“Cattle is very energy-consuming and energy-expensive,” Yang said. “And if you project forward on what we would need to do to reduce emissions, you would want to modify Americans’ diets over time.” He admitted it would be difficult for the government to dictate diets (well except for the Obamacare bill), so he suggested cattle producers “internalize the cost of emissions” to make meat more expensive. “So then, what that would naturally do, and some people are going to hate this, but it would probably make those products more expensive,” he explained. “And that is appropriate because there is a cost to producing food in that way. And so if you were to make it more expensive, then you would end up changing consumption patterns.”
Psychologists Jared Piazza and Neil McLatchie of England’s Lancaster University declare there is nothing unethical or unreasonable about the practice. The problem with cannibalism is people’s attitudes since they are often “overridden by our feelings of repulsion and disgust.” The reasoning behind the outlandish conclusion reveals the atheistic premises of the authors and the scientific establishment.
The main title of the Newsweek article says it all: “Cannibalism is common in the animal kingdom.” Thus, there is no logical reason why it should not be allowed for humans. Living creatures from spadefoot tadpoles, praying mantises, chimpanzees to lions cannibalize their own. The human is just another animal like all others.
"Some philosophers have argued that burying the dead could be wasteful in the context of the fight against world hunger—but there are much more palatable alternatives on the table than a haunch of human. We can shift to eating more plants and less meat to conserve resources lost by feeding plants directly to livestock. Insects can meet our protein needs, and there is the prospect of cultured meat technology."