PF,

I’ve answered your questions.  How about responding to this one?

Ask local farmers how much land they need to pasture raise cows, chickens, and pigs.  Then run some calcualations about how much land we would need to feed the 230,000 people Buncombe County. 

We have 656 square miles in the County, and there are 640 acres to a square mile.  So we have just under 420,000 acres,  which is less than 2 acres per person.  Do the math, and tell me if it’s possible fore everyone to eating local, pasture-raised meat.  Which was the entire point of my commentary.

I look forward to your answer.

“Stewart, when you are able to source the majority of your ‘vegan’ diet from ‘local sources’, all produced without ANY input from animals whatsoever, let me know.

In the meantime, i’ll continue to eat eggs from the coop 100 feet from my house. “

So you only eat food grown/raised and processed locally?  No oils, sugars, flour, chocolates, shipped in from elsewhere?  When you eat out you grill the server on the source of every component of your meal?

I find this terribly hard to believe, and therefore I fail to see the point of your comment.

Also, just because it is currently IMPOSSIBLE for a person to guarantee no animal “input” was involved in their diet, no matter how carefully planned and researched it was, doesn’t mean that a person arguing in favor of a 100% animal-free diet has any less of a valid argument…

I think it’s safe to assume that “local plant-based diet” or “local meat diet” insinuates eating locally WHEN POSSIBLE, and striving to choose local over non-local… as opposed to eating STRICTLY local foods and refusing anything non-local… which, while certainly an impressive feat, is also pretty much impossible for most people today, I think.

Sarah Palin pulled a Sanford (read cuckoo) and the tea party movement is falling flat: http://washingtonindependent.com/49616/tea-party-movement-loses-steam

A very bad week for the GOP :^)

Sorry if it sounded like I was singling you out for using that term (PFKaP), that wasn’t my intention. I don’t think anyone is terrible for using the term because it has worked its way into the popular lexicon, so most people have used it at one time or another. I just think we would all be better off without the term because of the aforementioned reasons.

Ah, so you kill for pleasure.  That explains your aversion to science and unwillingness to do math!

Thanks, Velouria.  The Carnegie Mellon University study was pretty amazing!  If only people would pay more attention to science.