See, there is irony in your comment, because I didn't bring it up out of the blue. It's very related to the subject being discussed.

Thanks for providing more evidence for my original point. Animal agriculture are one of the top emitters of greenhouse gases, even more than all transportation combined, so to imply that it's irrelevant is ignorant at best.

Well that’s not even close to true.

https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector

5.8% vs 16.2%

Read your own link again. That's just one aspect of it. Several percentages are listed for agriculture besides livestock, which are relevant, because 70% of crops are used to feed livestock. Furthermore, the page you link yourself directly encourages eating less animal products.

Here are the rolled up stats, which indeed show animal agriculture using more than transportation:

https://www.colorado.edu/ecenter/2022/03/15/it-may-be-uncomf...

Gotcha.

Maybe there's a way to fix this with language? If someone says that they use the metro or cycle to work, I'm like, cool man, trains are sick, let's chat.

If someone says they "support a car-free lifestyle", I'm probably already starting to think about something else and glazing over.