What are you even yapping about? All the things you wrote are irrelevant to this issue. What an insane comment copied straight from propaganda books.

All just hypothetical scenario bla bla while in practice the numbers are irrefutable. The following responses are not for you because you are clearly and idiot, but for others that might actually believe the bullshit you wrote.

Livestock is typically kept on marginal land that’s unsuitable for most crops.

Nonsense, but also the issue is actually the land required to grow the plants that feed the animals. The energy conversion rate of plants > animals > meat > food is incredibly inefficient compared to plants > food

If you know what you’re doing then you are not going to be poisoning the groundwater.

Well companies all over the world clearly dont give a shit about that so the point is irrelevant.

And again tens of thousands of years we raised animals and (excessive) greenhouse gas emissions were not a problem.

Because in 8000 BC there were an estimated 5 million humans in the world and a fraction of that in terms of livestock. Today there are 8+ billion humans and 30+ billion livestock animals globally if you include poultry.

Them existing would be the problem.

Yes, the amount of livestock humanity is keeping is not acceptable and needs to be reduced to a tiny fraction of the current levels. Without human interference these animals that we keep as livestock would never even have existed. If we stopped breeding them artificially they would cease existing in a matter of years. Realistically we wont and dont have to eradicate them, but we dont need billions of them.

When you dig up the sequestered remains of plants and animals [...]

Small note, but fossil fuels come almost entire from plants and microorganisms.