You are a fucking moron

You have provided short, confidently incorrect statements with zero citations. I have provided multiple articles with multiple citations each. What “evidence” have you provided exactly?

Ok, now I’m questioning your literacy. From the study:

“Methods To quantify the total food-related GHG emissions, we first estimated the total crop and grazing biomass, including livestock feed, and then partitioned the total biomass between plant- and animal-based food (livestock feed) and other utilizations.  Based on the estimated biomass, we calculated and partitioned the production-based GHG emissions from plant and livestock to plant- and animal-based food and other utilizations. After that, we calculated GHG emissions from the consumption-based perspective, taking into account transportation, international trade (import and export) and stock variation. We estimated the consumption-based emissions to explicitly account for the GHG emissions caused by trade. This was especially important for regions and countries which import and/or export large amounts of plant- and animal-based food in the context of better tracing food systems’ global and regional GHG footprints.”

And it goes in. LCA is mentioned one time, and they mention the single methodology that they used.

Yet you have not given a single shred of evidence to back up the claims

No one combined them. Xu, who you are calling into question, used one LCA methodology.

This you?

“i am more than willing to engage on any positive claim you want to make (i probably agree with a lot of them). what i’m not willing to do is tolerate personal attacks and dogpiling.”

You are very good at saying things that have zero meaning.

You haven’t actually made a single point that is relevant to the discussion.

It also doesn’t make it bad, and you have yet to articulate how it is bad.

Where did they combine LCA methodologies exactly? They cited exactly one LCA methodology, so I’m not sure what you are referencing when you mention “combining”.

I have not had any issue defending it, but you apparently have an issue with providing rigorous citations for your claims.

I do understand the science, and nothing you have said negates my point.

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?

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

Skimming is usually not a great way to make definitive conclusions about a study. Would you care to elaborate on what about the LCA methodology “invalidates all the data”, and how you could make such a claim with certainty simply by skimming it?

What is the issue with the methodology exactly? In any case, the lower end of estimates is still twice the emissions of all of the digital economy. We would do more for climate change going vegan than we would fighting data centers.

I mentioned AI because that is the topic of the thread we are in.

Animal agriculture contributes between 10-20% of total ghg emissions, depending on the estimate.

https://thebreakthrough.org/issues/food-agriculture-environment/livestock-dont-contribute-14-5-of-global-greenhouse-gas-emissions

The entire digital economy footprint, including AI and all internet infrastructure, is less than 4% of global emissions.

https://www.climatiq.io/blog/measure-greenhouse-gas-emissions-carbon-data-centres-cloud-computing

But sure, AI is the problem we should be focusing on.

Then hire more competent devs or work somewhere else I guess? Why are your company hiring such lazy devs?

You’re vegan too, I presume, since animal agriculture is one of the largest contributors to global warming?

What sort of free for all repo are you maintaining that is just openly accepting slop contributions? Control who is allowed to make submissions based on their adherance to best practices and the problem disappears.