun and nice to flirt with people slowly and every once in a while for like 5+ years lol.
That being said, I’ve been off them for a year. I prefer to meet people in real life when that’s a possibility.
That’s what I mean. It’s boring but you can do it for hours. Most other boring things people will just quit and do something else.
But it’s a satisfying boredom, weirdly enough
I’ve heard that a Claude 4 model generating code for an infinite amount of time will eventually simulate a monkey typing out Shakespeare
Every post is hidden like a nsfw post and you have to consent to receive the information
First you must try to stab the pit and slice your hand. Then you can start doing it the right way.
Ramaphosa’s face and body language say “I really gotta sit through this shit?”
I’ve always thought about behind a subscription service with an impossibly obfuscated cancellation process is a person who added “increased customer retention rate by 20%” to their cv.
Just when I was gonna have as much money as bezos
Everybody pack, we’re moving.
Like those “isn’t it amazing” posts.
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteers be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
Fake news, fake conservatives. Anything that goes against Trump is somehow “fake.”
Emissions are just a piece of it. There’s land use, consequences of this land use, etc, which involve changes in rain patterns, soil acidification, and so forth.