|
|
|
|
|
by falcolas
1255 days ago
|
|
Thank you. Being honest though, it's sus as fuck, and not just because of the source, or that these are "rough estimates" to use their terms. A simple read through the spreadsheet shows some pretty odd (and significant) discrepancies. A single example: A row with "2500-4999" animals per farm has farm counts and "total animals" that amounts to over 6.5k animals per farm. Also, note that CAFO - the farms we're (legitimately) concerned about - is not based solely on the animal counts†, though that's the only part of the definition that the "Sentience Institute" uses because "the public may consider it bad too". It strikes me as straight up lying with numbers - presenting real numbers in a way which tells the story the institute wants to tell. † "has a manmade ditch or pipe that carries manure or wastewater to surface water; or the animals come into contact with surface water that passes through the area where they’re confined." |
|
Do you mean line #69 (Inventory, Table 14) ?
----------------------------------------------
Animals per farm | Total farms | Total animals
2500 to 4999 ..... | 1,973 ...... | 6,681,843
----------------------------------------------
6681843 / 1973 = 3386 animals per farm
> It strikes me as straight up lying with numbers
Do you have better source ?