You already know the subject, animal husbandry. You all know the thesis - that animal husbandry is simply ecologically unsustainable with our current population numbers.

What Cowspiracy does is take one person through a very personal journey to show just how there is only one course of action that will allow this species to have a reasonable chance of surviving at the current population levels. We can change and adapt and go to a more healthy diet or we can wait for a massive ecological change and have our population levels and civilization crash like so many others have before.

Is it perfect? No, but it is still that good. I wish broadcast TV had the guts to run it. I wish it were played in schools. Unfortunately they never will.

Wow. This unassuming, even occasionally goofy documentary packs one hell of a punch. It aims to be a sort of follow up to "An Inconvenient Truth". But in some ways this is arguably an even more powerful film.

It asks a couple of simple questions, and finds answers that are so disturbing that it's the rare film that had an immediate impact on my behavior. Basically the film asks "how much does modern animal farming contribute to global warming and other pollution problems?" And the answer is, more than cars, trucks, planes and all other transportation combined. Maybe a LOT more depending on what metrics you use. It also asks, 'given these facts, why are no major environmental groups aggressively trying to change how we farm and eat, the way they're trying to change how we drive or power our houses? ' The answers are several and disturbing, and there's a bit of the thriller in how the filmmakers get sources to explain, or more chillingly suddenly clam up on camera as they realize what's being asked.

At times the film seems so personal and home-grown that I might have tended to dismiss it as the work of someone on the fringe, but doing some follow up reading it became clear that all this is pretty well grounded in solid science. (There are a some controversial claims here, but what becomes clear on further looking is that the basic points are hard to dismiss. For example, there's a review on here questioning the film's numbers about the greenhouse effect of methane. But if you go to the film's website, they list almost all the claims in the film, explain where they come from, and give links to the paper or article. In the case of methane it's from a NASA study on the upper atmosphere -- hardly some wild eyed fringe group.)

And some of the facts themselves are rather astounding. In a world short of clean water, do you really feel OK eating a burger that takes 660 gallons of clean water to produce?

Like all the best 'issue' documentaries, this will likely leave you examining your own lifestyle choices in a new light. What more can one ask from a 85 minute film?

I love the thinking behind "Cowspiracy" but I also know that since it goes against conventional thinking that this documentary will seriously tick off a lot of people. The filmmakers have done some research and have found that all the things humans can do to reduce their carbon footprints and reduce water use are a tiny drop in the hat compared to the impact that farm animals have on the environment. In other words, while governments and do-gooders are telling us that we need to take short showers, stop driving cars and not use planes (unless you are Al Gore),simply eating less meat would do FAR more to help the planet. Nitrous Oxide, carbon dioxide, methane and water are FAR more impacted by cows....as well as pigs, chickens and other animals raised for food. As an example, the impact on the amount of water used to produce one McDonald's hamburger is far more than would be saved if a person stops showering....for several days! Wow...I didn't know this. And, it shows that perhaps instead of knee-jerk reactions, governments should learn to prioritize before acting. Simply eating less meat and breeding less livestock might do much more to help the planet.

To a much lesser extent, this film also talks about how the oceans are being over-fished. Instead of selective harvests, gill netting is essentially killing everything--fish we eat, by catch that dies for nothing. The film points out that terms like 'sustainable fisheries' are essentially falsehoods. How did all this relate to the farm animals? I wasn't sure so I kept watching.

So far, I would agree with everything I saw in the film. I have known that research indicates the cows, for example, cause far more damage to the planet than cars (at least when it comes to emissions and the HUGE generation of poop). However, about 2/3 of the way through the film, I began to suspect there was some insincerity afoot here. It's a shame, as the film REALLY had a lot of great points to make and I loved how the various environmental protection groups NEVER wanted to talk about livestock--probably because this wouldn't help them in fund-raising or in public policy. BUT, then it became obvious that the filmmakers were Vegans---Vegans who were not calling for less meat and dairy consumption and prioritizing BUT for no meat, no dairy and no eggs. This absolutist thinking made me feel like I'd been roped in--- fallen for some genuine arguments in order to convince me of their almost religious zeal about animal cruelty and meat. Why else would they show a close-up of a duck getting its head hacked off and dead tuna covered in blood? This also explains why the portion about raping the oceans was included-- since it didn't appear related at all to the prior arguments--but it did when you realize they are arguing that we all become Vegans...NOT Vegetarians or folks who consume less meat but Vegans.

Overall, I see this as a brilliant and insightful documentary that is, sadly, dishonest in some of its conclusions. Yes, raising less cattle might be a good idea but their absolutist language wouldn't allow for any gray areas--meat and dairy and eggs are BAD! And, I felt like I'd been tricked by the film.