New study proves cow farts don’t cause global warming
Previous studies have laughingly declared that cow farts cause global warming and because of this people should stop eating meat. But now a new study has come out that has found that cows are actually good for the environment.
Let’s face it, the argument that cow farts were contributing to global warming was not the real focus of this ridiculous claim. The truth is that animal rights activists and vegetarians jumped on board the global warming cause as a means to persuade people that it was wrong to eat meat.
We can argue all we want about whether man is causing global warming through industrialization, but nature is a delicate balance; everything in nature serves a purpose that keeps the environment alive and sustainable. To claim that a part of nature, such as cows, are causing global warming by doing what comes naturally to them is absolutely asinine.
America's Watchtower 
The study did, however, find that cow farts cause people to want to eat fewer cows.
LikeLike
Not me! I guess I haven’t been around them enough. 🙂
LikeLike
Anyone who has ever lived on a farm knows that cows are good for the environment. One only needs to look at all the green growing around the cow spats. They do their part for a green earth. City eco-freaks haven’t got a clue!
LikeLike
Nature is this big circle, these people either don’t get it or they don’t care as long as they can achieve their goal.
LikeLike
I think one of the points of the study was to explore whether there may have been counterintuitive things going on – we know that animals, almost by definition, are de facto good for the environment because they’re part of the environment. Introducing animals to new environments, where they have no natural predators, though, defies that intuitive logic.
When it comes to cows, of course, predators aren’t the issue; but cow byproducts may be. Cow farts and belches, you may or may not be aware, contain good amounts of methane gas – in fact, I understand that bovine belching accounts for over 15% of the earth’s atmospheric methane.
The reason we would want to know more is that the world’s food supply rests in large part on animal farming, including cows. The worldwide herd of cows today is countless times larger than it was a century ago, and despite the sneering mockery from the willfully ignorant, it’s actually a very legitimate avenue of inquiry to determine whether or not the increase in the size of the herd causes an increase in the levels of atmospheric methane sufficient to impact climate change.
Remember – not everything is obvious, especially in so complex a world as ours. For instance, we and our dogs just love it when we share our food – yet we know that we must not share our chocolate with them. Counterintuitive? Of course, but it’s an established fact. Of course, if you distrust science, you can go ahead and feed your dog a few Hershey bars, but don’t say you weren’t warned.
Take good care and may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLike
Maybe the vegan freaks can install little afterburners on the cows’ rear ends, like at the refinery.
The green Left has massively overreached with this global warming group-think, and nobody’s going to listen to their alarmist BS ever again- they’ll have to make a solid case rather than just some MSM-propelled fantasy
LikeLike
When they thought that the global warming hoax was gaining steam they kept reaching for more in an attempt to bring even more people into the fold. In doing so they may some of the most outrageous claims that I have ever heard. This was one of them. The more they tried to convince people this was really happening, the more insane they sounded.
LikeLike
gaining steam? tee-hee-hee!
LikeLike
I didn’t even think of it like that but I will take credit anyway! 🙂
LikeLike
The words of Solomon: I know that everything that God does will endure forever, nothing can be added to it and nothing taken from it. God does this so that men will revere Him. Ecc 3:14 It doesn’t matter how much the gubment thinks they can control the people.
LikeLike
Solomon was simply stating the Law of Conservation of Matter and Energy.
I disagree with him about God’s motivation, though – I don’t think God did anything for the purpose of having people revere him, I think He did things because, as He said, they were Good and right.
LikeLike
I think the animal rights activists and vegetarians are (generally) the types to already gravitate toward stuff like the global warming nonsense. Blaming the cows for part of it was just a bonus! (Btw, would that make it Bovine-made Catastrophic Global Warming?)
Sirrahc
http://AViewFromTheRight.wordpress.com
LikeLike
Doesn’t that drive you nuts? I mean, I assume we all enjoy a nice cut of beef from time to time – do you see any of us running around trying to force anyone else to eat beef? Of course not – my attitude when I run into a vegan is “More beef for me!”
If they don’t want to eat meat, good for them – but stop telling me I’m doing something wrong in my choice of dinner!
LikeLike
Exactly, if a person doesn’t want to eat beef they don’t have to, but what drives me crazy is all of these people who want to tell me what I can and cannot eat. They are not happy just doing their own thing, they want everyone else to practice what they believe is right.
LikeLike
But try to “push” your ideas on them and suddenly they accuse you of “intolerance”. Talk about one-sided bias, not to mention philosophical inconsistency. Sheesh!
LikeLike
That is all too true!
LikeLike
Oh wow, this is over a year old and how fitting that you are talking about this NOW! Look at all of the food police we have in our administration in 2011! I am with you all, don’t tell me what to eat, OR how much OR how to season it. And don’t tell me what the kids can have at school or McDonalds. This was gearing up last year, it seems and is now in full swing thanks to Mrs. Obama. I also believe we should be careful with the environment, BUT to say we are the ones to blame for the climate change is stupid. This earth has been here years before we were here and it will be here for years after we are gone. Everything that is happening, in my opinion, is a natural occurance of things. We give ourselves too much credit for causing it. Well, at least the “earth people” do. Once there is a way to “measure” something whether it be cholesterol levels or the temperature, you know there are people that will take advantage of it.
LikeLike
Actually, nature’s balance is pretty robust, from all that we can see, and a few cows breaking wind aren’t going to be enough to disrupt that balance.
Second, I think it’s pretty arrogant on the part of some to claim that whatever particular balance of nature we’re enjoying is the “right” balance which must be preserved at all costs, including our standard of living.
If, as many claim, earth’s climate goes through cycles, wouldn’t it make more sense to try to determine that climate we might be cycling into, and prepare for it?
Don’t misunderstand, I hate pollution – we should continue our efforts to bring it under control and ultimately eliminate it – but I can’t buy into this idea that our industrialization is destroying the planet.
LikeLike
Just because a person doesn’t believe in global warming, it doesn’t mean that they don’t care about the environment or about pollution. I also think that we should seek alternative energy sources and care about the environment, but like you I do not think that we are destroying the planet. These global warming alarmists want to make it seem as though if you do not believe in global warming you must hate the environment. That simply is not true.
LikeLike
Apologies for ranting and for misspelling my name . . .
-The Georgia Yankee
LikeLike
No apology need, rants are welcome here!
LikeLike
Did you guys even READ the article?!!!
“But Dr Butterbach-Bahl pointed out that the study DID NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE METHANE PRODUCED BY THE LIVESTOCK or the carbon dioxide produced if soil erodes. He also pointed out that much of the red meat eaten in the western world if from intensively farmed animals in southern countries.
He said the study does not overturn the case for cutting down on red meat but shows grazing livestock is not always bad for global warming.”
When you eat cow, do you check to make sure it’s GRASS fed and not CORN fed? That’s the only way this article would make any difference to you or to global warming! But you don’t believe in global warming so WTF does it matter. And BTW, I’m not a vegetarian or a vegan. I eat meat and I love it!
LikeLike
i am with you i was yousing this for a follow up project and you are right this is completely insane and no cows would hurt amaricas economy even more with out one of ower only contry produced out ports
LikeLike
Could anyone provide me the link to the study please ? Many Boston legal fans to ridicule.
LikeLike
This is a very biased blog post. “Previous studies have laughingly declared that cow farts cause global warming ..” This has no basis of proof. The article you mean to uphold your argument with in-a-way supports the one you oppose. “The research does not mean that producing livestock to eat is good for the environment in all countries. However in certain circumstances, it can be better for global warming to let animals graze on grassland… as long as the animals are free range.” It is a rare occasion that animals are free-range anymore in America. This is a parallel dilemma along with that of methane release. The Telegraph article also emphasizes GRASSland and cows don’t eat much grass anymore either. Farmers tend to feed the cows corn because it’s cheaper (grows fast, more product on less land), and they can give it to them in troughs, allowing the cows’ eating quarters to be contained to small areas. Farmers contain cows in small areas like barns/sheds (created for this purpose) and don’t let them walk around. The cows get bigger (fatter) faster since they are not walking for their food and the farmers are then able to sell the cows sooner, in order to make more money. There are many unsettling issues involved in this, but to stay on the topic.. The blog post fails to address the issue of whether cows are free-range or not, and this was very apparently the determining factor in whether the cows’ methane causes global warming.
LikeLike
Person above me, click on “good for the environment” or I’ve copy&pasted it here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7564682/Cows-absolved-of-causing-global-warming-with-nitrous-oxide.html
Please read my comment as well.
LikeLike
I just noticed I’m almost a year late on this. Haha. Well, the issue still lives.
LikeLike
I think cows are good for the enviroment. I mean humans fart whats the difference?
LikeLike
I wonder, if enough conservatives were vegetarian/vegan, would the left have gone after our gardens as a primary contributer to “global warming” rather than cows?
LikeLike