Anyone For Salad?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by pombsen-armchair-warrior, Oct 27, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. The Times today is running an article on the latest wheeze from the climate-change zealots. Apparently the methane emissions from the animals that we eat, along with the wasteful use of the water that they consume, is putting enormous pressure on global resources. We must, therefore, stop eating meat.

    The future really does look bleak for today's youngsters. No pig roasts, living in semi-darkness with the new eco-bulbs, heating frowned upon and plenty of layers encouraged (although man-made fibres only as the methane producing source of fibre will have been done away with), and only tiny little upturned piss-pots on wheels to drive.

    Who said the only good thing about the 'good old days' was they they were gone?
  2. Surely methane output would increase significantly if we were all on a diet of mung beans and broccoli!

    Racked by insomnia one night, I made the mistake of turning on News 24 or BBC News or whatever it's called this week. Some tefal headed tw@t was interviewing an enviroloon. Both of them made repeated references to 'Gaia'. 'We must save Gaia', 'Gaia is crying out for our help' etc.

    WTF is Gaia, I thought so I fired up the old laptop and googled away.

    Gaia turns out to be the 'Earth Goddess' worshiped by ancient civilizations. Tell me now that this global warming cr@p isn't getting just a little bit scary. How long before the lunatic fringe are sacrificing Jeremy Clarkson to appease their godess?
  3. I think a fair compromise for carnivores like me is to eat veal and suckling pig roasts - the cows' and pigs' farts over their lifetime would be significantly reduced by killing them at an early age.

    Oh, and Lord Stern is clearly as mad as a soup sandwich.

    (Edited for punctuation)
  4. Scary? No.
    Expensive and tedious? Yes.
    It absolute lunacy, I heard on the radio yesterday some think tank moron expounding an idea to treble fule duty in the UK, how is £15 a gallon fuel going to save the planet?
    Perhaps somebody somewhere is finally getting a grip on the fact that mankind has very little impact on our climate and they are now trying to blame cattle?
  5. I think we should sacrifice JC as a matter of principle. Then cook him for 5hrs at Gas Mark 8 with an apple stuffed somewhere...

    Sorry, I thought this was the Cookery forum... :D

  6. Oh jesus, Bugsy is gonna love this!

    How is the land going to be maintained if there are no animals to graze it? and if that land is put to arable then carbon foot print caused by having to maintain it with vehicles will have more impact than it would to have left the animals on it, if we stop eating meat it would have a massive impact on farmers livelyhoods and god knows what else. Anyway am not gonna rant because its not gonna happen.

    Everything has a life span why should the Earth be any different, if its gonna die then its gonna die, no point making our own lives miserable trying to prevent the inevitable.
  7. Normally land used for grazing live stock is not suitable for arable use. So to get a decent crop out of such land you'd have to practise intensive farming with lots of chemical fertilizers, instead of the more eco friendly cowshit approach. The same chemcial fertilizers blamed for damaging water sources......

    What a clever man....
  8. I think Britain's green element have an inflated view of our country's significance in terms of policy making.

    We can tax our fuel, pay through the nose to change energy sourcing, dramatically change our culture and lifestyle to lessen our 'carbon foot print' all the while our economy becomes uncompetitive and our quality of life compared to the rest of the world goes in the toilet. It doesn't matter that we're all poor and miserable, at least climate change won't be 'our fault'.

    Unless every other county in the world takes unilateral steps at the same time, not only will Britain not make a difference but we'll pay disproportionately for the privilege of merely being able to claim we're progressive.

    The only clear and good argument I can see for changing to renewable energy on a large scale in Britain is for energy security, so that we're not politically dependent upon being on a pipeline from Russia - which they can switch off when they like and charge for their monopoly - and oil from the Middle East. In 100 years there will only be one or two large oil wells still producing in any volume, and it's shared by Iraq and Kuwait. If oil continues to me such a premium commodity it will attract conflict.
  9. My point exactly. I reckon they should teach agricultural studies at all schools, that way people can have a bit more of an insight into these things.
  10. Sympathetic_Reaction

    Sympathetic_Reaction LE Book Reviewer

    Sorry guys but you've jumped onto the media hype bandwagon again.

    Lord Stern's report is basically saying if we want to cut our output of 'carbon gases' by 80% which is what the government is sayin we will do, then we need to look outside the normal areas of life and it would be better to make a small change in every area of life than huge changes in a few areas. Therefore if we each ate 10% less meat we would make X% reduction in carbon emissions.

    He isn't saying everyone should go veggie today and we'll save the world. I do agree that Stern is a bit barking, but mainly as he believes that us cutting by 80% will affect the world climate...which it won't, but it will affect the UK beneficially.

    Personally I think the climate change idea is overhyped but still a significant issue, mixed in with the energy and food security problem I think we need to be doing more to sort out our life in the UK, in 50 years if we haven't reduced our reliance on oil and imported food we are going to be heading towards sh*t creek having failed to provide a propulsion device.

  11. Sympathetic_Reaction

    Sympathetic_Reaction LE Book Reviewer

    D0lly you can't be going and saying things like that you'll have the liberals up in arms....look what happened when a school tried to teach it's kids where food came from:

  12. There's not even any proof that humans are affecting the climate. Climate change was happening well before we started fcuking up the planet.
  13. Ah, that would be the same Lord Stern who was recruited by Gordon Brown as second permanent secretary at H.M. Treasury with responsibility for public finances and head of the Government Economic Service and then got frozen out by Brown and Balls because they did not want to hear what he was telling them

    So he moved on to better things, being the Climate change bandwagon, and produced the Stern Report that is held by some to be nothing more than a Climate Change Dodgey Dossier.

    So, just what Gordo needs: another huge vote loser.
  14. Never mind the "liberals" getting upset about it..can you imagine the uproar from the RLC if there was an imposed Salad diet.

    Hat, Coat....
  15. The school I went to had a farm, every other week we would go and be taught "rural science" you could take the subject for GCSE and A level, I grew up in a farming family so didn't feel the need to take the subject but for those that did it was really beneficial for them, it was also really good for the children with learning difficulties as many of them excelled at the subject as it was practical as appose to academic.