The GOATest Uber Map of how land is used in Murka

[bad seed]

I don't think you understand the full context of the conversation.

The question was if you were to have to raise your own animals for the meat you were going to consume within that year, would you be okay with that.

The poster who raised the question said some would have a problem with butchering meat, but in this hypothetical assume you wouldn't have to butcher the meat.

I replied that I would have no problem raising the animals on my own property, nor would I have a problem butchering them.

I think you've set up a false dichotomy, but if the choices are truly just veganism or factory farming, any thinking, rational person will clearly choose factory farming.

A vegan diet doesn't offer all the nutrition that every person needs. A vegan diet can even cause malnutrition in a growing child.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...fed-vegan-diet-hospitalized-for-malnutrition/

fair enough. It's just that it's a point brought up whenever food production is discussed. Because a fractional percent of the population has the luxury to hunt meat without considering the logistics of that scaled on a national level.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

You are going to deny that cattle farming is one of the largest producers of green house gasses? Raising cattle requires large amounts of land. Clearing land to raise cattle is what has directly resulted in the ever shrinking forest lands on earth.

How dare I tell you something is bad. I'm sorry go ahead and beat your wife and children, I should not have tried to stop you.

Cattle farming has negative effects on our planet. You desire to eat beef does not Trump my desire to have clean water.

Again, you trying to couch your personal dietary desires in environmental terms is just you trying to incorporate a collective to impose your self-interest.

The fact that you're trying to bring my family into this shows that you're running out of arguments to make.

I've pointed this out to you twice, and I find it fascinating that you won't acknowledge this one axiomatic truth:

It's not your place to say what others should, or shouldn't eat.

The reason that you're so resistant to this basic Axiom, is because deep down, you think it should be your place to tell others what they should or shouldn't eat.

This is why I keep telling you that you're guilty of Full Belly hubris. Because your belly is full, you think you can tell others when and how they should restrict their own diets.

 

[PubliusVentidius]

heard that shit makes people into infertile gay boys

I dont want any

I do wish we could farm in a more responsible manner as Beef is my preferred choice for dinner

I don't like how soy tastes (especially the milk, holy shit does it taste bad to me, although tofu soup is nice) but the fear mongering around soy is just silly, it doesn't lower your testosterone, man: https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(09)00966-2/fulltext
Phytoestrogens can be both estrogenic and anti-estrogenic, and very very mildly at that, the potency of the strongest phytoestrogen is only 0.001 the potency of your strongest endogenous estrogen Estradiol, let that sink in.
It's weird that people are so afraid of phytoestrogens in plants and then stuff their faces with milk and proteins derived from milk which contains actual steroidal estrogens, yet you never see people bashing milk as feminizing.

 

[Throwin Bombs]

Oh yes, I forgot people must eat beef, or they will surely die. Thank you very much for checking my pride.

You are one argumentative dude, turning this thread into another pissing match. You are probably yelling at your walls when not posting on this site.

 

[LMP]

Again, you trying to couch your personal dietary desires in environmental terms is just you trying to incorporate a collective to impose your self-interest.

The fact that you're trying to bring my family into this shows that you're running out of arguments to make.

I've pointed this out to you twice, and I find it fascinating that you won't acknowledge this one axiomatic truth:

It's not your place to say what others should, or shouldn't eat.

The reason that you're so resistant to this basic Axiom, is because deep down, you think it should be your place to tell others what they should or shouldn't eat.

This is why I keep telling you that you're guilty of Full Belly hubris. Because your belly is full, you think you can tell others when and how they should restrict their own diets.

First I never said don't eat beef, I clearly made the case that cattle farming is a waste of resources and contributes highly to pollution. You can't refute this facts, so you cry about how I'm dictating what other consume.

Next I point out how even if someone wants to do something, we as humans put restrictions on what they can do, if their actions are causing harm to others. (Maybe I missed explaining my point) cattle farming has negative overall effects on the earth and humanity. You can't refute that so you cry about how im forcing my diet on you. Good job

 

[JohnnySagebrush]

When I look at a BLM map, all I see is Family Farms, Ranches, and Homesteads taken by a legalized form of theft.

Well, that’s an ignorant belief. I would expect more knowledge about land use from a farmer, but the West is very different from the Midwest so your ignorance is understandable. The Midwest is largely private, the West public, and there are historical reasons for that. You don’t seem to know anything about the BLM.

Let me educate you a bit. There used to be something called The General Land Office. It was formed shortly after we became a country. They administered all Federal lands that the US owned. Eventually, the US population grew and the nation needed to expand. Thus, Congress passed the Homestead Acts. These act gave away federal land to settlers, over 270 million acres in total, given away for free. This is the origin of almost all farms and ranches in the US.

Homesteaders settled the most fertile, desirable locations. Such as all of Iowa, more or less. Hence why you find almost entirely private lands in the Midwest. If land wasn’t claimed and settled, it remained General Land Office property.
So what happened to the leftovers?

In 1946, the GLO was combined with the US Grazing Service to form what we know as the BLM. GLO lands with extraordinary features or natural attractions became National Park Service lands. Lands with high timber value became US Forest Service land.

What you allege is simply wrong. You are very ignorant on this issue. BLM lands were never “taken” from farmers, ranchers, or homesteaders. In fact, almost all BLM lands are grazed, and ranchers only pay a pittance for the forage. Hence the term “welfare rancher.”

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

“Waste” as in “make sure the whole fucking planet doesn’t starve” orrrrr?

Here is another one of your stupid posts that barely makes sense.

 

[Throwin Bombs]

What if beef consumption required one to raise, house and feed ones own lifestock? Same with Chickens? You didn't have to kill and butcher them yourselves, but you were required to provide for them up till slaughter.

Wonder how many people would still consume either beef or chicken?

In the process of making that transition within the upcoming months so no that doesn't dissuade me.

 

[LMP]

You are one argumentative dude, turning this thread into another pissing match. You are probably yelling at your walls when not posting on this site.

Am I wrong about what I'm saying about cattle farming?

 

[Gutter Chris]

I don't like how soy tastes (although tofu soup is nice) but the fear mongering around soy is just silly, it doesn't lower your testosterone, man: https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(09)00966-2/fulltext
Phytoestrogens can be both estrogenic and anti-estrogenic, and very very mildly at that, the potency of the strongest phytoestrogen is only 0.001 the potency of your strongest endogenous estrogen Estradiol, let that sink in.
It's weird that people are so afraid of phytoestrogens in plants and then stuff their faces with milk and proteins derived from milk which contains actual steroidal estrogens, yet you never see people bashing milk as feminizing.

Can you debunk my conspiracy that all the female birth control in the water supply is the real cause of why everyone is getting so feminine and fertility is going down with a side effect of everything stored in plastic having the same kinds of effects ?

I was being a smart ass about the soy I actually think what I just said is the real culprit and you seem like maybe you know bout that kinda shit

"You wanna fight, go buy a gun
You want knowledge, get yourself a scientist "

 

[Throwin Bombs]

Am I wrong about what I'm saying about cattle farming?

You ignore the content of my post and instead are trying to goad me into back and forth over this, come on now.

 

[JohnnySagebrush]

Really shows how much land we waste on cattle.

Hello, Lowman.
Most of that land isn’t arable. You can’t grow anything on it besides low-quality grass. But, the wonder that is the ruminant stomach is able to transform that mediocre forage into delicious and nutritious protein.

I would say it isn’t “wasted” on cattle, unless you can tell me a better use for it. In fact, I think we would be better off if some more of that Midwestern crop land was dedicated to grass raised cattle. A healthy cow pasture is much more ecologically diverse and sound than a corn, wheat, or soybean field.

 

[LMP]

You ignore the content of my post and instead are trying to goad me into back and forth over this, come on now.

I didn't deny being an angry man that screams at the walls. I just asked if what I'm saying is wrong.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

Well, that’s an ignorant belief. I would expect more knowledge about land use from a farmer, but the West is very different from the Midwest so your ignorance is understandable. The Midwest is largely private, the West public, and there are historical reasons for that. You don’t seem to know anything about the BLM.

Let me educate you a bit. There used to be something called The General Land Office. It was formed shortly after we became a country. They administered all Federal lands that the US owned. Eventually, the US population grew and the nation needed to expand. Thus, Congress passed the Homestead Acts. These act gave away federal land to settlers, over 270 million acres in total, given away for free. This is the origin of almost all farms and ranches in the US.

Homesteaders settled the most fertile, desirable locations. Such as all of Iowa, more or less. Hence why you find almost entirely private lands in the Midwest. If land wasn’t claimed and settled, it remained General Land Office property.
So what happened to the leftovers?

In 1946, the GLO was combined with the US Grazing Service to form what we know as the BLM. GLO lands with extraordinary features or natural attractions became National Park Service lands. Lands with high timber value became US Forest Service land.

What you allege is simply wrong. You are very ignorant on this issue. BLM lands were never “taken” from farmers, ranchers, or homesteaders. In fact, almost all BLM lands are grazed, and ranchers only pay a pittance for the forage. Hence the term “welfare rancher.”

Sorry, your narrative is just wrong.

You act like Farmers don't know anyone outside their own area. Ag is a smaller community than you would think. I know people who have had their grandfathers or great-grandfather's land taken by the BLM. Then the BLM charges them grazing fees to graze their cattle on their own land.

The reason I say the things I do about the BLM, is because I sympathize and empathize with the Farmers and Ranchers of the Great American West.

 

[LMP]

Hello, Lowman.
Most of that land isn’t arable. You can’t grow anything on it besides low-quality grass. But, the wonder that is the ruminant stomach is able to transform that mediocre forage into delicious and nutritious protein.

I would say it isn’t “wasted” on cattle, unless you can tell me a better use for it. In fact, I think we would be better off if some more of that Midwestern crop land was dedicated to grass raised cattle. A healthy cow pasture is much more ecologically diverse and sound than a corn, wheat, or soybean field.

I would argue that we use to much of the fertile farm land in the Midwest to raise cattle. Increase crop production drastically decrease cattle production. We would have a net positive to our food production. We would also decrease our pollution.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

fair enough. It's just that it's a point brought up whenever food production is discussed. Because a fractional percent of the population has the luxury to hunt meat without considering the logistics of that scaled on a national level.

Even in some hypothetical shit hits the fan scenario, I'm not too worried about the local Wildlife being over hunted in my area.

Most people who live in cities are conditioned to city life. Even if Society collapsed into a state of being without rule of law, I honestly wonder how many 3rd or 4th generation city-dwellers will actually venture out into the surrounding Countryside. I suspect quite a few will simply hunker down, scavenge, and wait.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

I would argue that we use to much of the fertile farm land in the Midwest to raise cattle. Increase crop production drastically decrease cattle production. We would have a net positive to our food production. We would also decrease our pollution.

Genetic technology is allowing higher yields on the same acreage. The American Farmer and Rancher can meet both needs: the need for more grain, and the need for a consistent supply of cattle.

The American Farmer and Rancher is willing to serve up whatever the American people are buying.

 

[JohnnySagebrush]

Sorry, your narrative is just wrong.

You act like Farmers don't know anyone outside their own area. Ag is a smaller community than you would think. I know people who have had their grandfathers or great-grandfather's land taken by the BLM. Then the BLM charges them grazing fees to graze their cattle on their own land.

The reason I say the things I do about the BLM, is because I sympathize and empathize with the Farmers and Ranchers of the Great American West.

Brown, you called me wrong and offered nothing in the way of facts to refute me. I clearly described the history of the BLM.
You don’t know anyone who had their ranch taken by the BLM. I gave historical fact, you gave a concocted anecdote.
You are out of your depth on this issue. I feel like we are kindred spirits because of my midwestern farming roots, but when it comes to this, you either don’t have a damn clue what you speak of, or you are trolling.

 

[JohnnySagebrush]

I would argue that we use to much of the fertile farm land in the Midwest to raise cattle. Increase crop production drastically decrease cattle production. We would have a net positive to our food production. We would also decrease our pollution.

You want to put more Land into crop production?

 

[LMP]

Genetic technology is allowing higher yields on the same acreage. The American Farmer and Rancher can meet both needs: the need for more grain, and the need for a consistent supply of cattle.

The American Farmer and Rancher is willing to serve up whatever the American people are buying.

So now that we have the idea of me forcing you to eat certain foods out of the way. Are you going to acknowledge the fact that cattle farming has negative effects on the environment? Is what I am arguing wrong? Maybe it is that as a farmer, you care more for your own profit, than you do about what is best overall for humanity?