The teacher said, "You don't have any evidence to support it. There's only one right answer to this essay. And it's that Americans should be eating bugs. Everyone in the world is eating them, it's healthy for the environment and there's just, there's only one right answer."
Give me a half hour with this narcissistic cunt and I’ll have her admitting that her committing suicide is the only rational recourse to “save the planet” and then she will squirm her way out of slitting her wrist’s because she is a self obsessed cunt who would rather the world die than her.
"T... T... There's only one w... w... way! Eat ze b... bugs!"
Joel Salatin and Gabe Brown have entered the chat
If we took global soil carbon content to 1800 levels, every gram of carbon emitted by the Industrial Revolution (which has been a disaster for mankind) would be safely sequestered in the ground. Best way to do that is regenerative grazing, which has proven to sequester 3 pounds of carbon for every pound of meat produced.
You wouldn't. Because these people are programmed to shut down when someone challenges their pieties in any way. You'd have to pose as a fellow cultist, and I don't think you can simulate the derangement all too well.
If people in authority are going to spout nonsense like this we should be able to audit their fridge and pantry to make sure they're eating bugs 24/7 365.
Cattle are carbon neutral by definition. They emit exactly as much carbon as they take in. They literally have to. I know they try to get around this with 'muh methane' but methane isn't stable in the atmosphere and breaks down into CO2 eventually. The world has always had a absolute ton of ruminants and if anything their numbers are only now recovering in the Americas (still not recovered world wide because Africa).
Plus, even if cows were giant carbon/methane machines...excess carbon and the like can be used to do cool things like make deserts/tundras more suitable for life. Including plant life which, you know, is the other end of the chain. These people are absolute moron cultists.
Kinda funny. America used to have tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of bisons, before settlers massacre the hell out of them. Bovines existed far longer modern humans have.
Stop believing leftist faggot lies about agriculture. You see them lying about this shit but think they're being honest and forthright about topsoil management?
So we need to, not get rid of cows, but like, try to balance our diet so that not so much of our land is being used to raise cows, cause it's killing the Ozone layer."
I thought the Ozone layer stuff was a myth and the hole is increasing and decreasing on a seasonal bases and is not increasing on average.
I also did not know cows had an impact on it.
I hope parents take their kids out of that school, honestly the teacher is crazy.
I'm by no means an expert, so pls no bully, but as far as I know, the ozone layer stuff was real - which is why some chemicals used in refrigeration were banned. But now it's fine, evidenced by the fact that they haven't stirred up hysteria over it for a very long time. In fact, I only remember it from high school.
The major evidence people had was that the ozone hole, which is a periodic phenomenon over antarctica that opens up and then refills as a natural cycle, was a bit wider for a few years before closing back up as usual. They spun that into "We're destroying our protection from the sun and now we're all gonna die!" and leveraged the resulting panic into political power.
There is no transport mechanism by which heavy CFxCLx ((88 to 153 amu) a family of very heavy molecule relative to N2 (28 amu)) can get from the northern hemisphere ground level to the southern hemisphere stratopause.
China has increased it's CFC production and usage more than sufficiently to cover for everyone else's reduction in usage. Essentially there was no global reduction in CFC usage.
The Montreal protocols are just global communism in disguise.
I love how China, by breaking all the rules, reveals that most modern "issues" are just smoke and mirrors to shield our evil governments while they cement their power.
Granted, China is still an awful place that's worse in a lot of ways, but credit where its due.
The hysteria about the ozone I think was do to how it was measured during the expansion of the hole without realizing it shrinks after. The effect was do to chemicals reacting to sunlight.
I do think humans caused the "hole" or rather increased it. that was not even a hole but rather a thinning of the ozone layer over the Antarctic. I'm also ok that we changed from aerosols to prevent it increasing.
However, the ozone hole was not a hole, ozone was not linked to skin cancer or damaging your eyes because ozone does not stop UVA light but everyone feared it. At one point they moved from skin cancer to wind patterns.
The effect was that now the activists and elites know they can use fear to control the population by marketing and making some wield unverified conclusions. On top of that they consider it as a win for the environmental movement and use it was a flag ship of why they are the good guys.
20 All flying insects that walk on all fours are detestable to you. 21 However, you may eat the following kinds of flying insects that walk on all fours: those having jointed legs above their feet for hopping on the ground. 22 Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket, or grasshopper. 23 All other flying insects that have four legs are detestable to you.
That said, those are definitely not Orthoptera in that picture since Orthops are hemi-metabolous and hatch/birth looking like smaller versions of the adults. Holo-metabolous insects like beetles, flies, butterflies/moths, and bees/wasps are the ones with larval forms that look like mealworms/caterpillars/grubs.
The only real advantage locusts have is they are like goats and will eat absolutely everything possible.
Yield wise holometabolic larvae are better as they are literal eating machines with the sole purpose of building energy reserves to then change into an adult form, which is sometimes aphagous in the case of some moths so what the caterpillar eats is the only energy intake that insect will ever accomplish.
Larvae mean fewer unpalatable body parts like wings, legs, and at times significant carapace developments, but it's still not something many in the world, notably in the West, want to consume as historically animal protein has come from domestic farm animals such as cattle, goats/sheep, swine, and fowl.
Worth noting that it's always cattle and swine herds that these arguments are against while ignoring fowl despite their broader range of consumables as well as utility options based around their plumage.
Obviously there's the actual animal to consume but there are also eggs which can either be consumed directly or used as ingredients for more complex foods.
Fowl being smaller than cattle are not only faster to reach maturity but also easier to raise by comparison in terms of both feed requirements and ranging location. Sure cattle can "only" need grass but that requires having the grass in the first place both in terms of quality and quantity. Fowl however can happily live in woodland areas living off anything small enough for them to swallow.
Yet eco-warriors never bother to champion fowl as a possible alternative to cattle, most likely because it's not about one or the other, it's about control.
Give me a half hour with this narcissistic cunt and I’ll have her admitting that her committing suicide is the only rational recourse to “save the planet” and then she will squirm her way out of slitting her wrist’s because she is a self obsessed cunt who would rather the world die than her.
"T... T... There's only one w... w... way! Eat ze b... bugs!"
Joel Salatin and Gabe Brown have entered the chat
If we took global soil carbon content to 1800 levels, every gram of carbon emitted by the Industrial Revolution (which has been a disaster for mankind) would be safely sequestered in the ground. Best way to do that is regenerative grazing, which has proven to sequester 3 pounds of carbon for every pound of meat produced.
You wouldn't. Because these people are programmed to shut down when someone challenges their pieties in any way. You'd have to pose as a fellow cultist, and I don't think you can simulate the derangement all too well.
I'm opposed to hitting women but communist aren't human
I'm opposed to hitting Ladies. That shrew is many things, a woman even, but one thing she is not is a lady.
If people in authority are going to spout nonsense like this we should be able to audit their fridge and pantry to make sure they're eating bugs 24/7 365.
Cattle are carbon neutral by definition. They emit exactly as much carbon as they take in. They literally have to. I know they try to get around this with 'muh methane' but methane isn't stable in the atmosphere and breaks down into CO2 eventually. The world has always had a absolute ton of ruminants and if anything their numbers are only now recovering in the Americas (still not recovered world wide because Africa).
Plus, even if cows were giant carbon/methane machines...excess carbon and the like can be used to do cool things like make deserts/tundras more suitable for life. Including plant life which, you know, is the other end of the chain. These people are absolute moron cultists.
Kinda funny. America used to have tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of bisons, before settlers massacre the hell out of them. Bovines existed far longer modern humans have.
Those migrating ruminants created a layer of topsoil feet deep that we're burning like coal to feed the world.
We convert tons of it to ethanol to burn in cars - don't forget about that.
I had momentarily shoved that idiocy out of my head. Thank you for making me even angrier at stupid people today!
Stop believing leftist faggot lies about agriculture. You see them lying about this shit but think they're being honest and forthright about topsoil management?
Yeah sure dude, topsoil is a leftist conspiracy going all the way back to the fucking Thesmophoria, clearly.
I thought the Ozone layer stuff was a myth and the hole is increasing and decreasing on a seasonal bases and is not increasing on average. I also did not know cows had an impact on it.
I hope parents take their kids out of that school, honestly the teacher is crazy.
In any case the greenhouse effect has absolutely nothing to do with ozone or the ozone layer
I'm by no means an expert, so pls no bully, but as far as I know, the ozone layer stuff was real - which is why some chemicals used in refrigeration were banned. But now it's fine, evidenced by the fact that they haven't stirred up hysteria over it for a very long time. In fact, I only remember it from high school.
Same for 'acid rain'. Member that?
Freon was the cooling agent in fridges. It did react on the ozone layer but when the use of freon dropped the ozone layer started recovering again.
The major evidence people had was that the ozone hole, which is a periodic phenomenon over antarctica that opens up and then refills as a natural cycle, was a bit wider for a few years before closing back up as usual. They spun that into "We're destroying our protection from the sun and now we're all gonna die!" and leveraged the resulting panic into political power.
Sound familiar?
There are 2 problems with that:
There is no transport mechanism by which heavy CFxCLx ((88 to 153 amu) a family of very heavy molecule relative to N2 (28 amu)) can get from the northern hemisphere ground level to the southern hemisphere stratopause.
China has increased it's CFC production and usage more than sufficiently to cover for everyone else's reduction in usage. Essentially there was no global reduction in CFC usage.
The Montreal protocols are just global communism in disguise.
I love how China, by breaking all the rules, reveals that most modern "issues" are just smoke and mirrors to shield our evil governments while they cement their power.
Granted, China is still an awful place that's worse in a lot of ways, but credit where its due.
The hysteria about the ozone I think was do to how it was measured during the expansion of the hole without realizing it shrinks after. The effect was do to chemicals reacting to sunlight.
I do think humans caused the "hole" or rather increased it. that was not even a hole but rather a thinning of the ozone layer over the Antarctic. I'm also ok that we changed from aerosols to prevent it increasing.
However, the ozone hole was not a hole, ozone was not linked to skin cancer or damaging your eyes because ozone does not stop UVA light but everyone feared it. At one point they moved from skin cancer to wind patterns.
The effect was that now the activists and elites know they can use fear to control the population by marketing and making some wield unverified conclusions. On top of that they consider it as a win for the environmental movement and use it was a flag ship of why they are the good guys.
After three generations of propaganda, teachers are unable to even know what the truth is.
it's not kosher
It is according to Leviticus 11:22
That said, those are definitely not Orthoptera in that picture since Orthops are hemi-metabolous and hatch/birth looking like smaller versions of the adults. Holo-metabolous insects like beetles, flies, butterflies/moths, and bees/wasps are the ones with larval forms that look like mealworms/caterpillars/grubs.
The only real advantage locusts have is they are like goats and will eat absolutely everything possible.
Yield wise holometabolic larvae are better as they are literal eating machines with the sole purpose of building energy reserves to then change into an adult form, which is sometimes aphagous in the case of some moths so what the caterpillar eats is the only energy intake that insect will ever accomplish.
Larvae mean fewer unpalatable body parts like wings, legs, and at times significant carapace developments, but it's still not something many in the world, notably in the West, want to consume as historically animal protein has come from domestic farm animals such as cattle, goats/sheep, swine, and fowl.
Worth noting that it's always cattle and swine herds that these arguments are against while ignoring fowl despite their broader range of consumables as well as utility options based around their plumage.
Obviously there's the actual animal to consume but there are also eggs which can either be consumed directly or used as ingredients for more complex foods. Fowl being smaller than cattle are not only faster to reach maturity but also easier to raise by comparison in terms of both feed requirements and ranging location. Sure cattle can "only" need grass but that requires having the grass in the first place both in terms of quality and quantity. Fowl however can happily live in woodland areas living off anything small enough for them to swallow.
Yet eco-warriors never bother to champion fowl as a possible alternative to cattle, most likely because it's not about one or the other, it's about control.
Nuclear war is a mercy.
insects wearing human skins
Nah, that would be cannibalism. Lizards on the other hand, are mostly insectivores.
I actually ate fried crickets on a school trip to an insect expo.
This was a long time ago, and I don't know if it had anything to do with globohomo. At that point, I thought these were just for weird people.
Is anyone surprised? If you're sending your kids to government indoctrination centers, you should expect this.
The soulless grinning demons behind this should have their carbon emissions zeroed out immediately.
Neu-Mormon cuisine?
Even parasites have parasites.
True story, and the reason why wasps are probably the most diverse insect group there is because so many of them parasitise other things.
It's like rule 34, except rather than "there will be porn of it", it's "there will be a parasitoid wasp for it".
Shouldn't cockroaches be off limits because it would harm a cock(roach)?
Kek.
Did you really think that calling women 'cockroaches' follows R16, or are you so hyper-emotional that you'll do it anyway?
Stop getting yourself banned and depriving me of entertainment.
I could link plenty of pieces where women call us far worse.
And I can link you examples of Jews calling non-Jews 'cattle', does that mean that calling them sub-humans is justified?
61% of women are feminist.
A few opinion pieces doesn't make the same dent.
And 100% of Jews are Jews.
If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.
I don't subscribe to either anti-Jew or anti-woman derangement, but it's odd that you can't see it when you're doing it.