The animal industries have their own lobbying and disinformation campaigns.

Among others this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Organizational_Research_and_Education from all time hits like “most doctors smoke camel”

But most now know the results of cigarettes, fossile fuels and the animal industry. Many people who drive are forced by the current infrastructure which was build with the car in the mind. It could be way less and way smaller cars though. For the animal industry we have alternatives and the personal choice to not consent to the system. It is in our interest: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aba7357

For most of the 140 years Exxon exists it was not the willful ignorance of the consumers but the deception, propaganda, lies and lobbying they made. While we are to blame for not overthrowing capitalism, companies are to blame for their malicious actions. If they just sold their product without mentioning the known problems I would agree.

The animal industry is responsible for 20% of the GHG and even though we are in the chains of capitalism we have the choice to not support them, do they exist with your consent?

why installing something

I don’t watch YT a lot on my phone, but Freetube for desktop and Newpipe for android (F-Droid) support offline subscriptions, playlists, history and downloads of video or audio, background playback and you can sync both apps.

Not only CO2 but also Methan. It is 84 times more harmful in the first 20 years. But it is degrading on its own with a half-live of 7-12 years in the atmosphere. Methan makes up 20 to 30% of the human made GHG. Change to a plant based diet can reduce the emissions by 40%.

It is one of the few things we can change on our own very fast and does not need additional technological solutions to have a big impact.

Even without any fossil fuels, the current food system alone is responsible for +2°C

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aba7357 (2020)

We ded

Most likely outcome (high confidence)

still letting this here: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aba7357

No, I am against the prohibition of common terms, I advocate for a stricter declaration of ingredients. “Milk” alone could be milk from any mammal, cow, goat, human. Steak could be a cut from any animal, that is why a the animal it is from is declared. Oat milk is called milk since centuries but now the industry fears competition and is publishing propaganda and pays lobbyism for restrictive laws.

Right, but ‘steak’ does mean a little more than that. It also would indicate a particular kind of cut of meat, which would generally indicate minimal connective tissue, tenderness, location, etc.

So as long as it has “steak” written on it you just care that is any animal with those properties?

Would you like ‘meat-free’ labels allowed on foods that had absolutely no muscle-tissue content, but did contain animal organ, bone, and fat content?

I want a strong indicator that a product contains any animal products. There are already many labels for plant based products but none are required by any law.

I am in strong favor a big prominent “contains animal products” label. It would make live so much easier.

Do you buy “steak” as in a generic description for something from any animal, or do you buy bison, camel, goat or horse steak? I have only seen plant based steaks or schnitzel where it has it in the name. “Plant based product” or “product based on soy/pea”

And all that while 75% of produce is grown for the animal industry. The same animal industry that even without any fossile fuels would exceed the Paris goal. Right now we could feed 10 billion but we feed it to animals.

+2°C from the animal Industry, +2°C from fossile and we are at +4°C where animal agriculture will fail globally due to heat and crop failure.

Please, go on, rebut the IPCC https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aba7357

I am sure I will see it in the news, backyard science that changes how we see the world are always hyped.

I think you are just a egoistical self centered science denier who has troubles with very simple concepts.

Ah, the “the damage is already done” argument. Has anyone told you that you pay for the next victim of the industry? Buying the product supports the industry and keeps it alive.

Maybe you have no concept of future.

I am sure you did your own research on the shitter. Much smart, such proof, many scientific.

ah, they use their private money to burn oil in their backyard. alright.

the animal industry would just keep breeding and abusing animals despite no one buying their stuff. OK.

Just because one is paying someone to create emissions does not make them responsible because someone else did it?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding-meat-and-dairy-is-single-biggest-way-to-reduce-your-impact-on-earth

See, even more single persons, do you think it is a single hive? those are all individuals you claim don’t change anything.

It is the single change everyone can make with the biggest impact. But don’t worry, a) you are old enough that you don’t matter b) you will see the future vegan because we would have to grind everything else to 0 if we want to support the animal industry, it alone will increase temperature by 2°C and from 3°C and upwards there is no more animal industry possible due to harvest loss and increased energy demand. Just chill and think you have done more than every vegan because you are not driving a car, well done, you are the one with no car.