These are the arguments of the big beef titans to convince consumers that eating meat has a negligible impact on the planet:

It's a hard, disgusting and disorienting truth: if we're serious about avoiding the worst-case scenarios of the climate crisis, people – especially those living in wealthier countries – need to consume less animal products. But for the corporate titans who stand at the top of the nearly trillion-dollar global meat industry, this slight change is an existential threat, and so they are telling the truth about the full climate impacts of animal agriculture. In the Guardian's review of dozens of articles, op-eds, fact sheets, blog posts, informational videos, educational resources and social media reports, several themes emerged repeatedly. In total, this vast body of industry-funded reporting perpetuates five myths that suggest that beef production is not a problem for the climate and that reducing consumption will not help—and may even hurt—environmental progress. Myth 1: fossil fuels are the only real problem to solve: "What we eat is important to the environment to some extent, but it pales in comparison to what we drive or how we use energy," Frank Mitloehner, a UC Davis animal scientist who works with the beef industry to research and reporting for industry publication Meatingplace. "Then have a burger. Just make sure you walk to the restaurant." (Joe Fassler, The Guardian)