Let’s not disturb the natural eco balance

It really galls me when climate change advocates keep telling us that it’s our meat eating that is causing global climate change. They claim that, because we’ve been eating meat, fish and poultry, the emission of methane has increased and that has contributed to climate change.

They claim that animals have a higher carbon footprint than plant based foods. So their idea is that the entire planet stops meat consumption altogether and replaces it with plants and their derivatives.

My query is, if we stop consuming meat are we not at risk of disturbing the delicate ecosystem of the planet by purposely removing a natural predator (us) higher up on the food chain? What would happen to these animals, cows, sheep, chicken, etc., and the environment?

Despite this obvious downside there are numerous varieties of fake burgers that look, taste and smell like real meat but they’re grown in labs from cells extracted from living animals. And now there is a fake fish that has also been grown in a lab. Apparently it too tastes like a real fish, plus it’s plastic free, mercury free and, according to its developers, contains all the nutrients one would find in a real fish.

But as one famous doctor warned, if you find a food item that claims to be sugar free or fat free, don’t automatically believe it is healthy. If they have eliminated some things from their ingredients or removed them from the natural substance, the chances are they’ve added something else. What is that something else they’ve added? Only they know. Is that something safe? Only they know.

Now, if plastics and mercury poisoning is what people are worried about, why do they not encourage fish farming? Fish would then be grown under controlled environmental conditions which would also mean no plastic or mercury poisoning?

Why the need to grow something artificial in a lab instead of encouraging an enterprise? There is the other side of the coin as well. Overfishing too can wreak havoc as the smaller fish population is depleted resulting in less food for big fish. They would then starve and die, or search for human food as an alternative. Again, it would wreak havoc on the delicate oceanic balance created by God.  

So if the sea is going to be overpopulated because we are now growing faux fish, then should swimmers and sailors watch out for even more and even bigger sharks at sea?

They will have more food and, therefore, a chance to multiply more than usual. Or will they? Will the overpopulation of fish mean some will end up dying anyway? Regardless, scientists are now suggesting that sailboats and swimmers not venture out at night especially when there is a full moon because, aside from werewolves being on the prowl (lol), so too are sharks and, therefore, there may be greater chances of a shark attack. I do, however, underscore the word, ‘may’ as it’s very important when reading scientists’ findings.

Scientists are so full of…’may’, ‘could’, ‘maybe’ and ‘might’. They might release a study that says, ‘chocolate may help lower blood pressure, in small quantities’. Or ‘coffee may help reduce heart attacks’. Or ‘dark chocolate may be useful in a weight loss programme provided it is very dark’.

Now a new study just released says that grapes may prevent a heart attack too. All these statements have one thing in common; the word, ‘may’ which, in my opinion, is code for, ‘we don’t know anything but spent a lot of money doing research to essentially learn…nothing’.

In other words they don’t really know what chocolate does, or coffee or even grapes for that matter. I think the words ‘may’, ‘maybe’, ‘might’ and ‘could’ are ways to absolve oneself of responsibility in the event a claim made turns out not to be true. They might argue that they never claimed it does but simply that it might.

Similarly, it is becoming a trend to use such phrases as ‘I believe…’, ‘I feel…’ and ‘I think…’ when making ‘assertions’ that one feels are not fact based. A lot of people are being encouraged to use these phrases when making assertions or assumptions about someone or something so that no blame goes around when the assertion or assumption made is found to be untrue. After all it was just a feeling someone had.