Our Oceans are Under Attack

http://www.countinganimals.com/how-many-animals-does-a-vegetarian-save/

Humans kill over 8.1 billion land animals each year for our food. Using the formula mentioned earlier, we find that a vegetarian saves over 30 land animals each year, over 28 of them being chickens.

Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the report concludes that a sum total of 970 to 2,700 billion fish caught worldwide weigh a total of about 170.61 billion pounds. Being conservative in our estimate of the number of fish, we will use the lower end of their estimate (970 billion). The average live weight of a fish caught to serve human consumption worldwide, therefore, is about 0.176 pounds (we catch a lot of anchovies!). But, why is the worldwide catch of fish relevant to us? According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) within the U.S. Department of Commerce, 86% of the seafood we eat is imported and so, the worldwide catch of fish is representative of who we kill for what we eat.

This implies that a vegetarian saves at least 1 aquacultured fish (large fish weighing about 11 pounds) and 224 wild caught fish (weighing an average of 0.176 pounds). So, a vegetarian saves over 225 fish each year.

We eat over 40,400,534,000 shellfish each year. Using the formula mentioned earlier, we find that a vegetarian saves over 151 shellfish each year, the vast majority of them being shrimp.

A vegetarian, therefore, saves at least 406 animals per year (30 land animals, 225 fish and 151 shellfish).

 

We've been through this before. Signing one's name is optional. Many people don't even realize that their name isn't automatically included. If you don't like it take it up with the forum admin. End of Story.

(As for my opinion, I think that FEEDBACK should be eliminated. It causes more hard feelings than useful information. It doesn't take a new forum member very long to figure out who are the useful posters and who are the goofballs.)

 

You may be one of the lucky few who has "longevity genes." If so, it is foolish of you to argue that because you are able to get away with the injurious and noxious habit of smoking that therefore everyone else can also get away with it.

Longevity Genes Found; Predict Chances of Reaching 100 | National Geographic

But if your luck should run out and you do get lung cancer, and if you don't want to put yourself through surgery and chemo therapy, you might consider moving to the Greek island of Ikaria.

The Island Where People Forget to Die | The New York Times

 

This ought to get Yob's goat.

Goats are SHRINKINg because of climate change | Daily Mail

 

Natural Gas Offers Little Benefit in Fight against Global Warming | Scientific American

 

Want to help save the planet? Stop eating beef

Beyond other ethical considerations, raising cattle is enormously more environmentally costly than any other animal, let alone the humble potato.

Livestock is responsible for almost one fifth of all anthropogenic global greenhouse gas emissions, scientists have shown. Their contribution to the atmospheric deterioration in the United States is surpassed only by electricity production and transportation, and roughly ties with heavy industry.
It always stood to reason that a cow requires more resources than a chicken. Now, for the first time, a study comparing the environmental impact of raising beef, pork, poultry, eggs and dairy products has proven the point (fish were excluded from the study since Americans don't eat much seafood, and the data is therefore scanty.)
Beef production requires 28 times more land than pigs or chickens, they showed. Breeding cattle uses 11 times more water and leads to emission of five times more greenhouse gases, concluded Milo, along with Alon Shepon from the Weizmann Institute of Science, Tamar Makov of Yale University and Dr. Gidon Eshel of Bard College in New York.
The results were even more dramatic when compared with the vegan option: Compared to potatoes, rice and wheat, beef production requires 160 times more land, consumes 8 times more water and emits 11 times more greenhouse gases.
Producing dairy products, eggs, pork and poultry, in comparison, requires 6 times more land, uses half the water and emits twice as many gases compared to growing crops.

 

Save the planet?
Do you have delusions of being powerful and able to, Myark?
I'm more intent on saving our individual freedoms from collectivist doomers.
That's why I refute the lies.
Livestock, animals producing CO2, are part of human produced CO2?
Animals are innocent, so blame their owners for their flatulence. LOL
YOU personally are producing CO2 everytime you exhale or speak from either end. Stop it!
Only inhale from now on. Both ends.

 

I'm not suggesting anybody smoke. I recommend they investigate the facts instead of blindly believing the current hysteria.
Do you really FAIL to see the lies and lack of scientific evidence, that only OPINION (dressed up as conviction) is the foundation of the anti-smoking movement?
Much the same as opinions that CO2 causes global warming drive AGW movement.
Some meaningless statistics and build an emotional appeal, fear mongering case on it, without real evidence.
Can't you recognize pseudo-sciences for the manipulative political agenda they always are?
I control me.
I'm not telling you how to live.
You and Myark, and other's that think like you want to control everybodies lives. Tell everybody how they should live.
Not going to happen. Give it up.
Your argument that if we DON'T live the way you dictate, it adversely affects YOUR life sometime in the future, is pure horse doobers.
How about if a bunch of us, do that to you? Sauce for the goose...equal for the gander!
Recognize your prejudices for what they are.
Whenever you start with a pre-judgment, then research or look for arguments to support it, it's your prejudice (means pre-judged) working, not science.
You have no right or permission to force your noxious prejudices on others.
It is wrongheaded for you to want to adversely affect our lives now, on the off chance, it may avert some imagined adverse effect on you, on a far someday.
I RESIST.
I'm not alone.

 

Rage, rage...

 

Grandiose narcissists are less sensitive and more confident. They know they are superior and will seek revenge or go into a vicious rage against those who don't treat them with respect or dare to give them negative feedback. They appear to have no sense of shame about themselves and truly have very high self-esteem.

 

Since the alternative energy technologies aren't ready yet, the USA will meet increased demands for electricity burning either gas or coal.
You don't really expect the country to use less electricity do you?

I detest manipulative people and their schemes.
Either an idea has merit or it doesn't.
If you have to coerce people into adopting your idea, it doesn't merit adoption.

 

projecting?

 

Obviously everyone has many different opinions, but it appears this thread is getting a bit too full of vinegar; please direct further posts not relating to the health of the oceans and/or which are just jabs at other people to facebook or some other site and let's please try to keep discussions here more informative than unpleasant towards others. Thanks for your understanding.

 

Oceans' Sad Future: A Sea of Small Fish | Live Science

 

Predator loss | Save Our Seas Foundation