Friday, August 31, 2007

PeTA attacks Gore on meat; then called out by astute blogger for their half-truths

First, let me apologize to readers for the lack of posts in the past couple of weeks. Sometimes the demands of everyday life, such as a more intense than usual work schedule, can leave you a little ragged. Hopefully, I'll have a little more time on my hands here real soon.

According to this report in The New York Times, PeTA is now attacking former Vice-President and global warming crusader Al Gore for being a meat eater. PeTA claims that Gore's carnivorous habits cost him credibility on environmental issues. I thought the fact that Gore travels the globe in private jets and owns a home that uses more electricity in a month that many average Americans use in a year, had already sufficiently discredited him, but I digress. In their criticism of Gore, PeTA cites a U.N. report that claims that the livestock industry produces more "greenhouse gas" emissions than all forms of transportation combined. PeTA uses this report as ammunition for its argument that Gore, as well as the rest of us, ought to become vegan so that we can, to use a vapid cliche, "save the planet". Well, it turns out that PeTA either is intentionally not telling the whole story about the U.N. report they cite, or they cannot read ( I leave it to you to decide which is more likely ). An astute blogger has pointed out on his blog that PeTA isn't telling the full story about the U.N. report. It turns out that what PeTA isn't telling the public is that the report makes no recommendation that people "go vegan" or cut animal products from their diet. What it does do is make suggestions to the livestock industry on how to cut and better manage its emissions. What PeTA has done here is only tell half the truth, and as the old saying goes, the best lies are always half true. Kudos to Eric at The Observation Deck and to the Center for Consumer Freedom for pointing this out.


Anonymous said...

The Center for Consumer Freedom is a propaganda outlet for the food industry. This site has some good reasons for going Vegitarian:

Grizzly Bear said...

"The Center for Consumer Freedom is a propaganda outlet for the food industry."

I think most of us know where much of their support comes from. But so what? That does make what they linked to untrue, now does it? Nor does it make their message of personal freedom of choice and personal responsibility invalid now does it?

"This site has some good reasons for going Vegitarian ( sic ):"

I have visited the site you refer to, and have watched the "Meat your Meat" video multiple times. It has yet to convert me to vegetarianism. Nor will it ever, so you can spare us your evangelism. The site and video to which you refer is a product of PeTA. You accuse CCF of being a "propaganda outlet", but somehow you want me to believe that PeTA is not? Surely you jest! Instead of offering up these red herrings, would you care to actually address the fact that PeTA is not being intellectually honest in regards to the U.N. report? Let me know when you do.

Anonymous said...

Even though the UN report may not specifically ask people to go vegan to help "save the world" it doesn't take a genius to figure that if we ate less meat, or no meat at all, that less animals would be used in factory farming. And seeing as factory farming is a massive contributor to global warming eating less or no meat can only help to lesson our enviromental impact. PeTA is just pointing out the obvious.

Grizzly Bear said...

Sorry anonymous, but you're dodging the issue. The ever more dubious nature of the science of human induced climate change completely aside, the fact is PeTA was not completely intellectually honest about what was contained in the report. They cherry-picked what they wanted and left out what didn't happen to be ideologically advantageous to them. That's dishonesty and it makes them look less than credible.