Author Topic: Farming vs Ranching  (Read 546 times)

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
    • View Profile
Farming vs Ranching
« on: February 08, 2021, 07:42:55 am »
Real Life "Farming" (lol. The discrepancy between the title and the video thumbnail couldn't be more apparent, to the point of it almost being a parody):
https://youtu.be/KnNxglCKmiE

This demonstrates the extent to which Westerners have corrupted our vocabulary. As an exercise, try searching "farming" on YouTube and you'll see that the top results all involve livestock.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2021, 10:56:35 pm by rp »

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Agree Agree x 1 View List

guest5

  • Guest
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2021, 10:25:20 pm »


"All Lives Matter" yells the "white" Westerner in response to Black Lives Matter.

All lives matter except non-human lives, those we get to maim and destroy at will and whenever we want without a care in the world, right? See the general hypocrisy of humans and the evil nature of humanism and humanitarianism? How do we ever find justice in hypocrisy?

See also: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/antropocentricism-the-most-dangerous-ideology-in-the-world/


Like Like x 1 View List

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
    • View Profile
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2021, 02:33:58 am »
Time for some map posting to highlight the inferiority of Western "Civilization":
Like Like x 1 View List

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7383
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2021, 10:36:33 pm »
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2021/4/26/22403599/biden-red-meat-ban-burger-kudlow

Quote
The grain of truth in the Republican claims (agri-pun intended) is that any serious climate change plan needs to do something about meat production. A recent paper in Science, a leading academic journal, found that food-related emissions alone put the Paris climate agreement’s warming target of 1.5 degrees Celsius out of reach. The most effective way to address these emissions, according to the paper’s authors, is a global shift away from meat consumption.
...
Increasingly, America’s meat-eating ways are being subsumed into our culture wars. It’s yet another sign of how polarized our country is and how hard this polarization makes tackling a catastrophic threat like climate change.
...
Here’s the problem, though: If Biden’s climate plan doesn’t do something about meat, it’s probably going to fail.

Globally speaking, livestock production represents a significant portion of overall greenhouse gas emissions. The reasons for this are intrinsic to meat production itself; there is no way for humans to consume meat in the way we do without abetting catastrophic warming.

Ruminant animals like cows, kept in numbers much larger due to meat and dairy demand, emit methane gas through their bodily functions — a pollutant more potent than carbon dioxide. Raising allegedly more climate-friendly meats, like chicken, also emits significantly more greenhouse gases than plant-based protein productions. Animal agriculture necessitates clearing huge amounts of land, a significant cause of deforestation in places like Brazil’s Amazon. Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), factory farms where animals are crowded into tiny cages and kept in horrific conditions, create massive feces lagoons that intensify the methane problem.

There is, in short, no way around the problem: If we want to keep climate change at a manageable level, we need to change the way we produce and consume animal products.

The Biden administration may or may not eventually take steps to deal with this problem. But the hysterical reaction to a falsehood that it is going to be doing so suggests just how explosive the reaction will be if Biden actually moves in this direction.
...
meat is linked with masculinity and ideals about the virtuous traditional American farmer — central concepts in a Republican Party dominated by culturally conservative rural whites.
...
The unstoppable force of climate change advocacy on the left is about to hit the immovable object of attachment to meat on the right. The resulting fight will implicate issues at the very core of American identity, a country where animal agriculture is a major part of our mythologized cowboy past and economic present.

With the stakes so high, there’s every reason to believe that meat could be the next big fight in our all-consuming culture war. “Biden bans burgers” isn’t a one-off lie; we may look back on it as the meat wars’ Fort Sumter.

Yet so many journalists still call ranching "farming"/"agriculture".....

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1107
    • View Profile
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2021, 10:38:30 pm »
The author (Zack Beauchamp) is a Jew

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7383
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2022, 11:06:18 pm »
Our enemies now actively produce focused anti-vegan propaganda:

https://www.eurocanadians.ca/2022/01/is-egetarianism-the-future-of-humanity.html

Quote
Our friends from the Globalist community would like to abolish animal-based diets for health and environmental reasons.

Given that animal-based diets waste farmland on producing feed for slaughter animals instead of using the same farmland for producing food for humans, autarky would in fact be far easier to achieve with plant-based diets. Thus globalists (ie. anti-autarkists) are the ones who in reality have an incentive to maintain the popularity of animal-based diets, in order to keep food supply dependent on trade. But don't expect our enemies to understand this.

Quote
we are omnivores with a strong carnivorous tendency. We are wonderfully well adapted anatomically and physiologically to eat meat. Meat consumption has also played a key role in increasing our brain size. Instinctively, meat and its derivatives are the most sought-after human foods all over the world [8]. And it is not a culturally rooted need that can be easily overcome but an anthropological need rooted in our genes.

You are describing yourselves only, not us. That is why we must eliminate your bloodlines.

Quote
Six Truths About Vegetarians

(Table adapted from science journalist Rolf Degen’s book, Seven unflattering truths about vegetarians) [9].

    1. Most vegetarians are not really vegetarians: 66% of “vegetarians” have indeed eaten animal products in the last 24 hours [10].
    2. People lie about their meat consumption: Women who were told by researchers that they were going to watch a movie about a slaughterhouse lied about (or as the study put it, “under-strategically declared”) the amount of meat they ate [11].
    3. 84% of people who stop eating meat eventually change their mind and return to a diet that includes animal products [12].
    4. British researchers found that only 25% of people who said they reduced their meat consumption did so [13].

Most people suck. Should we therefore choose to suck too?

Quote
    5. Vegetarians, a majority of whom are women, often suffer from depression and eating disorders – according to some scientists, vegetarianism is an occult eating disorder [14]. Why are women attracted to vegetarianism ? “Meat is masculine. And eating it proves you’re one tough dude. At least that’s what the American media tells us. And that message’s pervasiveness might be one reason the vast majority of vegans in the U.S. are women, say Emilie Aries and Bridget Todd, the co-hosts of the podcast Stuff Mom Never Told You” [15].

Yes, it depresses me every time I think about how many new slaughter animals are born into their prisons just in the time it takes for me to type this. And it depresses me more to realize that desire for high sexual dimorphism is considered more important in Western civilization than the duty to not initiate violence.

Quote
    6. It was not always the case[16], but vegetarianism is above all an ideology of the left, and this is undoubtedly the main truth to be remembered from this table:  “vegetarianism is a lie of liberal thought” [17].

I am happy that our enemies are making this an explicit left vs right issue.

Quote
Because of the disproportionate importance given to carbohydrates and grains, scientists have linked the famous Harvard University food guide focusing on vegetarian diets to the source of the epidemic of morbid obesity and of diabetes that is currently rampant in the United States [19].

Yes, this is due to non-Aryan blood:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/aryan-metabolism/

Back to enemy article:

Quote

Yes, humans who look like the stereotypical colonial-era Westerner in the drawing probably are designed to eat meat. That is why their bloodlines must be eliminated.

Quote
If she were a herbivorous animal, says Temple Grandin, “she would ‘rather die in a slaughterhouse’ with a system she designed to make the operation painless, rather than in the wild, starving or in awareness of a predator attack: early in her career, she saw a still living calf in Arizona on a ranch, partially eaten by coyotes, and concluded that “Nature can be very rough” [37].

If not for humans such as Grandin breeding them for food, the calf on the Arizona ranch she describes would never have needed to be born in the first place and thus would have avoided the coyotes (as well as the slaughterhouse, of course).

Quote
There is no connection between a person’s kindness and being a vegetarian. The Dalai Lama, for example, who is certainly not devoid of kindness and compassion is a meat eater [39].

Tenzin Gyatso is one of the most evil people currently alive:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/enemies/tenzin-gyatso/

Back to enemy article:

Quote
Livestock has no negative impact on the climate.

And Trump won the 2020 election.

Quote
Eating meat doesn’t make you a bloodthirsty monster or a human suprematist villain.

And wanting "white" ethnostates doesn't make you racist.

It gets even funnier in the comments:

Quote

Yes, notice the contrast in face shapes.

We also cover Lawson here:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/linguistic-decolonization/msg7238/#msg7238

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigella_Lawson

   
Quote
Taking part in the third series of the BBC family-history documentary series, Who Do You Think You Are?, Lawson sought to uncover some of her family's ancestry. She traced her ancestors to Ashkenazi Jews who originate from eastern Europe and Germany

I rest my case.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2022, 11:34:20 pm by 90sRetroFan »

guest55

  • Guest
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2022, 12:28:21 am »
Average Westerners subconscious: "If murder and **** keep me looking young then what other choice do we have except murder and ****?"

guest55

  • Guest
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2022, 01:27:01 pm »
Chinese farmer rancher and his 70,000 chickens become online celebrities
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWjYLYulALs

Rachel Wilson: an Australian free-range egg farmer rancher
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLvNaljgwdE

NSFAN

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
    • View Profile
When Ants Domesticated Fungi
« Reply #8 on: June 11, 2022, 01:46:37 am »
Quote
While we’ve been farming for around 10,000 to 12,000 years, the ancestors of ants have been doing it for around 60 million years. So when, and how, and why did ants start … farming?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XuPtW8lBCM

It's debatable whether or not humans have been farming 10k to 20k years too:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/farming-vs-ranching/

Etc.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2022, 01:52:14 am by NSFAN »

Zea_mays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #9 on: June 16, 2022, 10:53:06 pm »
Land used for ranching:
Quote
The cattle sector of the Brazilian Amazon, incentivized by the international beef and leather trades,[1] has been responsible for about 80% of all deforestation in the region,[2][3] or about 14% of the world's total annual deforestation, making it the world's largest single driver of deforestation.[4] The vast majority of agricultural activity resulting in deforestation was subsidized by government tax revenue.[5] By 1995, 70% of formerly forested land in the Amazon, and 91% of land deforested since 1970 had been converted to cattle ranching.[6][7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_of_the_Amazon_rainforest

vs farming:
Quote
Half of the world’s habitable land is used for agriculture, with most of this used to raise livestock for dairy and meat. Livestock are fed from two sources – lands on which the animals graze and land on which feeding crops, such as soy and cereals, are grown. How much would our agricultural land use decline if the world adopted a plant-based diet?

Research suggests that if everyone shifted to a plant-based diet we would reduce global land use for agriculture by 75%. This large reduction of agricultural land use would be possible thanks to a reduction in land used for grazing and a smaller need for land to grow crops.
[...]
The land use of livestock is so large because it takes around 100 times as much land to produce a kilocalorie of beef or lamb versus plant-based alternatives. This is shown in the chart.1  The same is also true for protein – it takes almost 100 times as much land to produce a gram of protein from beef or lamb, versus peas or tofu.

Of course the type of land used to raise cows or sheep is not the same as cropland for cereals, potatoes or beans. Livestock can be raised on pasture grasslands, or on steep hills where it is not possible to grow crops. Two-thirds of pastures are unsuitable for growing crops.2
[...]
Less than half of the world’s cereals are fed directly to humans
[...]
Less than half – only 48% – of the world’s cereals are eaten by humans. 41% is used for animal feed, and 11% for biofuels.
[...]
In many countries, the share that is for human consumption is even smaller. We see this in the map. In most countries across Europe it’s less than one-third of cereal production is used for human consumption, and in the US only 10% is.7
https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets

Be sure to check the article to see the additional maps, which give plenty of evidence of how inferior Western civilization is.



(And think of how much _less_ land farming would use, if the population was at a sane level.)

Some recommendations in the article are problematic though. As it currently stands, the number of individual chickens slaughtered far, far exceeds cows. "Substituting" chickens for cows would add exponentially more cruelty to the world.
Quote
This is an important insight from this research: cutting out beef and dairy (by substituting chicken, eggs, fish or plant-based food) has a much larger impact than eliminating chicken or fish.

NSFAN

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
    • View Profile
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #10 on: June 17, 2022, 12:11:07 pm »
Gillian McKeith has probably spent more time outside laboring in the elements than Lawson has too I would add, hence her weathered face. A weathered face always tells a more interesting story than a non-weathered face I believe. McKeith may also suffer from the stress of knowing how badly humans treat non-humans on this planet. Stress can weather someone's face even faster than the elements can...


NSFAN

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
    • View Profile
Re: Water supply
« Reply #11 on: September 04, 2022, 05:57:04 pm »
Ranchers Are Selling Their Cattle to Deal with Drought
Quote
Ranchers and their cattle are contending with harsh drought conditions across the American West this summer. In Texas, ranchers are selling off their herds in large numbers and some are even turning to more heat-resistant breeds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzP8Q4l3hrw

"heat-resistant breeds" still require grain as a food source:

One hamburger takes 2,400 litres of 'hidden' water to make
Quote
On the way, he shares a wider critique of the environmental damage caused by the meat industry and how society moving toward a plant-based diet could alleviate this.
Quote
‘Water has been fed into the grain that’s been fed to the cattle, the cattle’s been made into beef. One Hamburger is 2,400 litres of embedded water. That’s a heck of a lot of water.’

The documentary also shared statistics suggesting that 27% of humanity’s freshwater consumption goes to produce animal food, and that the livestock sector is responsible for about 15% of all human made emissions globally, which is equivalent to the emissions from all the forms of transport in the world, including the cumulative emissions of planes, trains, cars and ships.

Professor Lang later concluded,

"The message is overwhelming both for public health and environmental reasons. The more plants you can eat, and the less meat and dairy you can consume, the better."
Entire article: https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2019/10/one-hamburger-takes-2400-litres-of-hidden-water-to-make

NSFAN

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
    • View Profile
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2022, 05:15:57 pm »
Gaza's chicken farmers rejoice in recycled egg trays
Quote
Gaza resident Akram Al-Amour, who began recycling paper waste to try to reduce the emissions caused by burning it, is now turning them into egg trays that are more affordable, more durable, and environmentally friendly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6NC8F0OjqY

Whilst Palestinians themselves have been herded into Gaza by Israel....




NSFAN

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
    • View Profile
Re: Farming vs Ranching
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2022, 05:04:15 pm »
Can you tax a cow’s burps? New Zealand will be the first to try.
Quote
In a nation with seven times more livestock than people, taxing farmers for herds’ greenhouse gas emissions is a controversial proposal.
Quote
New Zealand has seven times more residents on four legs than on two—5 million people to 26 million sheep and 10 million cows—and dairy, meat, and wool account for more than half the nation’s export revenue.

But this abundance comes with an environmental cost. Half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture, [ARE WESTERNERS NOW SO THOROUGHLY CONFUSED THAT THEY TRULY BELIEVE THAT GROWING WHEAT IS THE SAME AS FORCING COWS TO REPRODUCE???] mostly as biological methane and nitrous oxide from livestock burps, urine, and manure.

So last month, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern unveiled a plan for New Zealand’s farmers to pay new taxes based on calculations of their herds’ emissions. The money raised by the tax would be returned to the ag industry for research, technology, and incentive payments to farmers for their efforts to reduce greenhouse gases—by planting trees on their land, for example.
Entire article: https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/environment-and-conservation/2022/11/can-you-tax-a-cows-burps-new-zealand-will-be-the-first-to-try?utm_source=pocket-newtab

Perhaps, rather than planting a tree and patting yourself on the back, westerners might actually try giving up ranching and actually start farming CROPS for human consumption, instead of primarily for livestock consumption for once!?

According to Westerners, this is what farming looks like:
« Last Edit: November 23, 2022, 05:10:57 pm by NSFAN »