Raw LLM Responses

Some crops sure, but if multiple sources (which I've linked to) say that cattle ranching is the greatest cause of deforestation, and you don't actually offer any evidence, just your personal assertion, then I dunno what to tell you. I'm going to have to see some evidence before you change my mind. > Ranching is vastly better than cropping. Evidence? To my knowledge you have it backwards, since livestock create a whole host of environmental problems, like [soil degradation and erosion](https://crops.extension.iastate.edu/encyclopedia/managing-your-pasture-reduce-soil-erosion), [drink places dry](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/03/burger-water-shortages-colorado-river-western-us/) since [livestock have far greater water requirements than crops](https://waterfootprint.org/en/water-footprint/product-water-footprint/water-footprint-crop-and-animal-products/), and [produce more green house gasses than factory farmed cattle](https://awellfedworld.org/issues/climate-issues/grass-fed-beef/). > Despite this ranching is vastly more sustainable Sorry... What *is* ranching more sustainable than? I'm genuinely curious. Especially if you've got any studies on the topic, because to my knowledge ranching is one of the least sustainable forms of farming that humans engage in. > and conflating the most extreme example from NOT Australia is deceitful. I had to read that a couple of times to realize what you were upset about. So just to clarify my intentions. Multiple papers have been written linking the meat industry to the problems on America's coasts, so it's easy for me to find articles and papers written in English when I look that example up. However, I don't feel like this is a form of deception because (lets totally ignore the part where I was upfront and even labeled my link as being specific to the USA and not Australia) these dead zones are multiplying and expanding all over the planet, at the same time that factory farms and deforestation to c