There is a lot of misinformation with regards to climate change and those two articles are prime examples. More accurately, and like much of your arguments, incomplete information, lazy research and lots of assumptions.

For example, you just assumed that forest moves more carbon than grasslands. In their book Countdown: The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed to Reverse Global Warming by Paul Hawken and Tom Steyer. They scientifically demonstrate that an acre of grassland, grazed by ruminants sequesters 8.5 tons of carbon per acre per year. Grazing is required as it stimulates root growth. Roots which grow as much as 14ft deep. While an individual tree sequesters 42lbs of carbon/year. In order to make a proper counterpoint to your statements I literally went into my woods and counted trees (62/acre) Real field science.

According to your little app I produce 8.5 tons of carbon per year. Now subtract their calculations for eating meat every day sinceI raise my own -2.5 ton, the 5 acres of regenerative farm I work -42.5 tons and the 5 acres of forest I leave in a natural state on purpose -1.25 ton. Leaving me with a carbon footprint of -37.75 ton per year.

Now, using the US Environmental Protection Agency numbers of 1.5 ton per year per person in waste (referred to as packaging or lifestyle in my earlier notes) I end up with a net carbon footprint of -39.25 ton per year where you end up with a +4 ton.

The point of my debate was not to swing our dicks around and see who has a smaller carbon footprint, nor was it to belittle you. My points are that until we all practice local sourcing and circular economy we are all the problem. It’s not the cow, it’s the way we farm them. How much methane do you produce a year? A natural lifestyle makes a person carbon negative. Think about that next time you drive some place and eat a meal at a restaurant. YOU are the carbon that needs to be reduced.