Add a big, Cheshire grin.
The lions won't just feel self-conscious from being watched by a cow's butt; they'll feel a growing sense of unease as a whole herd fixes them with a mischievous smirk. What are those cows planning now? It certainly can't be good for the lions.
Come on, I can't be the only one thinking it.
There's mounting evidence to indicate that plants have their own slow-motion version of pain, memory, and communication. So going vegan to prevent animal suffering is kind of like the Chick-fil-A cows who say to eat more chicken, except it's the plants who become the target.
Still, it's probably a lot easier for most people to accept that animals have feelings than to feel bad for eating plants. I get that. I just wanted to point out that not everybody wins.
Of course, there's also the point that the plants wouldn't be grown at all if not to be eaten. But that same argument could be made for most of the animals in question, too.
This is kind of like the problem of robots replacing factory workers. Sure, the animals don't have to be eaten anymore, but now what will happen to them?
Thus it was that the cow became an endangered species.
I came here for that, but then the power flickered and by the time I had reconnected, you had beaten me to it.
...is that my coworkers are 99% chimpanzee.
Everyone lost.
Wasn't really all that hard...
Methane, like carbon, is a greenhouse gas, but methane's global warming impact per molecule is 25 times greater than carbon's, according to the EPA.
I assume they mean carbon dioxide, right? Because if they're talking about pure carbon, I can't imagine it stays airborne for long enough to have much of an impact.
Maybe that's why it's so much less effective than methane.
The best laid plans of mice and men are held up in the legal department.
