Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
Is the significant amount over 90%? Because unless it is that argument still holds some water, albeit not as much as it does in its uncorrected form.
.
|
The argument makes no sense at all - are we trying to conserve the sun's energy or something? Why would you possibly care if eating animals meant that 50%, 500% or even 500000% more sunlight got wasted - its not like we're going to run out of it any time in the next billion years
If you wanted to combine agendas and make some enviornanimalist argument then youd have to consider the ratio of energy used to extract food to the energy produced in consumption. The perentage of the sun's energy involved is totally irrelevant regardless of the angle youre looking at things from, because the sun's energy is essentially infinite.