this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2026
-6 points (28.6% liked)

Friendly Carnivore

109 readers
18 users here now

Carnivore

The ultimate, zero carb, elimination diet

Meat Heals.

We are focused on health and lifestyle while trying to eat zero carb bioavailable foods.

Keep being AWESOME

We welcome engaged, polite, and logical debates and questions of any type

Purpose

Rules

  1. Be nice
  2. Stay on topic
  3. Don't farm rage
  4. Be respectful of other diets, choices, lifestyles!!!!
  5. No Blanket down voting - If you only come to this community to downvote its the wrong community for you
  6. No LLM generated posts . Don't represent machine output as your own, and don't use machines to burn human response time.

Other terms: LCHF Carnivore, Keto Carnivore, Ketogenic Carnivore, Low Carb Carnivore, Zero Carb Carnivore, Animal Based Diet, Animal Sourced Foods

Meta

Carnivore Resource List

If you need to block this community and the UI won't let you, go to settings -> blocks you can add it.

[Meta] Moderation Policy for Niche Communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
pulsejet@discuss.online
jet@hackertalks.com
psud@aussie.zone
xep@fedia.io
remote_debugging@programming.dev
xep@discuss.online
xep@piefed.social
-6
ELI5 - Cows Don't Pollute (hackertalks.com)
submitted 6 days ago by jet@hackertalks.com to c/carnivore@discuss.online
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Explained like I'm 5 - Cows don't pollute

A. Cows don't create carbon, they perform neither nuclear fission or nuclear fusion. They can't create elements.

B. Everything that comes out of a cow, must have gone into the cow.

C. Grass grows using carbon from the environment.

D. Cows eat grass, because they are a ruminant.

E. All the gas that comes out of a cow went into the cow as grass.

F. Therefore all the carbon that come out of a cow first has to be captured by grass to go into the cow.

G. Cows are part of a natural biocycle, they do not create pollution.

H. If cows don't eat the grass something will - animals, fire, microbes, and the biocycle will continue.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] username_1@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 6 days ago (2 children)

By this logic steam engines are good too: firewood -- engine -- atmosphere -- firewood again.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 5 days ago

Yes, but fire also produces particulate pollution

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 2 points 6 days ago

from the perspective of renewable energy - yes, if you only burn wood that just grew and you find a steady state (i.e. you only burn what grew that year).. yeah, it's sustainable.

air quality and human lung issues don't encourage consistent burning in places where people live, but yeah forest fires happen, so the cycle is sound. The fuel will be used by animals, microbes, or fire.