We have to keep breeding more and more cows (among other things) to fill humanity's gaping maw. We're so overpopulated that there's literally not enough available biomass on the planet to feed us all without making some severe ecological alterations, like mowing down acres of rainforest for pastures and crops.[b said:Quote[/b] (TheAntiLion @ Dec. 04 2006,11:01)]Yeah, but I have to wonder if they are just shoving off the blame towards "natural" causes to get us distracted from man made causes. I've seen it said that termites, cows, and a lot of other creatures produce greenhouse gases, but it seems to me that they've been here a lot longer than the industrial revolution. Therefore, shouldn't be a major contributer to global warming.
[b said:Quote[/b] ] find it hard to believe that raising a cow causes more ecological damage than driving a SUV, "silly usless vehicle". Just think of the damage caused by mining the metals, rubber and producing the plastics of just one vehicle. Not to mention obtaining the oil and the polution it causes. I am just not buying it.
[b said:Quote[/b] ]I am no chemist by any stretch of the imagination but wasn't it the UN back in the 70's that got the auto industry to install catalytic converters so that our cars produce MORE CO2 and less CO ? We were saving the world from acid rain right ? Instead we end up causing more greenhouse gas to cause global warming.
[b said:Quote[/b] ]Yes but there are far less of the megaherds of bison, reindeer, antalope, etc roaming the earth thn 10,000 years ago also
[b said:Quote[/b] ]And I can only imagine the methane a 150 ton Argentinosaurus would release in a single fart.
[b said:Quote[/b] ]I'm still a bit skeptical, but I always am when people make major claims about something on scientific grounds.
[b said:Quote[/b] ]Ozone can be destroyed by a number of free radical catalysts, the most important of which are the hydroxyl radical (OH·), the nitric oxide radical (NO·) and atomic chlorine (Cl·) and bromine (Br·). All of these have both natural and anthropogenic (manmade) sources; at the present time, most of the OH· and NO· in the stratosphere is of natural origin, but human activity has dramatically increased the chlorine and bromine. These elements are found in certain stable organic compounds, especially chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which may find their way to the stratosphere without being destroyed in the troposphere. Once in the stratosphere, the Cl and Br atoms are liberated from the parent compounds by the action of ultraviolet light, and can destroy ozone molecules through a variety of catalytic cycles. In the simplest example of such a cycle, a chlorine atom reacts with an ozone molecule, taking an oxygen atom with it (forming ClO) and leaving a normal oxygen molecule. A free oxygen atom then takes away the oxygen from the ClO, and the final result is an oxygen molecule and a chlorine atom, which then reinitiates the cycle.
Cattle are raised in every country on earth, not just South America.[b said:Quote[/b] ]There's that, yes, but also remember that much of cattle-raising occurs in South America, and in order to make pastures, they cut and burn huge areas of rainforest. Aside from the ecological damage, that also releases *all* the carbon locked in those trees into the air, hundreds of tons of it per acre.
Recent evedence shows that the Alps experiencing warmest time in 1,300 years[b said:Quote[/b] ]you guys realize that it was warmer in the middle ages(approximately 700 years ago) than it is now right?
[b said:Quote[/b] ]you guys realize that there were once farms on Greenland and there seems to be evidence that the Chinese took a boat trip around the Artic and didnt run into any blockages of ice?
[b said:Quote[/b] ]...................dont think im tucking tail on this just yet.......