My only problem is that I fear that despite being a "nerd"/scientist, he is still being somewhat politically correct. My main example is that the FAO says 18% of all global warming causing emissions are from animal agriculture, which is greater than the entire transportation sector (cars, trains, planes, and ships). As if that wasn't enough, the Worldwatch Institute recently published a report saying that taking into account a life cycle analysis, animal agriculture is responsible for 51% of greenhouse gas emissions...http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTMhttp://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20an ...Disclaimer: My only problem with the WWI report is that it seems to imply that if you don't eat meat you have to eat fake meat. This couldn't be farther from the truth... but either way, that doesn't affect the statistics.Please remind me again why we are talking about far-fetched ideas that will cost billions of dollars when we could just eat less meat... Seriously, I'm not trying to push any vegetarian/vegan agenda or anything like that... The science is clear. Why isn't it being talked about? I realize I'll probably get buried into oblivion and someone will say some ***** about bacon or something.