Climate vegetarians are just farting out nonsense

Eat steak, eat steak eat a big ol’ steer

– The Reverend Horton Heat

The nanny state mentality was well characterised by C. S. Lewis as, “‘the sort of person who is always snooping around to see if anyone is enjoying himself and then trying to stop it”. The UN is the biggest and most intrusive nanny state in the world, and its climate botherers in particular are determined to stamp out anything that anyone might find enjoyable. Having scolded us for enjoying overseas travel, abundant cheap electricity and our cars, the vinegar-faced inquisitors at the UN are now turning their gimlet eyes to what we ingest.

UN agencies long ago made pariahs of smokers, and they’ve been working hard at making us feel bad for enjoying a drink. Now they want to deny us the pleasure of a juicy steak. Quote:

Christiana Figueres, the former UN official responsible for the 2015 Paris climate agreement, has a startling vision for restaurants of the future: anyone who wants a steak should be banished. “How about restaurants in 10 or 15 years start treating carnivores the same way that smokers are treated,” Figueres suggested during a recent conference. “If they want to eat meat, they can do it outside the restaurant.”

In case you have missed this development: eating meat is fast becoming as repellent as smoking to many green campaigners. It is behaviour to be discouraged or even banned.

That’s because your hamburger is being blamed for climate change. End of quote.

But is there any real scientific basis for this dietary puritanism? Of course not. As usual, climate alarmists are fudging the facts and hiding their real agenda. Quote:

Reading the popular press on this topic, you find plenty of articles suggesting that eliminating meat consumption could cut greenhouse gas emissions by half or more. That’s massive. It’s also massively misleading.

Importantly, the 50 per cent reduction in emissions is achieved by going a lot further than vegetarianism. It requires going completely vegan…If we turn to the academic literature on emission cuts from going vegetarian, a systematic survey of peer-reviewed studies shows a non-meat diet could reduce an individual’s emissions by the equivalent of 540kg of CO2. For the average person in the industrialised world, that means cutting emissions by just 4.3 per cent. End of quote.

This isn’t the whole story. Quote:

But this still overstates the effect because it ignores an age-old and well-described economic phenomenon known as the “rebound effect”. Vegetarian diets are slightly cheaper, and saved money will be spent on other goods and services that cause additional greenhouse gas emissions…In a developed country, the real­ity is that going entirely vegetarian for the rest of your life means reducing your emissions by about 2 per cent. End of quote.

Factor in the noticeable digestive effects of a vegetarian diet, and it may well be that emissions rise. It’s just as well that smug isn’t a greenhouse gas or vegans and the UN would have plunged the planet into runaway global warming long ago.


Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to daily sudoku?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to podcasts?
  • Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

Who is Lushington D. Brady?

Well, a pseudonym. Obviously.

But the name Lushington Dalrymple Brady has been chosen carefully. Not only for the sum of its overall mien of seedy gentility, reminiscent perhaps of a slightly disreputable gentlemen of letters, but also for its parts, each of which borrows from the name of a Vandemonian of more-or-less fame (or notoriety) who represents some admirable quality which will hopefully animate the persona of Lushington D. Brady.

To read my previous articles click on my name in blue.

Listen to this post:
Voiced by Amazon Polly
62%