Once upon a time, all tar came from pine trees. — frank
think it's more that under pressure, fossilized organic material produces oil and coal. — frank
Being composed of carbon, coal forms a carbonaceous deposit. Having been transported and accumulated in a single deposit it is sedimentary. Having undergone metamorphosis and petrification it is a rock. Consequently it is reasonable to classify coal as a carbonaceous sedimentary rock.
Oct 12, 2015 — BC
I asked Google whether coal is a rock or not and got two answers — BC
Coal and oil can be called fossils, but in fact the original tissues of the organisms are present, albeit transformed. — BC
Not sure why you’re muddying the waters on something pretty well understood. No one claimed oil is made from “dead dinosaurs. — Mikie
The Oxford English Dictionary notes that in the phrase "fossil fuel" the adjective "fossil" means "[o]btained by digging; found buried in the earth", which dates to at least 1652,[25] before the English noun "fossil" came to refer primarily to long-dead organisms in the early 18th century.[26] — frank
It is fossil fuels that are the problem. NOT cows. — Agree to Disagree
Point out the fault in this logic:
- Atoms of carbon in the atmosphere are taken up by plants.
- Cows eat the plants.
- The cows release the atoms of carbon back into the atmosphere. — Agree to Disagree
Point out the fault in this logic:
- Atoms of carbon in the atmosphere are taken up by plants.
- Cows eat the plants.
- The cows release the atoms of carbon back into the atmosphere. — Agree to Disagree
Grass-fed cows digest their food by fermentation; a by-product of this fermentation is methane, which the cows belch in large quantities, Methane is a more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2. — BC
But yeah, keep quoting the “good meats” company website. Solid (and apparently only) source.
Try broadening your horizons. It won’t help your denial, but it’ll at least inform you a little more regarding your obsession with cows. — Mikie
Which points can you prove are wrong? — Agree to Disagree
Thus, it’s a cycle and burning fossil fuels doesn’t add any carbon to the atmosphere. — Mikie
You’ve repeatedly quoted a meat company. — Mikie
The carbon in fossil fuels accumulated over a long time and has been locked away from the atmosphere for a long time. — Agree to Disagree
What don't you like about these 2 sources? — Agree to Disagree
Emissions from livestock production are expected to continue rising as the global population nears 10 billion by midcentury and diets shift to incorporate more meat. (Consumption of meat from ruminant animals like cattle is expected to increase by about 90% by 2050.) If current trends for food demand and production continue, emissions from the food system alone would likely push global warming beyond 1.5° C, even if all non-food system emissions were immediately eliminated. Consumption of dairy and meat, particularly from cattle, is expected to account for over half of future warming associated with the food system, with emissions from meat production alone contributing 0.2–0.44°C of warming by the end of the century.
What don't you like about these 2 sources?
— Agree to Disagree
That they have nothing whatsoever to do with the problem of emissions from livestock, which is significant. — Mikie
You obviously haven't read it because it is about emissions from livestock — Agree to Disagree
if livestock numbers stay the same, eventually (in about 12 years), the methane produced by livestock will not contribute additional global warming.
From “goodmeats.”
Clue: the keyword here is “if.” — Mikie
I said it doesn’t address the problem of livestock emissions. It doesn’t address the problem at all, in fact. — Mikie
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.