A quick search shows that global c02 emissions are about 35 billion tons.

So the cow farts are a bit less than 8%. That isn't insignificant.

And how much of a dent would reducing cow consumption by 25% make?

You said that cow emissions weren't significant (well, that it was "absolute lunacy").

Two people have provided rough calculations that show they do have a measurable effect.

What's your point?

My point is people should do the math and come to their own reasonable conclusion. Assuming these numbers aren't totally bullshit (see what I did there) this won't move the needle unless we cut out cow consumption 100% and cull all native herd animals.

Me? I think we can probably survive some cow farts as our ancestors who hunted buffalo and burnt down entire ecosystems doing so did. We should focus on the real solutions that will move the needle, like proper human-scale city design and nuclear power.

Knowing they alone account for over 1/20th of the climate change effect though is useful information.

Maybe there are other ways we could reduce their methane emissions short of getting rid of all of them.

I agree that other solutions are needed to properly address climate change though.

There’s a ton we can do before taking food off our children’s table.

I don't think anyone was talking about taking food off children's tables?

Because that's exactly what reducing farming output does.

I don't know enough about this topic but my question is what is the input to the 250-500l cow fart equation. What's being consumed to produce that much methane?

A 2% reduction is absolutely moving the needle.

There is no silver bullet that's going to be a 25% reduction all on its own. The only way to win is a combination of changes each of which reduce emissions by a few percentage points.

Hmm, lets see: 8% * 25% = 2%

You can actually reduce how much methane cows produced by changing their feed by like 80% or something