Washington Post Promotes Fake Meat Company
First, they wanted us to eat the bugs. That didn’t catch on, so now they want to make our meat in a lab.
The Washington Post’s latest climate nonsense fawned over lab-grown meat to save the climate.
The Post propped up Good Meat, the company that served its lab-grown meat to the world’s elite at the U.N. COP 27 Climate Change Conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt.
“[T]he company serving it vows it will soon help save the planet,” read a Post story published on Friday. [emphasis, links added]
The paper’s most recent prodding over climate change came just a week after the COP27 conference devoted a day to discussing climate change and food production.
The Post described the so-called “meat” in what read more like advertising copy than a news article.
“It was raised not on a farm but in a lab. It tastes exactly like chicken, but no chicken’s life was taken to serve it up as crispy skins, spicy skewers, and a grilled boneless thigh,” The Post fawned. “Soon there will be beef, pork, and fish, too, in this quest to mass-produce edible flesh without cruelty or climate chaos.”
The Post continued its free promo when it summarized Good Meat chief executive Josh Tetrick’s “pitch:”
“If synthetic meat can be made affordably and in mass quantities, the implications for nourishing the world and curbing climate change are considerable,” The Post wrote. “Raising and feeding farm animals consumes two-thirds of the world’s agricultural land and drives 15 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases.”
Notably, the article fails to explain how not farming animals for meat will reduce methane gas in a slaughter-free way.
Common sense holds that the animals would have to somehow die in order to actually reduce the feared emissions.
It also makes no mention of the lab-grown meat’s nutritional value in comparison to real meat.
This isn’t the first time elites have tried to convince plebes to eat alternative proteins.
The New York Times Opinion section posted a video titled, “The Case for Edible Insects” in February. The Times sounded the false alarm on meat:
“Scientists have warned that unless we make major adjustments to the kinds of food we eat and how we produce it, we have no chance of meeting our climate goals.”
The Times also claimed that “reduced demand for meat, would help relieve pressure on the environment and mitigate global warming.”
Uber-liberal mega-billionaire Bill Gates drew intense public ire this year for promoting fake meats. Gates reportedly “invested in [a] range of ‘synthetic meat’ startups including Impossible Foods, Beyond Meat, Memphis Meats, and Hampton Creek Foods,” according to Australia-based Beef Central.
He also helped fund a study in The Lancet that coincidentally benefited Gates’s investments. The study alleged that 2019 deaths traced to unprocessed red meat intake spiked an estimated 36-fold, but this has since been shown to be false here, a few days ago red-meat-is-not-a-health-risk
See more here climatechangedispatch
Editor’s note: what happens to all the cows, pigs, chickens, sheep when we are producing Frankenstein foods grown in labs? They will still be producing so-called ‘greenhouse gases’, so should they all be killed, or allowed to die naturally while preventing new generations? Either way, this will cause the deliberate extinction of four species, something alarmists allegedly care deeply about.
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.