Slashdot Mirror
Norway's Army Battles Global Warming By Going Vegetarian
cold fjord writes "It looks like no more spam, spam, spam for Norway's warriors... at least on Mondays. The Daily Caller reports, 'Norway's military is taking drastic steps to ramp up its war against global warming. The Scandinavian country announced its soldiers would be put on a vegetarian diet once a week to reduce the military's carbon footprint. "Meatless Monday's" has already been introduced at one of Norway's main military bases and will soon be rolled out to others, including overseas bases. It is estimated that the new vegetarian diet will cut meat consumption by 150 tons per year. "It's a step to protect our climate," military spokesman Eystein Kvarving told AFP. "The idea is to serve food that's respectful of the environment." ... The United Nations says that livestock farming is responsible for 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Cutting meat consumption, environmentalists argue, would help stem global warming and improve the environment." — The Manchester Journal reports, "The meatless Monday campaign launched in 2003 as a global non-profit initiative in collaboration with Johns Hopkins University to promote personal and environmental health by reducing meat consumption.'"
The impact on global climate would be NOTHING MEASURABLE whatsoever. Several years ago I read China is about to launch 700+ coal power stations by 2020. Sure, China will decommission other stations in that period, but the overall trend is obvious. Even if the whole Norway, not just the army, stops eating anything and even stops breathing to reduce the so called carbon footprint, the impact would be ... nothing. China alone will more than compensate :)
The classical pusher-argument. If I didn't sell smack someone way more evil than me would.
they are Come on AAl; in order to go Little-known Raymond in his
My thoughts exactly, could you elaborate further?
Off the top of my head I can't think of a whole lot of options for locally-produced protein in Norway. If you eliminate the animal proteins, what's left? How much carbon is Norway saving if they have to ship more nuts and beans in from overseas, particularly if the alternative is wild-caught fish?
Food can be controversial, but I'll just chip in that all those fields of wheat and soya rely on intensive agriculture, stripping the diversity, excluding many species, and is heavily reliant on oil.
There is just a meme that veganism is good, CO2 is bad, therefore veganism is an answer to global warming.
Anyone interested in questioning this can read The Vegetarian Myth by a ex-long term vegan lady, as she explored whether veganism actually means less killing in practice, and whether it actually means better health in practice. Also, in Sweden you have the LCHF movement. So I wonder if the army is just trying to save money.
But the population isn't really increasing in the western world where we have all the food we can eat. By your reasoning western populations should be increasing a lot. The number of people will stop increasing when also poor countries have enough food and good health care so that parents are confident that the children they get will reach adulthood.
This is not a sig.
Well well, your Islamophobia is pushing you to do something good for once.
If by Islamaphobia you mean resisting attempts to impose a system which has no freedom of speech, inequality of women, death for homosexuals, death for changing religion from Islam, inequality in law for non-Muslims, penalty taxes on non-muslims --- then I consider this to be generally good rather than "for once".
Christianity has similar rules for non-christians. Research the word "ghetto" and its origins to find out more.
Modern contemporary Christianity does not. If there is some Christian group doing it somewhere it is wrong. The same applies to anyone else who promotes discrimination and violence. This sort of equivocation is typical of the pro-Sharia lobby. If anyone else at any time in history has done something wrong then it is OK for Muslims to do it now. Thus the Unibomber in an Islamophile's eyes means that the Boston marathon bombing is acceptable as "a non muslim did it too", violence against women is "OK" because it was common in Victorian England, and so on.
The Muslims should be responsible for their own actions - and not seek to justify them on the basis that once upon a time someone else was bad.
hipster mondays
Or as it's also known, "Hey, let's go eat at one of the restaurants off-base" Mondays.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Really. Pebble-beds. LFTRs, and other modern nuclear tech looks to be a viable solution. Save the petrochemicals for plastics and pharmaceutical feedstocks. . .
Now, burning natural gas, otoh, looks like a viable alternative to petroleum for vehicle use. . .
By that logic, same should apply to christians.
So when are people like you going to start taking responsibility for things like butchering done by various christians in middle east, genitalia mutilation done by christians in middle east, terrorist acts by Breivik et al, and so on?
Fact is, these people have a lot more in common with the extremist islamists (and also extremists [insert religion here]) worldwide. We have buddhists murdering the hell out of people in Burma, hindus butchering people in India and so on. Common element? Extremist religion.
Not so common element? The actual name of the religion. Moderate islam is pretty much like moderate christianity - take a look at former CIS countries that didn't get murdered by saudi-funded wahabbists, most of the muslims in Europe and Northern America. And before you explode at that one spamming extremist references, compare the extremists to, for example, christian laestadianism, which does most of the extremist stuff from suppression of women's rights to arranged marriages for children to paedofilia - and these people outnumber muslims in my country about 10:1, and they're pretty damn scary - I have a friend who to quote his words "managed to escape his family's grasp".
Fact is, christianity is about as much a "religion of peace" as any other large organized religion, be it buddhism, islam, hinduism, thaoism or any other. And you can mod me "troll" as much as you want - that particular fact will not go away no matter how much PR bullshit keeps getting spewed from TV screens. The only difference is that people like you view christianity as inherently righteous, and anyone who isn't doing it like you think it should be done is "doing it wrong". At the same time you do not accept that other religions should get the same right, and instead put them all under the same umbrella, extremists or moderates.
And in the end, like most hypocrites, you claim righteousness to be on your side.
Let me get this straight; Conservatives think Liberals are naive because we don't want to push Liberalism on foreign Conservatives?
Otherwise, conservatives object to Islamic backward societies merely because they have the WRONG MASCOT.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"