Snowflake teachers poisoning our children's minds

patsy_mccabe

'Livestock and Manure' account for 5.1% of global emissions;

gozunda

_Brian wrote: »

...

The trick that is used in paid for research against agriculture is to divide out the burning of fossil fuels into different categories separating “transport” from “heating” and “electricity generation”, plus they will include the felling of trees in the calculation for agriculture even for agriculture in Ireland where we are increasing forestry coverage and are at the highest coverage in 100years.

...

A good overview of ghg emissions in Ireland is given by the SEAI.

The consumption of energy accounts "for 60% of Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2017. With Transport, residential and industry accounted for the highest shares"

https://www.seai.ie/data-and-insights/seai-statistics/key-statistics/co2/

With regards to the OPs query - Tbh I believe that much of the current hype is being is indeed deliberatly being aimed at kids.

In my experience children tend to believe what they are told. And where there is one person responsible for a group of children for a year- it is perhaps not unreasonable to assume that person will have a significant effect on those children's views and opinions.

Many years ago in school - I remember being told unequivocaly that the priest and teacher could never be wrong. I think that church led dogma is no longer held in such high regard ...

I do believe teachers are professionals but where we have groups like an Taisce pushing crap masquerading as school resources on 'climate change' having a go at meat and dairy, promoting meatless mondays and vegan 'potluck' events,

Well the news is it's still there and it hasn't changed

https://greenschoolsireland.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Green-Schools-Climate-Action-Teacher-Resource_2.pdf

In the pack its notable (considering the SEAIs figures which showing that the consumption of energy as being responsible for the greatest proportion of greenhouse gases) that students are asked in Chapter 9 - "Goals" to"Research and create an engaging presentation (or write a speech) to inform your peers of the carbon footprint and environmental impact of the meat and/or dairy industry in Ireland."

Great stuff. So let's be fair and the children should also do the exact same for energy consumption? Nah dont be stupid! Just scream about meat and dairy to your friends and swap some plant based recipes ...

Tell me how

Siamsa Sessions wrote: »

re language: the title of the thread is satire. It's taking the michael out of people who make such claims.

re facts on modern research: If the research was clear, then I would expect the Dept of Education to issue dietary advice to that effect.

I'll state it again since some posters are obviously not reading what I wrote on here: I'm looking for evidence to either support or dispel urban myths and conspiracies.

Everyone is entitled to investigate anything they wish if they feel that strongly about it, but, and this is just my opinion, any evidence gathered here is worth as much as that of a bar stool expert given the anonymous nature of Boards.

36 different people have contributed to the thread so far, it's hardly a strong sample size and even if it was, it being located in the Farming Forum will, understandably have a larger proportion of contributors who have some form of conflicted bias. Not to mention the good old saboteurs who may seek to impact the narrative one way or another for no good reason other than it can be done.

Iodine1

36 different people have contributed to the thread so far, it's hardly a strong sample size and even if it was, it being located in the Farming Forum will, understandably have a larger proportion of contributors who have some form of conflicted bias. Not to mention the good old saboteurs who may seek to impact the narrative one way or another for no good reason other than it can be done.[/QUOTE]

While this may be the case, my impression of the response in general is a number of reasonable responses, many declaring a rural background. Yet they are NOT promoting the notion that there is a widespread campaign against meat in their schools, and in fairness that's about as far as they can go based on their experiences. That is all the OP asked: "Was there any factual evidence to support the hearsay?"

c.p.w.g.w

Timfy wrote: »

I can only speak for National Schools (primary) but we have to have a healthy eating policy which pretty much follows the standard "food triangle. There are certainly no hidden agendas!

Fruit juices are treated by the liver the same as coke, pure sugar and no fibre...so that's one major flaw on that triangle

Tell me how

Iodine1 wrote: »

36 different people have contributed to the thread so far, it's hardly a strong sample size and even if it was, it being located in the Farming Forum will, understandably have a larger proportion of contributors who have some form of conflicted bias. Not to mention the good old saboteurs who may seek to impact the narrative one way or another for no good reason other than it can be done.

An anonymous website is no basis for sourcing factual evidence.

_Brian

Tell me how wrote: »

While this may be the case, my impression of the response in general is a number of reasonable responses, many declaring a rural background. Yet they are NOT promoting the notion that there is a widespread campaign against meat in their schools, and in fairness that's about as far as they can go based on their experiences. That is all the OP asked: "Was there any factual evidence to support the hearsay?"

I don’t think the level of misinformed and misunderstanding in schools is any different to any other section of society.

Teachers are asked to work through a healthy eating section of the curriculum. Healthy eating isn’t as easy as it sounds and there is masses of misinformation being peddled abkut in the form of paid off reports that seem on face value to have information supporting an anti farming addenda.
Not surprised that some is rolled out to kids when you saw at time of publication of the EAT Lamcet travesty it was on every news outlet and every news paper, discussed on talk shows, it was everywhere, it was as if humans had discovered the secret of eternal living. That kinda sticks in people’s heads, first out with news wins, nobody heard the actual science that was rebuffing it, it’s now one of the most discredited reports both in content and in the lack of impartiality of the authors. But the damage was done.

Miss information is the enemy not “teachers”

Agriculture needs to be proactively getting actual science out there and being first out with the correct articles.

The EAT Lancet report had a major advantage in that on the surface it was from an impartial source when in fact it was a massively biased report. Yet another report completed by vegans, on the topic of eating meat that found in support of veganism - no surprise there.

listermint

The irony of a snowflake opening a thread about snowflakes.


It's amusing when someone goes a bit whiney about diversity in your diet. The op is as bad as the person in the restaurant feigning lactose or gluten intolerance.


It's boring OP. You are everything that you are railing against

ganmo

listermint wrote: »

The irony of a snowflake opening a thread about snowflakes.


It's amusing when someone goes a bit whiney about diversity in your diet. The op is as bad as the person in the restaurant feigning lactose or gluten intolerance.


It's boring OP. You are everything that you are railing against

Read the op, it was a query to see if it was actually happening.
if you had read the thread you'll have seen where OP reported back that they had gotten no info that it was happening

Balf

_Brian wrote: »

The same way that German citizens allowed themselves to believe Jews were an enemy.

Seriously?

Ye still need to develop a bit before you can coherently participate in this kind of discussion. I suspect ye know this.

Tell me how

_Brian wrote: »

Agriculture needs to be proactively getting actual science out there and being first out with the correct articles.

The EAT Lancet report had a major advantage in that on the surface it was from an impartial source when in fact it was a massively biased report. Yet another report completed by vegans, on the topic of eating meat that found in support of veganism - no surprise there.

Why would you trust agriculture to write a balanced and transparent article, but not vegans?

(I'm a meat eater by the way so I am not trying to advocate for the removal of beef or any other meat (maybe liver) from our menus.

_Brian

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Fruit juices are treated by the liver the same as coke, pure sugar and no fibre...so that's one major flaw on that triangle

The advice with the pyramid is juice should make up no more than 1 of your recommended servings of F&V a day so it shouldnt be a problem..


Its far from the same thing as coke as it retains some of the fibre and its not a hyper processed drink either..

_Brian

Tell me how wrote: »

Why would you trust agriculture to write a balanced and transparent article, but not vegans?

(I'm a meat eater by the way so I am not trying to advocate for the removal of beef or any other meat (maybe liver) from our menus.

I referenced actual science, and not the makey uppy stuff that the vegan movment are peddaling.


The professional scientists and irish registered dieticians are promoting a varied diet including meat and dairy. This is "actual science".


The truth is fossil fuels emit something like 9 times the CO2 than all agriculture does.. Recent reports all signal that appropriate animal farming has a major role to play in climat change mitigation.



Vegans only real angle is their emotional weakness to animal famring, they are promoting an abnormal lifestyle that is both unsustsainable and unacheivable on a scale other than a statistically small group.

Balf

_Brian wrote: »

The truth is fossil fuels emit something like 9 times the CO2 than all agriculture does.. Recent reports all signal that appropriate animal farming has a major role to play in climat change mitigation.

This is quite disingenuous, and reflects the defensive attitude that hampers progress. I suspect you know that its not all about CO2, and progress on the climate agenda would require a large change in direction in the sector.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Balf wrote: »

This is quite disingenuous, and reflects the defensive attitude that hampers progress. I suspect you know that its not all about CO2, and progress on the climate agenda would require a large change in direction in the sector.

Actually, it is all about CO2.

The levels of CO2 have risen above 415ppm, with a steady rise since the start of the age of fossil fuels.

The methane blame game is outside farmers remit. Agricultural CH4 emissions have remained steady for decades and, despite certain sectors deep need to blame farmers for the rise in CH4 emissions, methane rises in the atmosphere has been traced directly to the fracking of 'clean' gas mainly for use in the non Agricultural sector.

But I suspect you know this already as it's not exactly being hidden from mainstream media but sometimes people have to get up off their ass and look for information instead of waiting for it to be spoonfed to them all the time.

Balf

Buford T. Justice VI wrote: »

Actually, it is all about CO2. .

No, and you can't flick between global statistics and the specific features of the Irish situation.

patsy_mccabe

All this alarm about CO2 going over 400ppm in the atmosphere. Fossil records reveal that atmospheric CO2 levels around 600 million years ago were about 7,000 parts per million, compared with 379 ppm in 2005.

Tell me how

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

All this alarm about CO2 going over 400ppm in the atmosphere. Fossil records reveal that atmospheric CO2 levels around 600 million years ago were about 7,000 parts per million, compared with 379 ppm in 2005.

Will you ring the IPCC and/or NASA and tell them that. They obviously either don't know or seem to think that life on earth from 600M years ago is not really comparable to how it is now and particularly in the case of the human species.

You can set them straight.

patsy_mccabe

Tell me how wrote: »

Will you ring the IPCC and/or NASA and tell them that. They obviously either don't know or seem to think that life on earth from 600M years ago is not really comparable to how it is now and particularly in the case of the human species.

You can set them straight.

I've been on to them already, but they told me to stop ringing. If CO2 is good enough for plants, it's good enough for me. :rolleyes:

Buford T. Justice XIX

Balf wrote: »

No, and you can't flick between global statistics and the specific features of the Irish situation.

And which parts of the Irish situation are outside the global statistics?

tipptom

_Brian wrote: »

Youngest is in 5th class and they had a climate change assignment.
Rural school but probably only 50% are farming families.

A number of kids got up and spoke about how animal farming is destroying the planet and needs to stop to save the world.

It’s like the “drink Guinness for iron” slogan, if enough people repeat a lie long enough then it becomes accepted as a truth and impossible to rebuff. The iron thing in Guinness was actually an error and a decimal place incorrectly recorded it as having 10x the actual iron content.

Good marketing id say rather than a "mistake",was practically a doctors must recommendation for pregnant women going back a few decades.

Balf

Buford T. Justice VI wrote: »

And which parts of the Irish situation are outside the global statistics?

I suspect you know the question is more "what is the sectoral breakdown of the Irish contribution to the global issue, with particular attention to ETS and non-ETS emissions?"

But if you don't want to be helped, I'll make my excuses and go.

Panch18

Balf wrote: »

I suspect you know the question is more "what is the sectoral breakdown of the Irish contribution to the global issue, with particular attention to ETS and non-ETS emissions?"

But if you don't want to be helped, I'll make my excuses and go.

I don’t think anybody on here needs or wants your “help”

So maybe best to take your own advice and go

Balf

Unwanted, certainly.

_Brian

Balf wrote: »

I'll make my excuses and go.

I bet this is yet another empty promise I see in posts on boards.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Balf wrote: »

I suspect you know the question is more "what is the sectoral breakdown of the Irish contribution to the global issue, with particular attention to ETS and non-ETS emissions?"

But if you don't want to be helped, I'll make my excuses and go.

I'm assuming you're referring to the headline rate of Irish Ag emissions at 30% of Irelands emissions. Which is true, up to a point.

Taking into account that those figures used for Ag emissions are gross figures being compared with Net emissions from other sectors in that table gives a different perspective on the wailing about Ag emissions.

Especially when you consider that Ag is the single biggest consumer of CO2 in the state, in fact, the ONLY consumer of note of CO2 in the state. So the relative appropriation of emissions being headlined is a gross and misleading figure for Ag.

Indeed, the only sequestration of carbon being undertaken presently is in Ag in its soils and, funnily enough, it's the only sequestration method currently that can be rolled out in time to mitigate the worst of the rest of societies addiction to a fossil fuel propelled lifestyle that will have to be faced up to sooner rather than later.

You're welcome.

gozunda

Balf wrote: »

I suspect you know the question is more "what is the sectoral breakdown of the Irish contribution to the global issue, with particular attention to ETS and non-ETS emissions?"

But if you don't want to be helped, I'll make my excuses and go.

Why - are you finding the official figures difficult to understand?

According to the SEAI who give a detailed breakdown of ETS and non ETS emission sources - the consumption of energy accounts "for 60% of Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2017. With Transport, residential and industry accounted for the highest shares"

"Transport is by far the largest source of energy-related CO2 emissions in Ireland. In 2017 it was responsible for 39%. It is also the sector where CO2 emissions are growing the fastest."

https://www.seai.ie/data-and-insights/seai-statistics/key-statistics/co2/