The War on Cattle and Real Meat
The Green Wreckers who destroyed Australia’s cheap reliable electricity are now targeting our cattle industry.
They use fake science and false advertising to threaten our right to produce and consume real meat.
This stupidity relies on a totally false argument that grazing animals cause global warming by releasing carbon dioxide and methane to the atmosphere.
However, grazing animals have already reached “Net Zero”. They add NET ZERO carbon to the environment – they just help to recycle the same carbon products faster, endlessly.
Grasses and crops extract CO2 from the atmosphere and add minerals, water and nutrients from the soil. They then use solar energy to create plant sugars and release oxygen. All grasses are either eaten by grazing animals and termites, or burnt in grass-fires lit by humans or lightning. Then comes the rain, the grasses re-grow, and the cycle starts again.
Cattle harvest these crops and grasses, creating meat, milk, fats and bones. (That’s real carbon farming.)
Some of the carbon products that cattle eat get exhausted from both ends as CO2 and methane but not one atom of new carbon is introduced to the atmosphere by grasses, crops or cattle. They are just cogs in the endless carbon cycle that supports all life on Earth.
Moreover, contrary to the usual alarms, the atmospheric warming impact of methane from cattle is negligible since the few radiation absorption lines of methane are swamped by the absorption bands of the much more abundant water vapour. The same heat cannot be trapped twice. As physicist Dr Tom Sheahen points out:
“Worrying about methane emissions is the greatest waste of time in the entire lexicon of global warming fanaticism. . . .CH4’s effect is so tiny as to be completely irrelevant.”
Cattle even aid carbon sequestration as their meat gets incorporated into long-lived human bodies. As the decades and centuries pass, prodigious amounts of carbon are transferred from the atmosphere to grasses, to beef steak and hamburgers, to milk and cream, and thus to human bodies and bones. Eventually, millions of human bodies are buried (together with the considerable carbon fixed in their wooden coffins). Unlike the carbon temporarily captured in soils, much of this carbon in human cemeteries is permanently removed from the atmosphere.
Not only are Greens ignorant of the full carbon cycle of life, they also can’t count properly – they just measure whatever suits their red-green agenda. “Sequestration” or trying to bury carbon forever is anti-life and serves no useful purpose. All farmed soils will become severely deficient unless they are fertilised with carbon-bearing organic nutrients (like composted biomass or cattle manure) and mined or manufactured fertilisers containing lime, magnesite, phosphate, nitrogen and trace elements.
Cattle have always served human needs by converting inedible grasses into edible proteins and fats. Their hides make leather, and their bones and waste are recycled to make fertiliser.
Our hunter-gatherer ancestors treasured meat, supplemented by seasonal fruits, bulbs and tubers. When threatened by occasional starvation they learned how to process and eat grass seeds safely. We interfere with this ancient food heritage at our peril.
Men and cattle share millennia of history. Since the days of Aurochs and Longhorns, Bison and Buffalo, Nguni and Waygu, Yak and Zebu, men have hunted, protected, branded, worshipped, harvested, stolen, re-branded, milked and farmed Herefords, Santa Gertrudis, Shorthorns, Angus, Charolais, Jerseys, Friesians, Guernseys and many other breeds.
But now Green wackos from the aptly named “Extinction Rebellion” plan to ration and tax real meat while fraudulently labelling a manufactured plant-based concoction as “meat”.
Australia has about 26 million cattle producing meat, milk and cream. If meat is to be rationed why not also ration milk and cream for weet-bix, deserts and cappuccinos?
Why cull Australia’s cattle when India has more than 300 million cattle and lets millions of them roam freely because Hindus consider them sacred?
Why ration red meat in Australia when Brazil alone has more than 230 million cattle and South America’s beef consumption exceeds that of the USA and Australia, in total and per capita?
Why ration red meat in Australia when China, with about 97 million cattle, continually increases its meat consumption?
Even if all cattle vanished from the face of the Earth, grass growth would explode to feed mammoth bushfires, or be consumed by termites, or just rot – a real Zero Sum game to achieve world starvation.
Maybe de-population is their plan?
Here is a message for the cattle haters, people haters and meat counterfeiters:
“Hands Off our Grasslands, our Cattle and our Real Meat.”
Header image: Financial Times
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Andy
| #
Take real meat away from people you make them physically weaker, and thus easier to control. Depopulation is also the aim.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Good thing there’s no real meat in industry.
Reply
MattH
| #
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.
Have a nice day. Matt
Reply
MattH
| #
Thank you for not assailing with profanities Frank.
The leopard disguising it’s spots or yawning from tedium.
I did err in thinking you were somebody else and ordinarily I would have apologized for that. But ordinary does not enter the ring.
I have a saying “Hypocrisy is a beautiful thing”. We all posses it.
Some acknowledge and lessen their own.
Reply
Tom O
| #
Thanks Jerry. I appreciate the compliment. Just because you think you are wonderful and place your name in public – well, you say you do, I can’t verify that since I don’t know you – doesn’t mean you own what you say any more than does it mean that I am trying NOT to own what I say. Go back to eating canary seed.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Tom O and PSI Readers,
I do not think I am wonderful but I do read and I do claim to have learned to observe and frequently quote what I have read. For example, I learned to observe by reading what Lane Cooper, an English language professor at Cornell University had written, ‘Louis Agassiz As A Teacher’ (1917), about Louis Agassiz (1807-1873). You might ask: Who was Louis Agassiz? because few people (s cientists even) with whom I have had conversations, have any idea of who he was and certainly not how he taught. .
In his preface, Cooper began: “If it is asked why a teacher of English should be moved to issue this book on Agassiz, my reply might be: ‘Read the Introductory Note’ … ” So I did even though I did know the Agassiz had observed erratic boulders which lead him to conclude that glaciers had once covered the northern portions of Europe and Asia. Of which apparent possibility he had convinced the Geological Community, which had not concluded this even though they too had observed these erratic boulders.
In his Introductory Note Cooper began: “When the question was put to Agassiz, ‘What do you regard as your greatest work?’ he replied: ‘I have taught men to observe.’ And in the preamble to his will he described himself in three words as ‘Louis Agassiz, Teacher.’
Tom, I have been a teacher of chemistry (SCIENCE) and I am still trying to teach PSI Readers to observe as Agassiz taught some his students.
So I suggest you and other PSI Readers read (online) how Agassiz taught Professor Samuel H. Scudder and Professor Nathaniel Southgate Shaler by Googling these two men’s names.
For expect you and any PSI Reader might be amazed about Agassiz’s method of instruction which these two students describe.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Kathleen Pageot
| #
Here’s a handy suspect:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/eRRxreQxlV8/
“Bill Gates: Test Tube Meat, Mandatory Vaccinations & Real Time Global Surveillance From Space” by Spiro Skauras
Reply
Kathleen Pageot
| #
And here’s another suspect. The World Economic Forum is also cracking down on meat. Says the WEF: “5. We are eating much less meat. Rather like our grandparents, we will treat meat as a treat rather than a staple, writes Tim Benton, Professor of Population Ecology at the University of Leeds, UK. It won’t be big agriculture or little artisan producers that win, but rather a combination of the two, with convenience food redesigned to be healthier and less harmful to the environment.”
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/8-predictions-for-the-world-in-2030/
Reply