Ok man. Since you proved you are incapable of checking a website on your own I will do it to help you somehow stop this long ass thread:
Fact: Animal agriculture is responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, more than the combined exhaust from all transportation.
Source: "Livestock's Long Shadow: environmental issues and options". Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome 2006"
...

.... my points far better than I ever could. But you refuse to acknowledge that and furthermore claim that I think I am superior. I even conceided and said I give up you watch them or not check my sources or not, and I wished for you to have fun. But you refuse to see my point. I acknowledged your point at the beginning. I said yes you are correct. Everything we do may have a negative impact. But the important part is the "effect size". But you seem not able to grasp this simple point. Yes uranium waste is dangerous but drunk driving is "more" dangerous. Can't you understand that? Going into space is more dangerous but cancer ismore impactful and therefore more dangerous. This is simple math that you refuse to allow into your brain. I have to mention I always like your comments on the site but here you are "WRONG".

Oh my god just stop it with your inferiority complex. Come on man be a little realistic. Your argument is ill-defined and ill-structured. You write so much that you are lost in your own writing. The point I am making is that you are wrong that eating plants is as devastating as eating meat. Nuclear waste has nothing to do with your argument or mine. Suffice it to say it is not a huge problem compared to raising cattle. I referred you to a documentary with documentation and not a movie. This documentary is a combination of various studies. You can check its website and see the papers and publications. If anyone reads your rants, it is abundantly clear that I have provided a source for my facts while you didn't and haven't. So I am in a bubble of my reality while I provided a source for my claim positing that you are wrong, and you are right because I think I am omnipotent. As a matter of fact, I indicated that I am not omnipotent and omniscient by providing a source which explains...

Ok man I tried. Don't watch them. Have fun

and there is the line, we are human beings and we have an impact on our environment. This doesn't mean we can do anything we want. What is this way of thinking? All you say is that agriculture (plants) have impact. I know they have impacts. I am not stupid. We have an impact. But there is the important point on this line of yours and it is called "scale". Look at the scale and extent of the impact. We can compare the impacts plants and cattle have on the planet. This is the simplest of ways for explaining our argument.

I practically didn't get any of this. What are you talking about? what is my "smug superiority"? I am not superior to you or anybody, and I don't feel that way and I don't want anybody to think that. I am just saying your facts ARE wrong. You say nuclear waste is more important than meat eating and that's not true. It shows you don't know the full picture and that doesn't mean you are inferior or anything. You are just wrong. There is no shame in that. People can be wrong but they have to be searching for the right thing. You do your part is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in my life and I hate that phrase with passion. What does that even mean. Imagine we are in a boat which is sinking because water penetrated it. I started pouring the water out and "do my part" but it doesn't matter when others don't do their "part". Do you see how absurd that kind of thinking is?

Maybe arguing with me brings something good to your life. Just saying

I know what you are saying for the hundtedth time. But your facts are still wrong. Of course there are disadvantages for agriculture (of plants) but they are neglible compared to meat production. They are not negligble per se just negligble compare to raising cattle. Just go an watch those documantaries. The sources for any claims in the documentaries are in their corresponding websites. I get facts and don't care where they come from as long as they are facts. You again assume my ignorance, but I assure you this is not the case. I mocked vegetarians in my mind for a long time and just watched these documentaries about three months ago. I fact checked them and I am sure they will be useful in illuminating my points. Don't just count it as my misguided ignorance. Just go watch them.

I recommend watching "cowspiracy" or any other documentary by Kip Andersen so we can be on the same page if you want to argue based on facts and not fiction.

That's just amazing. I see what are you trying to say but to quote you I reject your premise. I can't argue with you since your view is completely wrong and it's based on wrong presumptions and assumptions. But I have to point to a number of things. First of all, you knowwhat I mean. Why are you resorting to abstracton to prove me wrong. That's stupid. Secondly, you don't even know the impacts of meat eating, so I don't want to argue with that. You believe mass agriculture (I presume you mean eating plants and not in the sense people use it to talk about farming animals) impacts us as much as farming (meaning raising cattle and agriculture for feeding cattle) and that's laughable. Don't want to be rude but I think you have to check your stats man. That's so stupid it makes you seem like a flat earther. Instead of writing this long ass reply, you better get your facts straight.

I agree with all you said except the last sentence. Meat eating is killing the planet and us with it. So it's an awfully important issue.

Smart

Your mistake is kind of funny. Bismillah is Arabic meaning in the name of god, sometimes used by Muslims to show surprise: they say Bismillah showing their astonishment at someone who wants to be allowed to go after what he did. Mistaking Bismillah for a zoroasterian (god) is so wrong on multiple levels. First, Zoroastrianism is not a pagan religion and there is only one god in it (Ahura Mazda) and its followers were killed and raped by early Muslims. So what even

thanks

Sorry but it has gone to shit anyway. So bring a woman don't bring a woman who cares

I actually think the majority of the us is like that. Just the news channels want to make that advertisement money

It seems you are not capable of understanding what I am saying. I am asking a simple question: how can anyone say where you got a paper or book or any reference to use in your paper. I know it is not ethical and an author down the comments suggested contacting the corresponding author or authors of a paper to get a free copy. Granted, it is unethical to download a paper without paying, but the question still remains. How are they going to find out? They can't and won't. And you don't seem to understand it.

What are you talking about? It's not an avengers trailer. There is only the publiched version of the paper. What sort of papers are YOU writing? You can search any paper using its doi, you can download the citing in any format you want. What are you even talking about?

They are bereft of life, they went to meet their makers

That doesn't seem plausible. How can they find if you paid for a paper or not. That's not the way anything works.

What does that mean?