/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>10912294

locally grown plants, fish and insects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inedia

When you think about it, both sides are bad

>>10912294
>97% of scientists agree
No, they don't. About anything. When people need to use bunk bullshit images like this and appeals to majority in order to convince people of their point, it makes one question how valid their point actually is.

>>10912362
t. Jeff

Your boyfriend’s semen

>>10912294
Its been like a .5°F change since the 1800s
Relax man

>>10912294
I dunno, maybe if you could eat fresh water algae?

eutrophication is a huge problem

>>10912294
car milk

Sure as heck isn’t meat

>>10912398
cows make a ton of methane which is a greenhouse gas. I'm saving the environment by contributing to the death of cows by eating them

>>10912398

>>10912398
>Water inputs in California food production
Can I see some numbers from a state that isn't constantly experiencing droughts?

>>10912398
oh no a replenish able resource is being used.

hell i have a fucking well and i have to purposefully waste the shit so the well doesnt get too high and make everything taste like fucking iron

>>10912403
That probably sounded clever when you didn’t have to think about it

>>10912408
>he thinks the water cycle is a universally constant with instant replenishability

>>10912400
Sure, as long as you ignore the other environmental costs such as water consumption, land consumption, and carbon emissions just rearing and feeding the damn things. You can't cherry-pick your science.

>>10912425
um, killing and eating cows also means that those cows no longer consume water or land or produce carbon emissions. dumb fuck bitch

>>10912423
>he thinks that we are going to run out of fucking drinkable WATER.

shit nigger stop living in california.

>>10912434
>he thinks the water cycle is a universal constant with instant replenishability

>he thinks California is the only place with droughts

>>10912449
>living in places with droughts

you deserved it, and im pretty sure using as much water as i fucking want where i live has no effect on the retards living in drought areas

TRY HARDER RETRD

>>10912362

>>10912467
he thinks the water cycle is a universal constant with instant replenishability

>he thinks California is the only place with droughts

>he thinks his own area’s water is going to be magically immune from producing water for others if droughts occur elsewhere

>he thinks real life is The Sims where you can just instantly replace anything

>he thinks for no more than 5 seconds at a time

>>10912362
Yes actually there is massive consensus among scientists that humans are contributing to climate change. Several polls of scientists have arrived at 97%.

>>10912294
Environmentally friendly? Probably not organic foods, they require the same amount of water and effort to farm ( if not more), but bare much less product than industrially farmed produce.

In terms of yield vs effort, organic foods are probably in the bottom of the list.

There's much interest in growing plants from aquaponics, using much less space and much less pesticides than normal methods. So the future isn't so much organic, but ways to utilize the space and water more efficiently.

So whats the take away? if you care about environmentally friendly foods, look for hydroponically or aquaponically grown foods.

>>10912484
>he's still replying

So if a lot of scientist believe something that makes it true?

>>10912479
This would be mildly funny if they didn't have all the "funny" misspellings

All that effort for nothing

>>10912530
>l-leave me alone big strong ausgod!!!

Pathetic

>>10912499
Wrong. That "consensus" narrative was started by one idiot who's results couldn't be replicated and another idiot that claimed to copy her approach with updated information. Neither are even climatologists and the second one is a fucking cartoonist.

Not to mention the fact that "consensus" isn't even part of science. Politics cares about "consensus". Science cares about who is correct regardless of how many think anything else.

>>10912294
Whale.
Look at how massive those poops are and think about how many are going into the ocean.

>>10912630
Look faggot, first of all you denied that there was consensus among scientists. I realize that consensus doesn't matter in science, but it matters in this conversation since you denied there was consensus.

Second of all, why the fuck does one need to be a climatologist to ask scientists what they think? There's absolutely no reason the person taking the poll needs to understand climatology themselves. They merely ask scientists what they think.

Finally, the fact that John Cook may have drawn cartoons does not change the fact that he is a professor who studies cognitive science (an appropriate subject for someone taking polls)

>>10912724
9 out of 10 dentists think you should stop guzzling semen

>>10912294
Longpig

>>10912294
Plain beans
Plain rice
Plain broccoli
Plain potatoes

Locally grown
No spices, it's a waste of environmental resources and land that could be used to feed other people

If you care about the environment, why not go all the way? Why is meat for taste bad, but spices imported from Madagascar and New Guinea by cargo ship and cargo jet for taste ok?

>>10912499
Question is misleading. There might be consensus that there is a contribution but not on how significant that contribution is.

>>10912908
>he actually thinks the question is framed to exclude degrees of variability

>>10912919
I think the best solution it to link the damn evidence already instead of circle jerking each other for the next half hour. Considering how often this topic comes up and how readily everyone engages is in it, you would think that people would have links to the studies, meta-analysis, poll, evidence, whatever.

Show us your model, show how it actually predicts what you say it does.

>>10912724
John Cook had his credentials burnished well after he started spouting off about climate science. He's a fraud who dropped out of college. This is the very type of person that alarmists would attack if he was a skeptic and for good reason. Yet because he's one of you, you are fine with that bullshit. Non-scientist, no real degree, fake credentials given to him by like minded people. But he confirms your bias so he's golden.

Stomping your foot and insisting there is a consenus doesn't mean there is one. Repeating what those hacks claim doesn't make a consensus. Sure, if you can repeat a lie often enough, people that are only casual observers will repeat the same lie. It IS important if these people taking these polls understand what they are asking. But these aren't even polls in the case of these two. They are doing keyword searches on scientific journals they barely seem to understand. There was one poll that was conducted in a traditional fashion. But the pollsters didn't like the results so they changed the standards after the fact. Which gave them a much smaller group than reported by the media while producing a higher percentage in their favor. Starting a poll or searching for "consensus" when you already know what you want the results to be, that's not scientific. And its certainly not scientific to keep molding the test after the conclusions fail to live up to your expectations. Until it finally produces the result you were looking for. That kind of shoddy work is what the brainlets promote with their ignorant repetition of "consensus".

I'm not the same person you were arguing with before. Who seems to be referring to the image that claimed the "consensus" and which you defended despite claiming to know that's not how science works. You still defended it.

So at least everyone can agree now that "consensus" is a garbage reason to promote anything as "fact".

>>10913109
t. nigger

Grug trust shamans in white loincloth who say big live rock getting hot and big ice become water.
Grug know he not big brain like them.
Shamans tell grug sky getting thinner.
Gryg cannot see sky getting thinner but Grug must believe.
Grug glad all whitecloths agree.

>>10913109
>He's a fraud who dropped out of college
that must have been before he went back to college and got a phd. maybe you could try going back to school too

>>10912538
>So if a lot of idiot question something that makes it untrue?