• commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    LCA studies are custom built for each product comparison. by combining multiple LCA studies that have desperate methodology, they have muddied the results. none of this is reliable. it’s not good science.

    • rjwilliamson@lemmy.zipBanned from community
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      They use someone else’s LCA methodology. It honestly sounds like you are just making shit up. Maybe try skimming a bit more thoroughly?

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            17 days ago

            so you say, but i had to explain the issue with the LCA data to you, so i don’t believe you.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                17 days ago

                your claim that livestock are a problem was supported by a dubious study. pointing out its inability to actually support that claim is highly relevant.

        • rjwilliamson@lemmy.zipBanned from community
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          It’s really quite irrelevant to the overall point I was making, and was one of several studies that puts the estimate for animal agriculture between 10-20%. Anything else you would like to nitpick about that is irrelevant to the actual discussion?