|
-
Carbon Dioxide.
You couldn't make it up. The media are determined to push the global warming scare based on cutting CO2 levels in order to save the planet and now the latest scare is that supermarket shelves will be bare -(wait for it) - Because of a shortage of CO2.
It helps if you have a sense of humour.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
-
Originally Posted by duncet
You couldn't make it up. The media are determined to push the global warming scare based on cutting CO2 levels in order to save the planet and now the latest scare is that supermarket shelves will be bare -(wait for it) - Because of a shortage of CO2.
It helps if you have a sense of humour.
Is the 'CO2 scare' not the real reason for empty supermarket shelves, then?
If not, what is/are the real reason(s)?
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by Desert Region
Is the 'CO2 scare' not the real reason for empty supermarket shelves, then?
If not, what is/are the real reason(s)?
Sadly there will be those who believe that cutting emissions and reducing atmospheric CO2 is responsible for the shortage.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 4 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
This little piggy never went to market
Some pig farmer on sky news is crying because even his family are leaving the business due to hardships including there’s not enough co2 to stun the pigs with or pack the meat so thousands are not getting slaughtered and sold.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news....rtage-12410604
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
I wondered how long it would take for the climate change denying dunce’s to make a link between the two stories.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by duncet
You couldn't make it up. The media are determined to push the global warming scare based on cutting CO2 levels in order to save the planet and now the latest scare is that supermarket shelves will be bare -(wait for it) - Because of a shortage of CO2.
It helps if you have a sense of humour.
The media are promoting the global warming scare based on gasses being let out into the atmosphere even though the globe has been warming and cooling since before time began long before we appeared and will continue long after we are all gone, but the scare this time is that due to gas prices ( that are set to rocket even worse soon ) fertiliser factories are closing and not producing co2 to be used in production and packaging of meats and poultry products, this is about to get worse and combined with transportation issues may result in less product getting to market and this will probably drive prices up aswell .
There is no link the latter is fact.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by MICK/GILLY
The media are promoting the global warming scare based on gasses being let out into the atmosphere even though the globe has been warming and cooling since before time began long before we appeared and will continue long after we are all gone, but the scare this time is that due to gas prices ( that are set to rocket even worse soon ) fertiliser factories are closing and not producing co2 to be used in production and packaging of meats and poultry products, this is about to get worse and combined with transportation issues may result in less product getting to market and this will probably drive prices up aswell .
There is no link the latter is fact.
What is also fact is that the current global warming catastrophe we are facing is up to 100% caused by man. Since 1850, almost all the long-term warming can be explained by greenhouse gas emissions and other human activities.
Whilst it is true to say that the earth’s temperature changes naturally over time. Variations in the planet’s orbit, solar cycles, and volcanic eruptions can all cause periods of warming or cooling.
However, reputable climate scientists unanimously agree that none of these natural causes can explain the earth’s current warming trend.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
You wonder why so many went down this man-made global warming route when it is and was clear that both our input and natural cycles gave room for argument.
Whatever your views on global warming you cannot argue with the pollution that blights our lives.
Giving people an obvious point of disagreement, however weak, was a great mistake.
If you don't believe in man-made global warming fine but give me an argument that the world isn't polluted.
I have never heard one that was even remotely cogent.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
1000's of pigs will have to go to be incinerated !
Apparently, IF the farmer keeps them beyond the optimum size for slaughter, the resultant size of the 'cuts' will be too big for the packaging!
The farmer cannot send them to slaughter, as the processing plants have no CO2 to aid in preserving the meat once packaged - for the supermarkets.
So, less pork in Tesco's = more trade for local butchers
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
I'm sure it would sell if just cut up in carryable lumps.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by *concerned*
1000's of pigs will have to go to be incinerated !
Apparently, IF the farmer keeps them beyond the optimum size for slaughter, the resultant size of the 'cuts' will be too big for the packaging!
The farmer cannot send them to slaughter, as the processing plants have no CO2 to aid in preserving the meat once packaged - for the supermarkets.
So, less pork in Tesco's = more trade for local butchers
CO2 is also used in the slaughtering process to stun the animals prior to having their throats cut. Probably a good time to ethically consider just how badly we treat our animals that are bred for slaughter, not to mention the huge carbon footprint left by large scale factory farming.
https://youtu.be/LQRAfJyEsko
Last edited by donkey22; 21/09/2021 at 12:47 PM.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 2 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by donkey22
CO2 is also used in the slaughtering process to stun the animals prior to having their throats cut. Probably a good time to ethically consider just how badly we treat our animals that are bred for slaughter, not to mention the huge carbon footprint left by large scale factory farming.
https://youtu.be/LQRAfJyEsko
I absolutely agree that treatment of animals bred for slaughter is totally unacceptable and should not be tolerated in any civilised society. I also agree that pollution should be tackled on a mammoth scale. This is a real priority and a good start would be to ban the huge amounts of unnecessary packaging that is used in practically everything we buy.
On the subject of global warming it is easy to take the view that because a large number of reputable scientists support the fashionable vogue that humans can change the course that our climate is heading, that global warming is a cut and dried fact. Surely it is only right to consider the opinions of other reputable scientists who do not follow the prescribed mantra but put forward alternative explanations on the subject. Surely we should be entitled to an open debate in which all views are examined? Instead, only the one side of the debate is heard and that is pushed on us from every direction as "fact" that shouldn't be questioned.
Don't forget that climate scientists were telling us, when I was 8 years old, that we were about to enter an ice age. It is all done on modelling, much of which is not based on pure fact.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by duncet
I absolutely agree that treatment of animals bred for slaughter is totally unacceptable and should not be tolerated in any civilised society. I also agree that pollution should be tackled on a mammoth scale. This is a real priority and a good start would be to ban the huge amounts of unnecessary packaging that is used in practically everything we buy.
On the subject of global warming it is easy to take the view that because a large number of reputable scientists support the fashionable vogue that humans can change the course that our climate is heading, that global warming is a cut and dried fact. Surely it is only right to consider the opinions of other reputable scientists who do not follow the prescribed mantra but put forward alternative explanations on the subject. Surely we should be entitled to an open debate in which all views are examined? Instead, only the one side of the debate is heard and that is pushed on us from every direction as "fact" that shouldn't be questioned.
Don't forget that climate scientists were telling us, when I was 8 years old, that we were about to enter an ice age. It is all done on modelling, much of which is not based on pure fact.
But why debate it?
What do you want to do differently?
What's wrong with clean?
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by duncet
I absolutely agree that treatment of animals bred for slaughter is totally unacceptable and should not be tolerated in any civilised society. I also agree that pollution should be tackled on a mammoth scale. This is a real priority and a good start would be to ban the huge amounts of unnecessary packaging that is used in practically everything we buy.
On the subject of global warming it is easy to take the view that because a large number of reputable scientists support the fashionable vogue that humans can change the course that our climate is heading, that global warming is a cut and dried fact. Surely it is only right to consider the opinions of other reputable scientists who do not follow the prescribed mantra but put forward alternative explanations on the subject. Surely we should be entitled to an open debate in which all views are examined? Instead, only the one side of the debate is heard and that is pushed on us from every direction as "fact" that shouldn't be questioned.
Don't forget that climate scientists were telling us, when I was 8 years old, that we were about to enter an ice age. It is all done on modelling, much of which is not based on pure fact.
The current arguments being put forward are based on fact though. I’d challenge you to find just one peer reviewed article/paper that supports the view that the current global warming event isn’t man made.
However I’m very pleased that I’m not the only one who’s disgusted about the way our farm animals are treated, and I completely agree with your views concerning plastic waste and pollution.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
|
Search Qlocal (powered by google)
Privacy & Cookie Policy
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Booking.com
Supporting Local Business
Be Seen - Advertise on Qlocal
UK, Local Online News Community, Forums, Chats, For Sale, Classified, Offers, Vouchers, Events, Motors Sale, Property For Sale Rent, Jobs, Hotels, Taxi, Restaurants, Pubs, Clubs, Pictures, Sports, Charities, Lost Found
UK,
UK News,
|