Cow Gas
- Thread starter dun
- Start date
MissouriExile
Well-known member
dun":wzugcqvs said:
With all due respect Dun; What is the individuals agenda?
All of these facts are data that we need to consider in an effort to understand the world around us and how is it changing.
I don't advocate any radical steps be taken to address any of these issues but to deny what 99% of scientists are saying because one guy says not doesn't seem wise. This cow manure crap is old news, I heard the exact same story 25 years ago. My ex-father-in-law (an engineer) told me that grass clippings decomposing produce more CO2 than all the cars combined. The same about the swamp gas.
There are all kinds of "agendas" simmering out there, some of them very powerful. I, for one, don't want to be stampeded by any of them on either side.
Jon
backhoeboogie
Well-known member
Jim62":1rnjw86c said:
Yep. Then there was the Y2K scare. Cost Corps billions. People were running out and buying up generators, stocking up food all sorts of things. "The computer chip in the car is going to fail too..."
ALX.
Well-known member
backhoeboogie":3e511cq8 said:
As much as I hope backhoe and Jim are right, I don't think we will be laughing about this in 5 years.
Along with the tree huggers and animal rights terrorists there is a 3rd group making their play - medical associations.
There are already recently enacted laws prohibiting the sale of certain foods ( goose liver in Illinois for one ?? ).
The good old doctors are also pushing our feds to enact laws restriciting the fat content of foods!!
Remember the tobacco industry? Once they start gaining ground painting us as poison purveyors it is going to get tough.
We as an industry are much too quiet about how healthy a food choice beef is.
MissouriExile":1xvdn0ar said:
He is just one of many, but since the opinion isn;t popular he's assigned the label fo a being a nut.
I'm sure that humans have had some affect on the earth and the atmosphere and all that goes with it. But to claim that a good share of it isn;t just the earth doing it's thing, which it does periodically, is just one of the many agendas. There's money in the sky is falling community, just as there is in the "rat is a dog is a child" community.
99% of scientists??? I offered reading about this issue and obviously nobody is interested. Let me make it easier with another quote:
In identifying the burning of fossil fuels as the chief cause of warming today, many politicians and environmental activists simply appeal to a so-called “scientific consensus.†There are two things wrong with this. First, there is no such consensus: An increasing number of climate scientists are raising serious questions about the political rush to judgment on this issue.
For example, the widely touted “consensus†of 2,500 scientists on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is an illusion: Most of the panelists have no scientific qualifications, and many of the others object to some part of the IPCC’s report. The Associated Press reported recently that only 52 climate scientists contributed to the report’s “Summary for Policymakers.â€
Likewise, only about a dozen members of the governing board voted on the “consensus statement†on climate change by the American Meteorological Society (AMS). Rank and file AMS scientists never had a say, which is why so many of them are now openly rebelling. Estimates of skepticism within the AMS regarding man-made global warming are well over 50 percent.
The second reason not to rely on a “scientific consensus†in these matters is that this is not how science works. After all, scientific advances customarily come from a minority of scientists who challenge the majority view—or even just a single person (think of Galileo or Einstein). Science proceeds by the scientific method and draws conclusions based on evidence, not on a show of hands.
Snider_Angus
Well-known member
Have you ever heard of Ron White's story about Cow Flatulence?
He had a friend that moved to L.A and after 2 months he didnt recognize him anymore. he had turned into a vegetarian while living in L.A. Ron asked him why he was a vegetarian and he couldn't give him a good reason. All he said was that the production of cattle was infesting the air with methane and by not eating the cow he was saving the environment. He asked Ron what HE was doing to help the environment and Ron told him that he was eating the COW!!! Here's YOUR SIGN Vegetarians!!
He had a friend that moved to L.A and after 2 months he didnt recognize him anymore. he had turned into a vegetarian while living in L.A. Ron asked him why he was a vegetarian and he couldn't give him a good reason. All he said was that the production of cattle was infesting the air with methane and by not eating the cow he was saving the environment. He asked Ron what HE was doing to help the environment and Ron told him that he was eating the COW!!! Here's YOUR SIGN Vegetarians!!
backhoeboogie
Well-known member
Snider_Angus":2un0ehu2 said:
Forgot about that one but it is a good one.
One scientist states that destroying the ozone layer will cause more lightening storms which created the ozone in the first place.
The earth was tropical (warmer) before the dinosaurs were killed by the meteor.
I don't like polution. I don't like trash on the road, trash on my property, or trash anywhere. Polution of any kind is bad. I don't think we should fail stupid.
I don't think we should listen to Chicken Little every time he rears his ugly head. We'll get through this just like we got through Y2K scares. But what next? Y3K is way to far off to get folks to panic just yet.
DiamondSCattleCo
Well-known member
When the first 'Cows are destroying the earth' article was released a few years back, I was writing for the Outdoor Recreation Network as a freelance writer. This was my response that article. Oddly enough, none of the environmentalist groups picked it up for their own magazines and websites:
Emissions Control - The Cowboy Way
We here at The Cowboy Way owe you city slickers an apology.
For years now, we've accused y'all of destroying the environment with your fuel hungry, CO2 producing SUVs and pick'em up trucks that never have a load in the back. According to the "Latest Scientific Evidence", it appears as though its actually our cows that are wreaking havoc upon the climate of good ol' Mother Earth.
And even further, apparently its a crying shame, as these emissions could be easily controlled or reduced to neglible levels.
So what can we do to help? We want to make amends for the destructive powers of our bovine buddies.
We see cow belches are a primary source of methane. Do we have to bring them in three times daily and brush their teeth? Will this help, or will it simply mask the methane smell and make the ranch smell Crest Winter Fresh all year round? Does anyone know if the makers of Crest would be willing to donate several thousand giant tubes of toothpaste, and a few hundred AA batteries for our electric toothbrushes?
Perhaps we need to talk to that Gene Simmons guy. Find out how he ignited the gas in his mouth, and install the gizmo on all our cows? Will burnt methane be as destructive to our fragile environment as raw methane? Maybe, however it would certainly lend a new credibility to the term 'rotten fire-breathing SOB of a cow'.
Well, perhaps we can't control the ozone destroying excretions from the front end of the cow, so maybe we should be turning to the backsides for our answers.
We don't know how many of you have worked with cattle, but working the backside of a cow is always frought with danger. So whatever we come up with for a solution must be safe for the poor cowboys who will be using the devices.
Perhaps a rubber balloon tied to the backside of the animal that collects the destructive farts? It wouldn't be too bad to install, as long as you had a good horse and rope. Make sure its large enough that it would only have to changed once a week or so. Then we could sell the collected methane to some cash strapped oil and gas company. Would we need licenses to sell the gas? Since oil and gas reserves under the top 6 inches of soil are considered mineral deposits, and as such, do not belong to the land owner, would we then need to buy "air rights" to the methane collected from the animals who reside _above_ the top 6 inches of soil? Since methane is obviously lighter than air, how much could we store in a balloon before good ol' #69 simply takes flight?
Guess our fences will need to be made higher. The neighbors would likely take offense to Freddy the Bull floating past their windows and peering in to see whats for supper.
He always seems a little more gassy than other critters on the ranch.
Or, if we find out that burnt methane isn't near as destructive to the environment, perhaps we could install the Gene Simmons device on the tail end of the cow too? Certainly be easier than changing balloons once a week. Pulling a calf in the spring would be a little more exciting though. Oh well, we really didn't need those eyebrows anyway. And on a cold day, a little heat during the calving process may help the little fella get a quick start.
Since our critters are chief causes of the apocalypse, we can't help but think that other animals are equally destructive. Take a bear for example. Many bears are every bit as large as one of our cows, especially polar bears. There are some real monsters up north. Shouldn't we be looking at controlling their farts as well?
Since it would be difficult to change the methane balloons on a wild bear, we suspect we'll have to jump to using the KISS device immediately (barring, of course, no protests from the knowledgeable scientific community about uncontrolled burning of methane gas). We're not sure how we'll get an igniter stuffed up the butt of a polar bear, but we're willing to give it go if someone else is willing to try and cram one down its throat.
Hmmmm, perhaps the Ignito-Cow device wouldn't be such a great idea for use on polar bears. If we have all these polar bears roaring around, spitting and excreting fire, wouldn't that increase the average temperature in NukTayYukTuk, perhaps increasing the rate that the polar ice caps are melting, causing even more destruction to an already beaten environment?
We're sorry y'all. We just can't think of a single way to make amends for the damage the Diamond S Cattle Co. has caused.
Perhaps one of these ultra-knowledgeable scientists would be able to help us out a bit? After all, 600 years ago, global warming wasn't even a twinkle in Merlin The Wizard's eye, even though there were literally MILLIONS more animals walking the face of the earth. Since todays scientists have been able to figure out that we're doing more damage with fewer animals, we're sure finding a way to control bovine emissions would be childs play to one of these rocket scientists.
Rod
Emissions Control - The Cowboy Way
We here at The Cowboy Way owe you city slickers an apology.
For years now, we've accused y'all of destroying the environment with your fuel hungry, CO2 producing SUVs and pick'em up trucks that never have a load in the back. According to the "Latest Scientific Evidence", it appears as though its actually our cows that are wreaking havoc upon the climate of good ol' Mother Earth.
And even further, apparently its a crying shame, as these emissions could be easily controlled or reduced to neglible levels.
So what can we do to help? We want to make amends for the destructive powers of our bovine buddies.
We see cow belches are a primary source of methane. Do we have to bring them in three times daily and brush their teeth? Will this help, or will it simply mask the methane smell and make the ranch smell Crest Winter Fresh all year round? Does anyone know if the makers of Crest would be willing to donate several thousand giant tubes of toothpaste, and a few hundred AA batteries for our electric toothbrushes?
Perhaps we need to talk to that Gene Simmons guy. Find out how he ignited the gas in his mouth, and install the gizmo on all our cows? Will burnt methane be as destructive to our fragile environment as raw methane? Maybe, however it would certainly lend a new credibility to the term 'rotten fire-breathing SOB of a cow'.
Well, perhaps we can't control the ozone destroying excretions from the front end of the cow, so maybe we should be turning to the backsides for our answers.
We don't know how many of you have worked with cattle, but working the backside of a cow is always frought with danger. So whatever we come up with for a solution must be safe for the poor cowboys who will be using the devices.
Perhaps a rubber balloon tied to the backside of the animal that collects the destructive farts? It wouldn't be too bad to install, as long as you had a good horse and rope. Make sure its large enough that it would only have to changed once a week or so. Then we could sell the collected methane to some cash strapped oil and gas company. Would we need licenses to sell the gas? Since oil and gas reserves under the top 6 inches of soil are considered mineral deposits, and as such, do not belong to the land owner, would we then need to buy "air rights" to the methane collected from the animals who reside _above_ the top 6 inches of soil? Since methane is obviously lighter than air, how much could we store in a balloon before good ol' #69 simply takes flight?
Guess our fences will need to be made higher. The neighbors would likely take offense to Freddy the Bull floating past their windows and peering in to see whats for supper.
He always seems a little more gassy than other critters on the ranch.
Or, if we find out that burnt methane isn't near as destructive to the environment, perhaps we could install the Gene Simmons device on the tail end of the cow too? Certainly be easier than changing balloons once a week. Pulling a calf in the spring would be a little more exciting though. Oh well, we really didn't need those eyebrows anyway. And on a cold day, a little heat during the calving process may help the little fella get a quick start.
Since our critters are chief causes of the apocalypse, we can't help but think that other animals are equally destructive. Take a bear for example. Many bears are every bit as large as one of our cows, especially polar bears. There are some real monsters up north. Shouldn't we be looking at controlling their farts as well?
Since it would be difficult to change the methane balloons on a wild bear, we suspect we'll have to jump to using the KISS device immediately (barring, of course, no protests from the knowledgeable scientific community about uncontrolled burning of methane gas). We're not sure how we'll get an igniter stuffed up the butt of a polar bear, but we're willing to give it go if someone else is willing to try and cram one down its throat.
Hmmmm, perhaps the Ignito-Cow device wouldn't be such a great idea for use on polar bears. If we have all these polar bears roaring around, spitting and excreting fire, wouldn't that increase the average temperature in NukTayYukTuk, perhaps increasing the rate that the polar ice caps are melting, causing even more destruction to an already beaten environment?
We're sorry y'all. We just can't think of a single way to make amends for the damage the Diamond S Cattle Co. has caused.
Perhaps one of these ultra-knowledgeable scientists would be able to help us out a bit? After all, 600 years ago, global warming wasn't even a twinkle in Merlin The Wizard's eye, even though there were literally MILLIONS more animals walking the face of the earth. Since todays scientists have been able to figure out that we're doing more damage with fewer animals, we're sure finding a way to control bovine emissions would be childs play to one of these rocket scientists.
Rod
