Scaeva Wrote:As a vegetarian it's nice to see this. Still wouldn't eat it, but it's nice that it's there. Hopefully we can come up with good replacements for other animal related products soon too.

I'm not looking forward to the public 'resistance' to this though. People should really learn to shut up about things if they haven't properly researched it (or have had formal education on the subject). I honestly can't wait until I can finally start working with GMOs myself. Who knows, I might even end up working on something like this (though I'm planning to work with plants).

DeanNim Wrote:wasnt there an article somewhere that said cows release more co2 to the environment compared to cars. so, yay to the environment (if we didnt have to raise so much cows anymore) ??

DeanNim Wrote:wasnt there an article somewhere that said cows release more co2 to the environment compared to cars. so, yay to the environment (if we didnt have to raise so much cows anymore) ??

Kype Wrote:To draw that conclusion, I'm pretty sure they factored in the amout of forest being destroyed to make plains for the cows, and even the production of the meat. It is also likely that they left out the energy needed to get the oil, produce the fuel, make the cars and so on.
They tried the same in Sweden/Norway(?) a few months back, but with cycling. Someone claimed that the carbondioxide you produce cycling to work, is more than a car would produce on the same distance. Some idiots actually believed it, without any further investigation. However, when sceptics reviewed it, another conclusion was drawn. Multiple factors where left out, just to reach a conclusion which was already set.
This is the stupidity of subjective and biased researchers.

KhainiWest Wrote:http://www.seattlebikeblog.com/2013/03/02/state-lawmaker-says-bicycling-is-not-good-for-the-environment-should-be-taxed/