"Cowspiracy!" - It's all the cattle ...

Recently, and with increasing frequency, I hear this excuse: "Cowspiracy!" - It's all the cattle that produce more methane and carbon dioxide than all else combined.

My Answer to that is now simply: "I know that movie. It is frightening indeed. When did you stop eating burgers? Or, when did you start to eat less meat?"

The long answer might take more time, but let me ask you a few questions first:

- How many animals where living on this planet - say - 200 years ago?

- How many of these animals did we kill?

- How many species did we effectively extinct?

- How many humans where living on planet earth about 200 years ago?

- How old is planet earth?

- How old is the species of the "Great White Shark"?

- How long did it take for the species of the "Great White Shark" do evolve?

- What did humans feed on about 200 years ago?

- What changed within the last 200 years?

The problem is not cattle, nor is it animal life stock (Hey, I don't like this wording neither). The problem rather lies in our perception of things that are odd, or which appear to be off.

Now, I hope that, you have answered all the questions above.

You'll come to a strange picture, which might induce, that we have removed 90% of all animals on land, as well as 90% of all fish from the seas, and that, we have caused severe damage to under water plants as well, and, we have managed to wipe out many species, which took millions of years to evolve, hundreds of millions of years, to be precise. We then started to grow animals within the spot, that had been left empty by wildlife gone extinct.

We are left with a habitat, which can hardly sustain it's natural balance. And, this is not your fault.

But, it is what you have to deal with. Sorry to say, but it is upon you to fix the mess, which prior generations in Europe and Northern America have passed on to you.

If cattle is not the sole issue on it's own, then there might be more within the other side of the equation. That is, by removing nearly half of all trees from the planet and by removing nutrition from plankton, we have diminished our planets ability to absorb giant amounts of carbon dioxide every moment.

Still, we keep increasing the amounts of carbon dioxide, which we release into our atmosphere.

On a side note, I would like to ask you to reread that excuse: "It's all the cattle that produce more methane and carbon dioxide than all else combined."

Do you know that, there are scientists exploring possibilities to kind of "store" electric power by "producing" methane? It is a gas, it can be easily transported, it is less risky to handle than Hydrogen, and it could be "burned" again to release the stored energy within. 

Doesn't that sound like, we could get kind of free "energy" also, if we'd be able to "collect" the methane these animals "produce"? I think therein we can see an opportunity and not only a problem.

Lack of power - at an impasse with your desires

Do you believe that, there are problems, which we can not solve, or that, there are issues we are unable to tackle?

Ok. I am trying to guess some of these. Please, feel free to send me an email with what I might have omitted, so I can add it.

The world did not stop yet, it did not end. We still can breathe and we still can live. Life on earth still continues. However, the end of it will not be a spontaneous one. There will be no "big final". Life will just slow down until it finally stops.

The planets and the solar system keep spinning. Everything just moves on. Simply, without us anymore. All is fine. All will be quiet again.

But are we really out of all options yet? Some say: "We are doomed." I say: "Don't get paralyzed by the idea that, your actions will be without effect."

We know that, complex systems can appear stable, whilst they are not. They are unstable, and, any small change whatsoever, can have a surmount effect throwing that system off balance. For example, our solar system is highly unstable, but appears to be in balance. But, it is only our perception, that intrigues us into belief of it being stable. 

However, when arguing for change, be that the shift towards electric vehicles, the reduction of energy consumption, the planting of trees, the reduced outtake of fish and wildlife, we always come up with "reasoning", as to why we don't need to attempt any action, because we'd see either no effect, or, worse, that there is always something else, that we don't yet do. Some even ask for more radical attempts, like, the condemnation and even ban of certain behaviors, choices and things.

My point here is that, we must try, always. But, it is not about attempting things for the cause of doing something, like anything that, really appears to be hopeless endeavors.

We must determine, if any of our actions have the potential to make a change. And if there is a slight possibility that, we will see change for the better, then we have to give it a try.

We are in the billions, so we won't be working on the same things anyway, but i think we all share the vision of keeping this planet alive and have it return back to becoming a beautiful habitat again, for all life on earth, including you and me.