@fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish • 1 month agoIt's just loss.mander.xyzimagemessage-square204fedilinkarrow-up1892arrow-down158
arrow-up1834arrow-down1imageIt's just loss.mander.xyz@fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish • 1 month agomessage-square204fedilink
minus-square@graycube@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish23•1 month agoAre pets livestock, or did they miss a category of mammals? In the US there are more dogs than children.
minus-square@stray@pawb.sociallinkfedilinkEnglish7•1 month agoI believe pets are counted as livestock, but it’s not specifically referenced as far as I have the interest to read. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1711842115
minus-square@hakase@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglish0•1 month agoIt’s intentionally misleading, like most vegan propaganda. It’s by mass, not population.
minus-squareFundMECFSlinkfedilinkEnglish31•1 month agoBiomass is the usual way this sort of data is presented in environmental science. I think calling it “propaganda” is a bit much. But yes if would have been better if that were clear on the infographic.
minus-square@Semjaza@lemmynsfw.comlinkfedilinkEnglish1•1 month agoDo you think this info graphic is more or less worrying if it is numbers of living beings rather than biomass?
Are pets livestock, or did they miss a category of mammals? In the US there are more dogs than children.
I believe pets are counted as livestock, but it’s not specifically referenced as far as I have the interest to read.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1711842115
deleted by creator
It’s intentionally misleading, like most vegan propaganda. It’s by mass, not population.
Biomass is the usual way this sort of data is presented in environmental science. I think calling it “propaganda” is a bit much. But yes if would have been better if that were clear on the infographic.
Do you think this info graphic is more or less worrying if it is numbers of living beings rather than biomass?