No Meat for You!

Figure 1. Africa’s Serengeti with Abundant Meat on the Hoof
Figure 1. Africa’s Serengeti with Abundant Meat on the Hoof

Guest post by Jim Steele,

Published in the Pacifica Tribune January 15, 2020

What’s Natural?

No Meat for You!

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio recently announced NYC’s New Green Deal and his plan “to save our earth”. He stated NYC will reduce beef purchases by 50% and phase out ALL purchases of processed meat by 2030. It’s not clear how he defines processed meats, but the World Health Organization defines it as “meat that has been transformed through salting, curing, fermentation, smoking, or other processes to enhance flavor or improve preservation.”

Processed meats evolved before the era of modern refrigeration for good reason. Salting, curing, fermenting, and smoking meat increased the shelf-life of a limited food supply and thus increased human survival. But now processed meats are demonized. Certainly, some chemical additives are unhealthy, but demonizing all processed meats is just wrong. With good labeling people can freely choose what foods they trust.

But de Blasio’s edict would mean any institution run by NYC will no longer serve chicken nuggets, hotdogs, sausages, bacon, pastrami, ham, baloney, salami, pepperoni, corned beef and jerky. Fresh beef meals will be cut by 50% to “save the planet’s climate” from cow farts. How far will these government actions go? Dairy cows fart too. Will milk, whip cream, cheese, yogurt and ice cream be next on the hit list? Will they later extend their ban to all of NYC? What if Mayor de Blasio ever became America’s president? Fortunately, de Blasio’s authoritarian actions are why so many Americans rightfully argue we need limited government!

There is no place for authoritarian diet control. We all experiment with our best personal diets. I went vegetarian for a few years. I liked learning to make tastier vegetables. But eventually I reverted to carnivorous ways. Most studies suggest our bodies evolved to eat both plants and meat, so I resent those who try to shame me for naturally eating meat. However, one PETA article did argue if you see dead animals on the side of the road, but are not tempted to stop and snack on them, you are naturally a herbivore. Really?

Nonetheless, vegetarians make a very valid point. Over-grazing has been bad for the environment. Studies of temperatures in Arizona and Mexico determined lost vegetation from overgrazing caused soils to dry, raising regional temperatures by as much as 7°F compared to un-grazed adjacent lands. Over-grazing converts biologically diverse grasslands into barren deserts. But counter-intuitively, without grazing animals, grasslands still convert to deserts. Grasslands benefit from natural grazing and “holistic grazing” has been shown to prevent “desertification”. Unfortunately, overzealous radical vegetarians don’t understand – holistic grazing is a win-win for the environment and meat eaters.

Grasses do not decompose immediately. Nutrients get locked up for years while the accumulating “thatch” blocks the sun and inhibits the growth of new grasses. Accumulating thatch also enhances wildfires. Grazing animals not only remove thatch, their manure freely fertilizes the soil and promotes next year’s growth. Holistic grazing has demonstrated if we mimic the natural migrations of huge herds, as in Africa’s Serengeti, we can prevent desertification. Overgrazing typically happens when herds are confined to small pastures, too small to support the cattle’s needs.

I encourage everyone to google Allan Savory’s hope-filled TED talk titled “How to Fight Desertification and Reverse Climate Change”. Savory is originally from South Africa. There, cattle were removed from lands destined to become National Parks and Savory was charged with studying the results. His studies revealed the park’s grasslands continued to degrade into desert despite removal of all cattle grazing. The “only” remaining explanation pointed to elephants. Regretfully he recommended culling elephants to sustainable levels. Such a recommendation was blasphemous, so government experts initiated another study. Unfortunately, government experts agreed. Too many elephants were ripping up vegetation. So, thousands of elephants were slaughtered. The result – the land continued to degrade from grassland to desert.

Savory eventually understood holistic grazing was the only solution. If cattle were managed to imitate natural grazing, the land could be restored because cattle grazing would remove thatch, freely fertilize the ground, and supply a protective layer of moisture-holding mulch. Holistic grazing reversed desertification and stopped excessive warming of surface temperatures caused by overgrazing. And holistic grazing increased the storage of carbon in the soil.

The anti-meat-eating crowd often argues eating meat is a shameful, immoral and inefficient use of calories. They argue meat provides only a small fraction of the calories we would otherwise obtain by directly eating the grains fed to cattle. But that is a narrow perspective. By raising cattle holistically on grasslands, we efficiently obtain calories and protein that we could never acquire otherwise from inedible grasses. Globally there are huge swaths of land unsuitable for growing edible plant food, and where human populations must totally rely on grazing animals for survival.

So, feel no shame! Meat eating is not the ticket to climate hell! Holistic grazing is a win-win for meat eaters and the environment.

Jim Steele is director emeritus of the Sierra Nevada Field Campus, SFSU and authored Landscapes and Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
January 15, 2020 2:09 pm

“New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio recently announced NYC’s New Green Deal and his plan to save our earth”

Theater of the absurd

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Chaamjamal
January 15, 2020 6:06 pm

We would not have evolved as big- brained humans, without a meat diet.

John Tillman
Reply to  Alan Robertson
January 15, 2020 6:43 pm

For brain, animal fat, such as brain and bone marrow.

For muscle, meat.

Jay Willis
Reply to  John Tillman
January 16, 2020 3:36 am

John…. “””For brain, animal fat, such as brain and bone marrow.

For muscle, meat.”””

I’d like to see you discuss the fine points of that with a full grown male gorilla. You need to reconsider the brain and muscular benefits of a vegetarian diet! Once you have finished proving your meat based muscular superiority with the Gorilla, how about competing with Leonardo Da Vinci on brain power or creative ability!

Nobody minds your preference for meat (well I don’t anyhow) but don’t parrot some meaningless mantra about the benefits of a meat based diet when the evidence of its falsehood are abundant and evident.

All the best


John Tillman
Reply to  Jay Willis
January 16, 2020 3:59 am


I refer to the evolution of the human brain. Without animal fat, our ancestors could not have so dramatically ballooned our neocortex.

In today’s world it is indeed possible to derive sufficient fat and protein from plants, without needing the jaw muscles and big bellies of gorillas.

Human teeth and jaw musculature however required meat. Our cousins the chimps are also omnivores.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Jay Willis
January 16, 2020 4:40 am

I’d like to see you discuss the fine points of that with a full grown male gorilla. You need to reconsider the brain and muscular benefits of a vegetarian diet! Once you have finished proving your meat based muscular superiority with the Gorilla, how about competing with Leonardo Da Vinci on brain power or creative ability!

I don’t think it would be hard to win a debate against a gorilla. They are not very good at verbalization. As for Leonardo, how many of his “inventions” did he actually put into practice?

Animal protein is much higher quality than plant protein and the human body utilizes a higher percentage of animal protein than plant protein. How many NFL players are vegetarians?

Jay Willis
Reply to  Jay Willis
January 16, 2020 5:51 am

Trying to play nice…. “I don’t think it would be hard to win a debate against a gorilla.”
You’re clearly thinking of a verbal debate. My apologies, I was using the gorilla as an example of superior muscle development and then subverting that as a humorous allusion to debating with a gorilla. Clearly the animal (which is predominantly but not totally vegan) is much more powerful physically. As for brain development, Leonardo was an example of a relatively superior intellect, I think it would be a tough call to say he wasn’t a genius. But he certainly wasn’t deficient mentally – in comparison to his meat eating peers.

So on to the idea that we couldn’t have evolved big brains without meat. Elephants have bigger brains than us. Leonardo maintained a normal brain on vegetables. So no there is no reason why mankind could not have evolved our big brains on a vegan diet. There is also no evidence that animal protein is ‘superior’ to plant protein (quite the opposite in fact). But I’m not your Google jockey 🙂 look up vegan NFL players for yourself. (remember I only need one to prove my argument – falsify your hypothesis that meat is necessary)

So stop trying to justify your preferences using pseudo science. There is no scientific reasoning behind a meat eating diet.

Reply to  Jay Willis
January 16, 2020 7:39 am

I’m not expert in gorilla anatomy, or human anatomy for that matter, but presumably if gorrillas grow big and strong on a mainly plant diet, they have things in their anatomical makeup which take advantage of nutrients in their food supply. I’m not sure humans have the same when it comes to eating what a gorilla would eat.

Reply to  Jay Willis
January 16, 2020 12:10 pm

“Jay Willis January 16, 2020 at 3:36 am

“John…. “””For brain, animal fat, such as brain and bone marrow.
For muscle, meat.”””

I’d like to see you discuss the fine points of that with a full grown male gorilla. You need to reconsider the brain and muscular benefits of a vegetarian diet!”

Stuff and nonsense!
1) a false analogy; man is the same as gorilla, a falsehood that establishes Jay’s red herring strawman.

2) Gorillas are not strict vegetarians!

e.g. 1) Gorillas feed on termites.

Now discuss, explicitly humans and their diets.
Diets well established by anthropologists, egyptologists, and paleontologists, back at least 14,000 years.

Reply to  Jay Willis
January 16, 2020 12:25 pm

Nonsense follows nonsense.

“Jay Willis January 16, 2020 at 5:51 am

As for brain development, Leonardo was an example of a relatively superior intellect, I think it would be a tough call to say he wasn’t a genius. But he certainly wasn’t deficient mentally – in comparison to his meat eating peers.
So on to the idea that we couldn’t have evolved big brains without meat. Elephants have bigger brains than us. Leonardo maintained a normal brain on vegetables. “

Wrong, again.

Leonardo was a gourmet and left notebooks with recipes, shopping lists, comments, etc.

A sample of one of Leonardo’s shopping list:

“Da Vinci’s kitchen notebooks are filled with comments on the cost and quality of the food and drink he encountered throughout Italy. For example, da Vinci noted that a bottle of wine, a pound of veal and a basket of eggs cost one soldo each. Also included in the notebooks were his shopping lists, which varied between elaborate ingredients for court feasts and rather simple items for his own household’s fare.”

It’s certainly not Da Vinci or the meat eaters on this comment thread who lack critical amino acids where their brains might be affected.

Jay Willis
Reply to  Jay Willis
January 16, 2020 1:13 pm

Good point Wadey. So I suggest considering Patrik Baboumian. He may not officially be the world’s strongest man, but he’s close and holds world records for things like the log lift etc. He’s vegan.

Reply to  Jay Willis
January 16, 2020 7:31 pm

Hate to rain on the vegan gorilla myth, but a study of gorilla poop found monkey and antelope dna present. It seems they have a secret meat craving that they indulge.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Jay Willis
January 17, 2020 1:00 pm

“Good point Wadey. So I suggest considering Patrik Baboumian. He may not officially be the world’s strongest man, but he’s close and holds world records for things like the log lift etc. He’s vegan.”

I’ll bet he ingests a LOT of additional protein.

Reply to  Alan Robertson
January 16, 2020 7:35 am

This story makes one wonder if we did evolve as big-brained humans. Or at least, some of us.

Reply to  wadesworld
January 16, 2020 11:05 am

Hi wadesworld, – Brains of asians are statistically larger than caucasians & caucasian brains are statistically larger than blacks. Aside from that people around the world have different brain configurations & folds.

The west African brain is narrower at the base of the cranium & as the percentage of Yoruba ancestry increases the temporal brain portion is located more back & inward. The native American Indian brain in the frontal & occipital brain regions is more flat than in other people.

The east Asian brain’s cranium vault is relatively higher with a corresponding increase increase in the temporal & parietal surfaces. The northern & western European ancestry brain trends toward being elongated at the frontal & occipital reguons.

For good images see free full (2015) text on-line of “Modeling the 3D geometry of the conical surface with genetic ancestry”; originally published in journal Current Biology.

There are also significant variations in the intelligence among people. Specific data can be found this website: human-intelligence dot org.

Ascribing meat eating to brain quality seems tenuous. For example the archaic hunter-gatherer Aborigine may have optimized their survival in an environmental niche yet the average IQ of an adult is statistically matched by the average 11 year old Eurpean’s IQ of 62.

January 15, 2020 2:16 pm

This action by New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio verges on the famous” Shirley, you can’t be serious”. This action, however, runs well with Bill de Blasio’s track record where he and his ‘co-mayor’ wife have wasted $1.8B of taxpayer money in a short time on TeamThrive and his signature Renewal school program. Bill is a centre of bad, wasteful and stupid ideas.

John Tillman
January 15, 2020 2:21 pm

Bovine burping is the main methane source from cattle and other ruminants. They also of course produce methane in their large intestines as well as from enteric fermentation in their stomachs.

If Australia had allowed its dangerously built up vegetation to be grazed and browsed, its destructive wildfires wouldn’t have happened.

Aboriginal peoples replaced feeding by the extinct megafauna such as the giant wombat with controlled burning.

Western North American forests have similarly burned from lack of foraging by large herbivores and other sound management practices prohibited by brain dead ecoloons in charge of public lands and making insane rules for private managers.

January 15, 2020 2:21 pm

[Catastrophic] Anthropogenic Diet Change.

Pillage Idiot
Reply to  n.n
January 15, 2020 3:33 pm

Selective Herbivore Intensity Technology.

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Pillage Idiot
January 15, 2020 4:03 pm

Superb Healthy Institutionalised Teaching

Reply to  n.n
January 15, 2020 6:20 pm

Sensitive Human Intestinal Torture!!

Reply to  n.n
January 16, 2020 3:51 am

Soaring Human Idioty Trend !

Adam Gallon
January 15, 2020 2:24 pm

I can just see the court cases in 2031, the Mafia are smuggling prosciutto, Palma ham & Chorizo.
Moonshiners replaced by illicit bacon curers.

Reply to  Adam Gallon
January 15, 2020 3:13 pm


While you might have been sarcastic with the idea that illicit bacon curers will replace moonshiners, you have hit on a trend. Illicit bacon cure will be the additional money maker for those who also distill. As we speak, there is a trend among homebrew stores to offer classes in Charcuterie which of course includes bacon. The revenuers failed to stop illicit distillation, what makes the control freaks so confident that they can stop illicit smokehouses and sausage mills. They will only get my breakfast links when they pry them from my cold maple syrup soaked hands.

Reply to  Richmond
January 16, 2020 1:11 pm

Thank you for use of “charcuterie”! I’ll hang my comment under yours because you established the topic definition.

“Salting, curing, fermenting, and smoking meat increased the shelf-life of a limited food supply and thus increased human survival. But now processed meats are demonized.”

Old markets, butchers and even meat purveyors in third world countries hang their animal carcasses. Which allows the meat to age, tenderizing as it ages.

Sliced thin and dried, dried meats are commonly known as ‘jerky’.

The real problem starts with large portions of the animal; e.g. hip bones and surrounding meat.
Unfortunately, botulinum can grow in meats, especially in the meat near bones or in sausage.

Sodium Nitrate is, by far, the most effective method of preventing clostridium botulinum growth.
Nor has sodium nitrate been proven harmful.
Instead, activists against salts simply moved their demonizing sodium nitrate to sodium nitrite. Sodium nitrite is a chemical byproduct of sodium nitrate; one always has the other.

Modern processing injects the salt solution deep into the meats to ensure meat near the center bones are well treated. Unfortunately, all too many of the factories add other flavors and diluents so that modern processed meats no longer taste the same as before.

A fact that started more people learning charcuterie or finding their local charcuterie to obtain quality bacon, kielbasa, pancetta, hams, etc., even bologna.

Consider this, salt cured bacon is hung for smoking. A curing process that leaves meats quite dry.

That wet drippy bacon from the big manufacturers that starts spitting grease while cooking are rapidly cured using a wet process, sliced then packaged with extra liquids that are mostly water. Leaving a water soaked inferior product with artificial and sort of natural flavors. (sort of natural refers to manufacturers who use fire emission byproducts for the smoke flavor.)

Commercial sausage is a similar process. Finding a quality charcuterie eliminates the cheap ground meats that have substantial quantities of tendon chunks masquerading as meat. Nor will a good charcuterie add significant quantities of water to their sausage.

Commercial enterprises add substantial quantities of ice to the meats being ground, to keep the grinders cool. In spite of claims that it keeps the meat cool, meat that passes through a grinder picks up little heat. Meat that is left in a warm grinder picks up a lot of warmth.
Every bucket/shovel of ice thrown into the grinder gets sold at meat prices.

Cooking food well, destroys botulin toxins.
Unfortunately, cooking at lower temperatures, e.g. boiling at 212°F (100°C) does not destroy clostridium botulinum spores. Which is why canned foods are processed at higher pressures.

Reply to  ATheoK
January 16, 2020 6:14 pm


Thank you for that post. It was most informative and timely. I appreciate your knowledge and exposition of the traditional methods and why they worked. People would do well to embrace our food heritage and not fall prey to the false narratives of pseudo-intellectuals, and deluded consumers.

Christopher Simpson
January 15, 2020 2:27 pm

Wait. What does this mean? I mean, this simply can’t be enforced upon the general population. It must be referring only to meat bought by the actual City of New York. So how much meat does the CITY of New York buy? Does this mean no more baloney sandwiches at City Hall meetings? Would this affect schools? Are schools owned by New York City?

And what about hot dog vendors? They’re not owned by the City, but they get their licences from the City.

I’m so confused!

Ron Long
Reply to  Christopher Simpson
January 15, 2020 2:49 pm

No, you’re not confused. No more baloney sandwiches, just like you said. Baloney, however, especially delivered by Major de Blasio, bring it!

Christopher Simpson
Reply to  Ron Long
January 15, 2020 7:51 pm

Do we know about the schools? No meat for the students? And what about the hot dog vendors. While they’re not owned by the City they’re licenced by it and therefore might be under the same strictures.

Christopher Simpson
Reply to  Christopher Simpson
January 15, 2020 7:52 pm

Never mind. I saw other answers below.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Christopher Simpson
January 15, 2020 4:04 pm

Maybe hotdog vendors can sell the supplements – which aren’t like getting the real thing – of the nutrients that are impossible to obtain from plants. If only nature had developed a natural way for us to obtain these nutrients…

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Robert W. Turner
January 16, 2020 9:37 am

Yeah, like the critical vitamin B12.

Reply to  Christopher Simpson
January 15, 2020 4:17 pm

It means that if you are a NYC employee, your cafeteria will have significant restrictions.

In my generation, hospital and college cafeterias were awful, so many of us on limited incomes frequented lunch trucks and hot dog stands (unaffected by this decree). Keep track of NYC cafeteria revenue.

Unfortunately if you are in inmate in a NYC jail………

But who reallybelieves this edict will still be in effect in 2030?

Reply to  George Daddis
January 16, 2020 7:49 am

” inmate in a NYC jail”

All the more reason to rehabilitate yourself so that you don’t go back.

Reply to  MarkW
January 17, 2020 11:01 am

Feeding them a vegan diet will cause medical and more mental issues. Not feeding young kids meat would probably violate federal nutritional guidelines for schools.
In Oregon they literally have fed prisoners fish bait (marked not fit for human consumption). So, not like they will save money trying to replace meat with nuts.

Reply to  Christopher Simpson
January 15, 2020 6:45 pm

What do we do with Rep. Swallwell who had a loud gas emission on tv?

January 15, 2020 2:29 pm

” a bold and audacious plan”….

liberal speak for stupid and asinine virtue signaling

they honestly do not have any idea how bad they look

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Latitude
January 15, 2020 4:05 pm

But they have a plan to tackle the problem. Do You?

All other plans have failed, but this one looks like a winner.

Loren Wilson
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
January 15, 2020 5:41 pm

If all other plans have failed, I would be skeptical of this one, just based on the track record of the planners so far. P.S. I just ate several pounds of recycled grass for dinner. It was delicious.

Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
January 15, 2020 6:53 pm

What “problem”? Are we out smoked ribs again? That’s OK, I could go some banana prawns and scallops on the BBQ.

Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
January 15, 2020 7:41 pm

Well, they have a plan. Stupid as it may be. Now all they need is a problem for it to solve. Other views might say it’s putting the cart before the horse. Or perhaps it’s a tail wagging a dog. Maybe grabbing the bull by the horns.

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Pete
January 15, 2020 9:18 pm

I’d rather grab the bull by the horns than what’s available to grab at the other end.

Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
January 16, 2020 7:51 am

You have a better chance of controlling the bull, if you grab what’s at the other end.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
January 16, 2020 4:46 am

If you can elucidate the problem, then maybe we can tell you what our solution would be.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
January 16, 2020 9:40 am

What problem? Are you talking about the phantom menace aka CAGW? We are in the middle of a ice age man, a little more heat is a good thing! It will turn cold again soon enough; enjoy the warmth while it lasts.

January 15, 2020 2:30 pm

Very nice. I have posted here about Dr. Allan Savory and Regenerative Agriculture. This stuff is the REAL solution to “climate change,” which is NOT coming from fossil fuel, but destruction of the hydrosphere (water) through bad agriculture. Soil temperature of 140F are NOT natural and did not exist before the lands were stripped of cover vegetation. The best book for understanding the mechanics of this is Judith Schwartz’ “Water in Plain Sight.” The best book for farmers or ranchers wanting to increase their profits by improving their soil is probably “Dirt To Soil” by Gabe Brown.

There are many other great books on these things.

Today, only the climate strike kids know very much about these actual solutions. Since this stuff is PROFITABLE, it does not require a mountain of government force to implement. And since it will actually work to heal “the planet” (by which everyone means the biosphere), those blasted greenies can get bored about all their destructive nonsense, and quit doing so much harm.

Reply to  LadyLifeGrows
January 15, 2020 3:02 pm

If Vegan and vegetarian diets provide all required nutrients, why is the lapse rate so extraordinarily high?

Reply to  RobR
January 15, 2020 4:21 pm

I think I know. One episode of the “Two Fat Ladies” had them eating bacon on a bun that they bought from a roadside vendor in England. One lady remarked to the other that the smell and taste of bacon is the reason why vegetarians go back to meat!

A survey from a couple of years ago:

I was keto for a couple years and felt great; carnivore for a month now and feel even better. Meat is delicious and nutritious!

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  polski
January 15, 2020 5:37 pm

I love vegans. Those vegan cows and sheep taste lovely!

Paul Penrose
Reply to  RobR
January 16, 2020 9:44 am

Because we require vitamin B12 to live, and animal meat is a good source of it. In fact, it’s really the only source that can provide enough B12 for the entire population. So “vegans” either cheat in private, or they quit. The only other option is a painful death.

Reply to  Paul Penrose
January 16, 2020 11:54 am

Hi Paul Penrose, – A healthy adult can store 3,000 micro-grams (0.003 grams) of B12. And there are different absorption rates for ingested B12.

By eating cooked liver (rabbit data) 10-41% B12 may be absorbed; raw liver (calf data) has 30% B12 absorption rate. Age seems to also be a factor where young consuming liver pate (mutton data) absorb 11% of the B12, while old people absorb just 4.5% of that liver pate B12.

Better absorption is found in with both fish (trout) of 30-40% B12 absorbed. And cooked chicken has a 61-65% B12 absorption rate.

European agencies determined that only 0.0000015 grams of B12 is required daily by the very young (up to 11 months old) & teens (15-17 age) daily require 0.000004 grams B12. This is assuming no internal B12 is being drawn upon.

Supplementing with B12 is apparently quite practical. Furthermore in larger doses there seems to be a better absorption rate; up to 40-50% B12 absorption in healthy individuals.

Apparently aside from what the body uses for metabolic requirements a mega-dose of 5,000 microgram (0.005 gram) B12 undergoes a loss rate of just 0.13% per day. For an adult’s metabolic usage of 1.4 – 5.1 micrograms a day (0.0000014 – 0.0000051 grams B12/d.) that means B12 supplements are quite long lasting in healthy adults.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  gringojay
January 16, 2020 2:31 pm

Where do you think those supplements come from? Animal sources, of course. While it’s probably possible to synthesize B12 using other base materials, it would not be practical to provide the entire world’s population this way. So you either eat meat/fish, or take supplements that are made from meat/fish. Ultimately it’s the same thing – they have to die so that we can live. Cue the song “Circle of Life”.

Reply to  gringojay
January 16, 2020 7:01 pm

Hello again Paul Penrose, – Man made vitamin B12 (as cyanocobalamin) is commercialized quite successfully. It is also a misconception that flesh organisms are themselves making B12; it is their symbiotic bacteria hosted that actually make cobalamin (B12) for their uptake.

I purposely specified the relatively small amounts of B12 required & the low depletion rates. Commerce has been around for centuries & fortified foods show up in seemingly remote areas already.

I respect the decision of those who eat a flesh based diet while challenge the unsupported declaration that B12 is impractical to otherwise source.
Personally my blood tests show I get plenty of B12 from eating dairy instead of eating flesh foods as a so called “lacto-vegetarian”(egg eating vegetarians also get B12); pure “vegans” would need to supplement B12 or consume nori seaweed.

Reply to  gringojay
January 16, 2020 8:19 pm

Here’s my math if everyone in the world today (using online statistic of 7,794,797,739; 7.8 billion people) got the minimum teen age (15-17 year old) B12 daily requirement (4 micro-grams; 0.000004 grams). This would require 32,000 grams of B12 a day to cover everyone.

The small vitamin bottle of fancy formulated B12 on hand contains 0.15 grams. Which means 213,333 of these units would be equivalent to the above reference 32,000 grams B12.

I would not be surprised if a major USA state supermarket/pharmacy chain could order that amount from their product suppliers’ inventory for delivery. In actuality we are looking at about a product when pure takes up the space of about 32,000 palms full daily.

Thus 11,660,000 palms full of man made B12 is enough for the specified annual requirement. Alibaba commerce options indicate there are already 1,192 B12 producers offering the product (I haven’t checked wholesale bulk lot prices; usually that would be for “drum” containers full.)

[Note: I used a B12 reference number for easiest calculation & did not parse for different population ages.]


Reply to  gringojay
January 16, 2020 10:48 pm

Out of curiosity I found Alibaba sells 100 kg B12 for US$50/kg. So 100 kg costs U$5,000.

If my prior calculation of globally needing 32,000 grams B12 is correct then that is a total of 32 kg B12/day required for all the 7.7+ billion human beings around. For 365 days of the year at 32 Kg/day the entire need for B12 is 11,680 Kg annually for the worlds’ people.

That is 116.8 lots of 100 Kg B12 wholesaling for US$5,000 per lot. Bottom line is man made B12 can be bought in separate lots of 100 Kg for a total amount of US$584,000 annually . Now, that is enough for everybody in the world & this cost basis does not take into account any further bulk discount.

Thus the cost of B12 per person at this price would be US$7.50 annually. In short the cost is no more than US$0.0206/day for every individual person in the entire world’s B12 requirement.

Pardon any possible math errors that I may have made. [Again: I have used the teenage dose for simplified calculating & not parsed ages.]

Paul Penrose
Reply to  gringojay
January 17, 2020 11:00 am

Cyanocobalamin apparently is made in much larger volumes that I was aware of, so I was wrong about that. However, it is not nearly as bioreactive as natural sources of B12, with some sources indicating only a 20% uptake. So you have to take much large doses that the 4mcg that you stated. This is probably why most oral supplements are sold at much higher concentrations per pill. Your quick math indicates that you would need 12.5 tons yearly for the entire world population, but that goes to 62.5 tons at 20% uptake. That’s about double the current annual world-wide production, but it doesn’t seem like it would be impossible to double it. Keep in mind though, you need more than the minimum since B12 is also in higher doses to treat certain conditions. The current 35 tons per year is going somewhere after all, and most of us still get all our B12 from animal sources (including dairy). Keep in mind that cyanocobalamin is made in bioreactors, so ramping up production would still be a big job. Interesting discussion, thanks!

Reply to  RobR
January 16, 2020 1:18 pm

The real question is: where are all the record setting, medal winning, fit as a fiddle champion vegans?
And by “where” I am what planet? Because they are sure as heck not to be found on Earth

Mike McHenry
January 15, 2020 2:30 pm

A little known fact is that processed meat may be a contributor to the benefits of the Mediterranean diet. They often contain nitrites which help lower blood pressure. De Blasio recently proposed banning the sale of foie gras in NYC

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Mike McHenry
January 15, 2020 5:46 pm

Foie gras (fat liver) production involves cruelty to animals via force feeding.

Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
January 16, 2020 4:55 am

yeah really cruel AND stupid
just use normal livers and add bodyfat to the puree muck if you must eat it
you can get fat n happy geese or ducks without force feeding, if you can pay the feed bill

J. Pyle
January 15, 2020 2:34 pm

These silly proposals are created by and supported by non-serious, non-rational people. What are the biggest sources of greenhouse gases and where exactly does cattle rank? Let’s make the list weighted — tons of emissions multiplied by the estimated potency of the gas in question. Where does cattle or all livestock emissions rank on the list? Does it even make the top 10?

Assume greenhouse gas emissions are a major factor in climate change. Reason dictates we focus on the largest sources first; at the very least, we focus on the highest emissions we can economically reduce.

But of course, emissions aren’t the problem. The problem is some woke elitist progressives are radical vegans and can’t stand the thought of anybody else not following their extreme beliefs.

Progressives as a whole do not want people to enjoy life. The fact the majority of people enjoy eating meat is enough for them to want to stop it.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  J. Pyle
January 15, 2020 5:48 pm

Essentially, cattle, like all animals, are carbon neutral. To claim otherwise is just ridiculous.

Reply to  J. Pyle
January 15, 2020 6:59 pm

Religions must have converts to keep preaching the message to people who don’t want to know about it. Stop resisting your reprogramming Sinner!

Chris Mahoney
January 15, 2020 2:42 pm

Every time a cow farts, China builds a new coal power plant.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Chris Mahoney
January 15, 2020 5:48 pm


January 15, 2020 2:47 pm

Being that de Blasio is what he is, I’m quite sure he’s enjoying steak on a regular basis during his taxpayer-funded luncheons and coffee breaks. /sarc

Really, he seems to not have anything to do but make himself look ridiculous. And people voted for him….

HD Hoese
January 15, 2020 2:57 pm

There was more to the PETA argument. I traveled many a mile with a famous among his peers roadside, marshside, oceanside, must be fresh, no skunks or comparables, scavenger. No daydreaming or raw meat except oysters. A lot of that has become illegal for quite a few years, protect the uninformed innocents. He was a great cook, used vegetables as well. Lots of places cows can be raised, but not vegetables as easily.

“What is the natural human diet? Are humans natural meat-eaters? Quick test: When you see dead animals on the side of the road, are you tempted to stop and snack on them? Do you daydream about killing cows with your bare hands and eating them raw? If you answered “no” to these questions, then, like it or not, you’re an herbivore.” Weird, they define that word with witchcraft in the dictionary! Successful carnivores don’t survive snacking on the highway. Cows don’t like cowboys that choke them. Put them out to pasture with a few. I’ve been there.

Reply to  HD Hoese
January 16, 2020 1:03 am

I’m pretty damned sure the reason why most of us don’t eat roadkill or daydream of eating raw meat has nothing to do with being a herbivore.

It’s to do with the abundance of available meat in the local shops.

Now if you were to ask the same question to parts of the world where people are starving, I’m pretty sure the answer would be different.

Andy Mansell
Reply to  Redge
January 16, 2020 8:40 am

Absolutely! I’m so glad that snowflakes in the West have the time and money to be so virtuous these days. Perhaps the modern world isn’t so bad after all…

Reply to  HD Hoese
January 16, 2020 1:23 pm

Quote: Quick test: “When you see dead animals on the side of the road, are you tempted to stop and snack on them? Do you daydream about killing cows with your bare hands and eating them raw? If you answered “no” to these questions, then, like it or not, you’re an herbivore.”

This is called false equivalence or perhaps a strawman argument.
You are debating and or promoting something which is not being discussed. Don’t do that

January 15, 2020 3:09 pm

As one who has researched plant nutrition science for a career, I love the look, the feel, the smell of a rich black soil crumbling in my hand. Farmers can create these soils by methods such as adding large quantities of mulch and helping along the natural decomposition/conversion biochemistry by adding fertilizers. This will almost always increase the total soil organic carbon content. If done on large enough scale, we are into the realm of global carbon sequestration by removal of carbon compounds from the atmosphere, the ultimate C source in many models.
Authors like Allan Savory rightly promote generation of higher soil carbon, but the process does not stop there. These better soils need to be used. They usually allow better yields of crops and pastures, but over time this will usually deplete the lovely original soil. The whole cycle has to be managed, with strategic addition of fertilizers, many of which like phosphate and potash have mining as their ultimate sources, or urea or ammonia with natural gas as their ultimate sources.
No matter how you slice and dice it, increased sustained crop and pasture yields are not feasible without more mining and more fossil fuel feedstocks.
All this is conventional and uncontested, but it is seldom added as a requirement for progress like Savory describes. Efficient management is a key component for large scale schemes to sequester carbon compounds in soil, but management comes at a cost. I have seldom seen realistic cost estimates, let alone detailed benefit:cost analyses that are mandatory in the transition from dream to reality. Geoff S

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
January 15, 2020 4:07 pm

But you miss the fact that the Earth could use more CO2 in the atmosphere.

Reply to  Robert W. Turner
January 15, 2020 5:32 pm

I do not miss it. It was not part of the lesson. Besides, it is a hypothesis, not a fact. Geoff S

Paul S
January 15, 2020 3:21 pm

So what exactly is holistic grazing?

Reply to  Paul S
January 15, 2020 3:53 pm

Keeping the grazer on a plot until it has consumed most to the nutrients then moving it to the next plot. This allows for regeneration of the plants and allow the grazed are to rest. It is more labor intensive but works well.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Pathway
January 15, 2020 5:17 pm

So like crop rotation? Who would have thunk it.

John in NZ
Reply to  Paul S
January 15, 2020 9:44 pm

In New Zealand it is called “rotational grazing”.

Farmers have been doing it for close to 100 years.

Livestock are rotated around the farm returning to a paddock after the pasture has had time to recover.
To take care of the animals you need to care for the pasture. To care for the pasture you care for the soil.

Curious George
January 15, 2020 3:24 pm

Will Mayor de Blasio really eat the grass instead of beef? That would be the most direct way to save the planet.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Curious George
January 15, 2020 4:08 pm

In fact, if all of these types of people would immediately switch to an all grass diet, then most of the world’s problems would vanish.

Reply to  Curious George
January 15, 2020 4:13 pm

Well, it would save the planet from de Blasio, certainly.

Reply to  Curious George
January 15, 2020 4:20 pm

A cynic might suggest he is smoking it.

January 15, 2020 3:49 pm

Bought some nitrate-free bacon once by accident. It went bad in the fridge before I could use it.

More seriously, the famous diet paper in Lancet Jan 2019 paper prescribes a vegan diet, but read the small print. They recommend B12 for everyone and more supplements for pregnant and lactating women, babies, children, teenagers, the ill, and the elderly. Any diet that REQUIRES universal pills is a looser in my books.

Reply to  FranBC
January 15, 2020 5:34 pm

This chemist asks “Nitrate or Nitrite?”
They are not the same. Geoff S

Joel Snider
January 15, 2020 4:08 pm

Boy, these progressive control-freaks just can’t stop, can they?

michael hart
January 15, 2020 4:18 pm

Have any readers tried Zebra meat? I’ve not yet had the opportunity but am curious to know beforehand, should the opportunity present itself.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  michael hart
January 15, 2020 6:09 pm

Doesn’t taste like chicken.

michael hart
Reply to  Alan Robertson
January 17, 2020 10:14 am

Not much help, but thanks anyway, Alan.

Abolition Man
January 15, 2020 4:30 pm

Since at least the times of the Egyptian pharaohs ruling elites have tried to limit meat consumption by their slaves and peasants. Slaves and peasants building the pyramids were fed a diet of bread and beer with perhaps a little fish thrown in so they wouldn’t waste away on a high carb diet. Medieval poaching could be punished by hanging, blinding and castration although later eras saw poachers sentenced to transportation with many other criminals to the newly discovered Australia.
Hunting and high meat diets were reserved for the nobility; somehow the elites understood that high quality protein could produce rebellious and hard-to-control populations. Look at the Vikings with their high intake of dairy, beef, pork and fish; the Maasai diet of raw milk, raw blood and raw meat; and the Plains tribes of North America like the Comanche and Cheyenne who subsisted primarily on buffalo with other game harvested as available. All of these cultures were extremely adept at making war and, in the case of the Plains tribes, battled an advanced culture to a standstill for almost a century despite being badly outnumbered and outgunned. The ruling class would much rather deal with soy boys than hardworking, red blooded farm boys; look how that contest worked out for the Slave States of the South and the Fascists of Europe! I would posit that individuals on vegan and vegetarian diets are more easily programmed as high quality protein with the right amino acids is necessary for full brain function; patients exhibiting symptoms of dementia are first tested for serum amino acid levels. Perhaps the rebelling all around the world as in Hong Kong, France, Britain, Iran and the deplorable old U.S. of A. is due to the proles being allowed too much meat! Don’t worry though, Nanny Bill will take care of it; go back to sleep!

January 15, 2020 4:31 pm

I put my faith in the cattleman (and women) who live their lives managing beef and dairy farms. They know how to manage the land better than any politico ensconced in a high rise office.

January 15, 2020 4:34 pm

Ahh, cow flatulence! Nobody seems to get that certain methanogen bacteria may live inside of cows, but they predate cows. They exist quite happily without cows, and have done for millenia. They are one of the earliest bacterium types on Earth for heaven’s sake. Eons before mammals. (Cows are mammals).
Eliminating cow-farts is a scam for ignorant people who only read headlines and skim articles. Don’t be fooled.

January 15, 2020 4:46 pm

I’m a second degree vegan ( a vegan once_removed)…The animals eat the vegetables and I eat the animals

Gunga Din
January 15, 2020 4:52 pm

I’m 65 (or so). I remember when I was “woke” as a teenager that there were groups against “Big oil” and for PeTA people and against “The Rich” and Environmentalist that would alter anything in anyway and Rachel Casonites against anything involving “Chemicals” and … etc.
They’ve now unified (sort of) under the banner of “CAGW (or “Climate Change” depending on which way the weather blows)”.
NYC is a plugged sewer.
It was under Bloomberg. It is under de Blasio. We see the spillage in AOC.

January 15, 2020 5:10 pm

The GND cannot be taken seriously by the vast majority of people. Why it even gets traction in the media is a testament to their low standards. If we’re asleep at the voting booth it could become reality.

Right-Handed Shark
January 15, 2020 5:11 pm

Grass grows by absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere. Left alone, it eventually dies and is broken down by bacteria into CO2 and methane. If instead a cow eats the grass, bacteria in it’s stomach breaks it down into CO2 and methane. The cow cannot make the grass into any more carbon than it has absorbed from the atmosphere. The ratio of the expelled gasses may differ a little.


Why not enjoy the delicious bovine by-products?

Andre Lauzon
January 15, 2020 5:31 pm

The Mayor has a good plan. Half the people that hate beef will eat grass and beans. The other half, that is the people that did not vote for de Blasio, will have access to the beef. Since the demand will fall so should the price.

God bless the stupid.

January 15, 2020 5:49 pm

In mild protest at the laughable NYC political stupid-storm, I’m going to the shops right now to buy a couple of thick steaks, one of which is going to become a steak-heavy Asian stir-fry served on a bed of delicious long grain rice.

There will be wind.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
January 15, 2020 5:53 pm

I think this is something we can compromise on.

I suggest New York City stop serving meat to all prison inmates — it’s cruel to make them suffer all the ills that a meat diet brings after all. Then we can study how a strict vegan diet improves self-esteem, reduces aggression and stimulates higher brain functions, thus increasing the tendency to talk through conflicts instead of resorting to physical confrontation.

With no meat in their diet, inmates won’t need so much gym equipment. The space currently devoted to weightlifting gear can be used to provide Yoga classes.

And it’s especially cruel to all the people on public assistance to poison their bodies with processed meats, so limit EBT purchases to one or two meat servings a week and encourage healthier choices.

Likewise foodbanks should stop taking donations of meat products.

And to set a good example, the cafeterias serving the city council and all NYC employees should cut out, or cut way down on meat portions. No doubt the state of New York led by climate paragon Andrew Cuomo will be inspired to follow the city’s example.

And since the New York Times is in full support of this earth-saving measure, the entire editorial staff should immediately take a public “no meat” pledge.

This could be a good thing.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
January 16, 2020 9:52 am

And after a few years, the prison population will drop drastically, so it’s a win-win, right? Except for those inmates that didn’t count on a death sentence, of course. Maybe before that happens one of them would sue under cruel and unusual punishment claims since vitamin B12 deficiency is quite a painful way to die.

Pat Frank
January 15, 2020 6:58 pm

Meat also has micronutrients that are either poorly available or unavailable in plants. See here. There’s no reasonable doubt that humans evolved eating meat.

Meat supplementation improves the cognitive, growth and behavioral development of poor children, see here.

Red Meat in Global Nutrition


The influence of data and recommendations from developed countries on nutrition guidance has overshadowed recognition of the key micronutrients and protein contributed by red meat to the global food supply. Relative to the energy it contributes, the impact of red meat on the nutritional quality of the human diet via its contribution of protein and key micronutrients is under-appreciated. The current discussion will review red meat nutrient composition and global consumption rates and discuss the evidence underpinning current dietary recommendations. The beneficial role of red meat in reducing risk factors associated with noncommunicable disease in developed countries and improving the nutritional status of developing nations will also be reviewed.


► Evidence supports the use of lean red meat to manage diet-related disease risk.
► Animal protein improves maternal and infant health globally.
► Meat and livestock contribute to nutrient adequacy and food security.

People who enforce abstinence from meat are especially harming the young, and corroding children’s ability to properly develop their bodies, minds, and behavior. Such people should be prosecuted for criminal negligence.

Reply to  Pat Frank
January 16, 2020 4:10 am

Eskimos and others arctic hunter gatherers were able to get all their nutrients from animal meat without eating vegetables

Reply to  Waza
January 16, 2020 6:34 am

– Traditional Inuit food: Fish, seal meat/oil. That’s it! They have survived for generations w/o malnutrition. (Vegans on the other hand …) No veggies will grow in snow and ice. Something I tell vegans, when they tell me that humans are not suited to eat meat.

J. Pyle
Reply to  Pat Frank
January 16, 2020 8:00 am

Humans are omnivores and evolved/were designed to eat meat. Eliminating meat from your diets forces you to add supplements to your diet, especially for the B vitamins. Veganism is especially unnatural.

No doubt many of us eat more meat than we probably should but that is a personal choice. Nobody has a right to tell us what to do with our bodies.

Reply to  Pat Frank
January 16, 2020 9:20 am

Agenda 30 wants to cull the herd. The “plant-based diet” with which the WHO is currently carpet-bombing the airwaves fits right in–may even be the deus ex machina. The “woke” activist (troublemaking) inclined bunch can feel all self-righteous and superior while kale-munching themselves into deficiency diseases, infertility, inflammation, depression and dementia. “Soy-boys” are unfit for military service, unlikely to sire offspring, less likely to want a physical job outdoors, docile and easily controllable, not least through the ubiquitous cell-phone “Matrix.”

In my neighborhood there are 2 kinds of people; the Spandex-and-Patagonia-clad virtue-signaling upper middle class, who conform to all the popular BS–and We Deplorables who actually do practical things, which are the things that make the world work for everyone. If the “wokesters” want to take themselves out of the gene pool through their sheer ignorance of everything natural and practical, fine by me!

Mickey Reno
January 15, 2020 7:08 pm

Didn’t the NY City schools try something like this a few years back, radically restricting the choice for school lunches, “for the good of the children.” But the kids just stopped buying the new crappy food offerings, with most preferring to bring a PB&J sandwich from home. The schools had to drop their new policy, and go back to having pizza on the menu. I definitely recall something like that.

DeBlasio is a chip off the old Mike “No-32-oz-sodas” Bloomberg. In other words, a farging idiot.

Reply to  Mickey Reno
January 16, 2020 6:45 am

They tried that in a school in Sweden a few years ago. The result was tired and cranky kids together with poorer learning …

January 15, 2020 7:58 pm

Allan Savory’s hope-filled TED talk titled “How to Fight Desertification and Reverse Climate Change”.
Reverse climate change? Climate is a chaotic, non-linear system, it changes in multiple different ways, often simultaneously. What the heck does “reverse climate change” even mean?

Oh, you mean reverse global warming! But why would I even want to? Not to mention that it’s well beyond human abilities to reverse. Nature will get around top that in its own sweet time. Global warming is good. Global cooling is bad.

Reply to  Art
January 16, 2020 4:31 am

“How to Fight Desertification and Reverse Climate Change” : This guy is a complete idiot.

During the Holocene optimum (about 8000 years ago), the Sahara was almost nonexistent. It formed gradually because of the global cooling in progress since the Holocene optimum :

Nowadays, satellite data show a global greening of the planet during the last 40 years and this is particularly true in the sub-saharan zone , which is a major benefit to agriculture and the local population.

And this bonkers mad wants to reverse the beneficial warming effect of the modern optimum ?
He will have to fight way more against desertification than now if his crazy goal of reversing the (already decreasing) warming trend was to succeed.

Jim Steele
Reply to  Petit_Barde
January 16, 2020 7:27 am

Art says, “Global warming is good. Global cooling is bad”

I agree. A century of warming has extended the growing season, reduced cold stress, etc. But Savory was referring to the warming caused by overgrazing. The loss of vegetation and increased bare ground, warms the surroundings due to similar physics of an Urban Heat Effect.

The use of the term Climate Change is confusing to most people because it can be applied to different discussions of various warming effects. What should be appreciated is Savory is pointing out that landscape changes and desertification, not CO2, has caused regional warming over much of the world, and that warming is not a good thing. Dr Pielke has been arguing landscape effecs for decades. I have argued for a decade that the global average temperature is a chimera of effects. That is why I titled my book “Landscapes and Cycles”. Each contributing factor to the average must be dissected before we blame CO2 and then project a climate catastrophe that gets used to push a political agenda. Bad analyses promote bad remedies! Savory is pointing out a good regional remedy that counters the climate crisis fearmongering

(Rescued from spam bin) SUNMOD

Jim Steele
Reply to  Petit_Barde
January 16, 2020 7:35 am

Petit, you Totally misconstrue Savory’s efforts. He is not arguing that he can cure global warming or prevent naturally formed deserts. Indeed the Hadley circulation largely dictates where deserts will naturally be found, and a shifting ITCZ will cause the band of deserts to shift.

In contrast, Savory’s efforts are aimed at restoring NATURAL grasslands that were desertified by overgrazing! And that is something that can be reversed to everyone’s benefit. My work restoring a watershed proved that for me.

Jim Steele
Reply to  Art
January 16, 2020 7:24 am

Art says, “Global warming is good. Global cooling is bad”

I agree. A century of warming has extended the growing season, reduced cold stress, etc. But Savory was referring to the warming caused by overgrazing. The loss of vegetation and increased bare ground, warms the surroundings due to similar physics of an Urban Heat Effect.

The use of the term Climate Change is confusing to most people because it can be applied to different discussions of various warming effects. What should be appreciated is Savory is pointing out that landscape changes and desertification, not CO2, has caused regional warming over much of the world, and that warming is not a good thing. Dr Pielke has been arguing landscape effecs for decades. I have argued for a decade that the global average temperature is a chimera of effects. That is why I titled my book “Landscapes and Cycles”. Each contributing factor to the average must be dissected before we blame CO2 and then project a climate catastrophe that gets used to push a political agenda. Bad analyses promote bad remedies! Savory is pointing out a good regional remedy that counters the climate crisis fearmongering

Pat Smith
Reply to  Jim Steele
January 16, 2020 10:41 am

Jim, why does desertification lead to higher temperatures? The albedo of sand dunes is in the 30-60% range and sandy soil 15-40% compared with meadows and fields 12-30%, woods 5-20 and dark cultivated soil 7-10% (The Climate Near the Ground, Geiger, Table 3). Isn’t more sunshine reflected back into space?

Jim Steele
Reply to  Pat Smith
January 16, 2020 11:41 am

Hi Pat,

You must consider several other variables. If albedo is the key driver of surface temperatures, then why are the record high maximum temperatures found in the deserts.

In the 2018 Mildrexler satellite study “Thermal Anomalies Detect Critical Global Land Surface Changes”, they examined land “skin surface” temperatures which closely correlate with surface air temperatures , they found the key factor was vegetation density. Examining global average skin surface temperature for vegetation types

forest land-cover types and highlatitude shrublands in the Northern Hemisphere averaged 20–
35C .

Grasslands, croplands, and some savannas maximum ranged from 30–50C

Barren deserts and shrublands in hot, dry environments ranged 50–65C.

In part those differences can be explained by how vegetation creates a moister environment via transpiration and its ability to hold soil moisture. Thus more solar radiation is consumed as latent heat due to evaporation , in contrast to solar radiation over dry high albedo land where it is converted primarily to sensible heat that rapidly raises temperatures. Water vapor also inhibits solar radiation from reaching the ground and also counteracts albedo differences.

January 15, 2020 10:01 pm

Don’t interrupt the enemy when they are busy destroying themselves. I love to read stuff like this because it will lead to more voters turning away from the madness. Nothing like a threat to one’s stomach to focus one’s thoughts.

January 16, 2020 12:21 am

Important (although rather technical) remark: Cows produce methan up to 95 % through their mouth (by “burping”), not by farting. Do not repeat the same mistake as AOC, see, e.g., Nevertheless, banning (processed) meat is a nonsence.

Mr Reynard
January 16, 2020 12:49 am

Yupp………. VEGAN ??

Seen that Vegan Tiger …..
Eats two Vegan a day ..
Feel marvelous ….
comment image

January 16, 2020 1:45 am

It is known that meat pollutes. The documentary “The Uncomfortable Truth” explains exactly how does it happen. Besides meat, that is animals for industrial production, the problem also falls on cars. Hence, the problems for climate change are more than one.

Rhys Jaggar
January 16, 2020 5:20 am

Green Nutters are the fascists of the 2020s.

Intolerant, strident, wilful, dictatorial and utterly ignorant.

If you only listen to people whose pronouncements stand up to scrutiny, you will be filtering out a lot of verbal ‘Green Crap’…..

January 16, 2020 5:43 am

Cute term “Holistic grazing”. Excuse me while I go throw up.

Again, I am reminded humans are ALIENS on this planet, not part of it, that Darwin LIED and your imagination is the way to go. Really, it’s sad when the skeptics are part of the insanity….

PS Is anyone ragging on the starving people in third world counties about their “non-holistic” practices?????? Let ’em starve, right?

Jim Steele
Reply to  Sheri
January 16, 2020 7:07 am

That’s a mighty weird comment Sheri. I suggest you actually visit the Savory Institute or the linked TED talk before you bloviate. Much of the poorest people of the world live on land that cannot sustain people via a plant based diet. They rely on grazing animals. Overgrazing . has been a problem in ALL cultures. Holistic grazing is a beneficial to that overgrazing and has shown success and much of the holilstic efforts have been directed towards healing the land where starving people are most vulnerable

January 16, 2020 6:05 am

Am I the only one to see the potential political impact here?

A few, well-placed, large billboards announcing, “Bill Blasio and his Democrat Supporters Want to Ban Fried Chicken Nuggets,” would turn NYC from blue to red virtually overnight, and they would look like hypocrites trying to deny it.

Whether they realize it or not, this is a third-rail. A voting bloc of fourteen percent of the population is almost thirty percent of the Democrat vote, and you can’t disrespect a culture’s traditional food without losing their support.

January 16, 2020 6:40 am

Prohibition, Part Two! Didn’t they learn the first time around? I can see it now: Today’s version of Al Capone, sitting in his luxurious penthouse apartment overlooking Central Park, big stogie in his mouth and an illicit sub sandwich in his beefy hand, while his minions scurry around the darkened NYC streets like 21st century bootleggers, delivering their ‘moonshine’ processed meats to hungry citizens.

January 16, 2020 7:53 am

Of the total land area of or planet of 149 million sq. Km. only 11 million is cropland while 28 million is considered pasture/herd lands. Another 12 million is bush, 39 million is forest and jungle, about 1.5 million is within city limits, but some cities are less than half urban development. Animal husbandry is the best way to economically utilize those 28 million Sq. Km. And the other half of the land area of the planet is rocks, desert, and ice.
People who say restriction of meat consumption will save the environment aren’t researching the topic. Most of them are sympathetic to animals being led to the abattoir.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
January 16, 2020 12:35 pm

Hi DmacK. – With the world population currently over 6,750,000,000 (6.77 billion) over the age of 14 & over 1,000,000,000 (1 billion) young people I’d like to parse dietary protein. Using WHO minimum protein requirement cipher (weight in pounds stated as grams divided in half = daily gr. protein need) & an admittedly generalized size human here goes.

If all the adults in the world weight was averaged at 150 pounds then each of them would require 75 grams of protein daily. That works out to 506,250,000 grams (506,250 Kg ) of protein daily for current adults.

If we average the world’s youth weight at 50 pounds then each of them would require 25 grams of protein daily. That works out to 25,000,000 grams (25,000 Kg). of protein daily for current children.

Every day 506,275 Kg of protein is required in the world. In a 365 day year 184,790,375 Kg of protein is required for current world population. The growth trend meanwhile is significantly driven in Africa.

Now having reared livestock I know that not all land is equally productive, nor is that land constantly so. True the same can be applied to agricultural land. None-the-less I believe on a large scale agricultural production of protein can be manipulated easier, distribution more compact & preservation simpler for the world at large.

January 16, 2020 8:39 am

Liberals are natural born dictators and will jump on board with anything restrictive.

Pat Smith
January 16, 2020 11:38 am

Can I ask what the big deal about methane? It is always described as being 10 times or 25 times more greenhousing than CO2 but: there is more than 200 times more CO2 in the atmosphere than methane; it absorbs at a point in the spectrum (1306 cm-1) where the intensity of radiation is about a quarter of the peak at 600 where CO2 absorbs; water also absorbs more highly at this point in the spectrum, if methane were not absorbing, water would; and it resonates in a very narrow spike compared with the very broad line of CO2 – if you increase the amount of methane by a factor of 10 in MODTRAN, you hardly notice the difference. Is methane all that important to CAGW?

January 16, 2020 3:15 pm

Jim ==> Thank you for this, very nicely done. There is news on the Meat Wars front, which I will be covering next week.

Jim Steele
Reply to  Kip Hansen
January 16, 2020 4:12 pm

Thanks Kip, I look forward to your upcoming article on the Meat Wars. Your previous article were very informative

John Shepherd
January 16, 2020 3:33 pm

When it’s open season on Jews in NYC you just have to change the subject.

Russ Wood
January 17, 2020 8:45 am

Pastrami? But isn’t pastrami one of the basic food groups in NY?

Lyn McCormick
January 17, 2020 9:11 am

The global financial sector’s climate agenda is about creating a carbon market to invest in – it has nothing to do with science or anything else for that matter, just another place to invest idle cash. It’a resource grab and a way to control the rest of the populace and create another tax base, a Carbon credit program However, in the meantime, if government is going to continue to subsidize traditonal commodity markets the producers should be required to clean up their act; stop polluting and use more environmentally sustainable methods of production.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights