No, I think your bias towards crop farming is reading more importance into the part of my comment that is actually the least important part to me. The most important part to me is the health benefits my diet provides me. The least important part to me is the environmental impact of producing those components of the diet that I eat.

If I was a vegan, and the vegan diet resulted in health benefits for me, but vegan agriculture processes had more environmental impact, I would still eat vegan…because what is most important to me is the health benefit I am receiving.

In this case I eat keto and receive health benefits from that diet that I am unwilling to give up just to satisfy the dogmatism of environmentalists who have a problem with pastoral farming.

Fair, makes sense, I understand your thinking now.

My response is that one person's dogmatism is another person's recognition of genocide. But I do understand that when you perceive that your life is at stake, the fate of rest of the world may not matter so much to you anymore.

> you perceive that your life is at stake, the fate of rest of the world may not matter so much to you anymore.

This little underhanded slap is hilarious. I love it how you folks always try to frame things in “a single person is responsible for the entire apocalypse” terms. Frankly, it’s why your argument struggles. You devolve into ridiculous moral absolutism.

Considering that conservatively almost 90% of the people on this earth eat meat, I’m pretty sure that any global catastrophe that may or may not arise from meat consumption will not fall solely at my feet.

And that's why these sorts of catastrophes occur. "Everyone else is doing something bad, so why should I stop?"

From my vantage point a catastrophe has not yet occurred and may not occur. What we have are a bunch of apocalyptic predictions from a tiny group of zealous people trying to force a behavior on a very large group of people.

Sounds too much like religion to me.