|
|
|
December 22, 2009
my dog is better than ten environmentalists!
As if any further proof was needed that global warming hysteria was a pretext to invade people's lives and tell them what to do, a "study" -- by so-called "specialists in sustainable living" -- advances the claim that dogs are worse for the environment than SUVs: PARIS (AFP) - Man's best friend could be one of the environment's worst enemies, according to a new study which says the carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle.I think it's time for everyone to say "screw these people!" Just tell them collectively to go pee up a rope and then fuck off. Anyone who thinks their efforts will be limited to dog eradication is barking (!) up the wrong tree. This is no time for dog owners to act all apologetic and defensive the way some are: "Everyone should work out their own environmental impact. I should be allowed to say that I walk instead of using my car and that I don't eat meat, so why shouldn't I be allowed to have a little cat to alleviate my loneliness?"Spoken like a groveling slave. Really, some people talk as if they accept without question that the environmentalists are their masters. For the umpteenth time, this calls not for denial, but defiance. If we take these crackpot specialists in sustainable living at their word and assume the average dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares, it should be pointed out that by the environmentalists' own calculations, the average American has a footprint of 10.3 hectares. Which means that according to the environmentalists' own calculations, my dog Coco is more than ten times less wasteful than a single environmentalist. Environmentalists propose that people eat their dogs. I propose that it would be more ecologically sound for dogs to eat the environmentalists. Right now, Coco is chowing down on Rachel Ray's brand of dog food (developed for Ray's pit bill Isaboo), but if the environmentalists could simply be ground up and made into dogfood, I would be willing to feed her ten environmentalists per year. Think of the carbon footprints that could be reduced!
It's recycling for a good cause. MORE: My thanks to Glenn Reynolds for linking this post! Hope all your Christmases were doggone good! posted by Eric on 12.22.09 at 03:08 PM
Comments
"around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4x4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car." Actually this also reminds me: why are so many environmentalists against using modern technology in farming? I've even seen them espouse "people power" i.e. humans doing hard labor (as long as they are poor 3rd world humans). Looking at the human body as any other machine, it's very inefficient and wasteful compared to modern farm tools. It takes about 10 seconds of math to figure it out. plutosdad · December 22, 2009 05:55 PM I used to think the lefties just hated people. Turns out, they're anti-mammalian. "This would be such a nice planet," I can hear them say, "if it just weren't for all the g*dd*mn LIFE on it." Rhodium Heart · December 22, 2009 06:59 PM Accusations of eliminationist rhetoric in 3...2...1... Pious Agnostic · December 22, 2009 08:31 PM I say we make them fuck a 6" (diameter) hawser and then we piss on them. Just for the entertainment value. M. Simon · December 22, 2009 08:57 PM Certain eco-fascists seem to think that all fauna are threats to the ecosystem. First it was the sheep we shear for wool, then the animals we shear for cashmere. Any animal we raise for meat is of course an environmental disaster, and now our cats and dogs are on the table. Why are these enviro-tards so opposed to the bio-diversity necessary to sustaining a healthy bio-sphere? Isn't the loss of species a prime threat to the planet's ability to sustain life-which is what environmentalism is supposed to be all about? Turns out that any animal of any interest or utility to humans is a threat to the environment. Dogs provide sustainable security and also pull sleds and carts in addition to herding sheep and minding children. But then, sheep and children are threats to the environment also, arent they? Laura Louzader · December 22, 2009 10:48 PM We have 4 cats. Do I have to meet some of these people at the door with my gun? I will if I have too. Is that Revolution I smell in the air? LYNNDH · December 22, 2009 11:20 PM I need funding for a study that demonstrates that court intellectuals' dirty little secret is their love of power and force in service to their personal bigotries. Wait a minute. How does anyone promote their prejudices at taxpayer expense? Perhaps neither court nor private intellectuals should rely on force for their fortunes. Brett · December 23, 2009 08:36 AM Well, my proposal wouldn't cost a penny of taxpayers money! Dog food companies are already there as are the rendering plants, and the resulting environmentalist dogfood would be sold at a profit. Moreover, it would at last allow the environmentalists to actually be worth something. And above all they would really be doing something green. A win-win for everyone! Eric Scheie · December 23, 2009 09:02 AM Environmentalists, or just activist parasites. Hugh · December 23, 2009 03:14 PM There is an easy solution to the enviro problem. 1) stone wall; 2) 10 guys with AK-74s; 3) a few battlepacks of ammo; Some Assembly Required. John Cunningham · December 24, 2009 06:29 PM Screw 'em. Makes me want to put my two St. Bernards in my SUV and go drive around in circles for a while so they can bark at all the environuts. Choey · December 25, 2009 04:45 PM I am struck by the similarity between "Environmentalists" and V'ger in the first Star Trek movie; they are ever ready to eliminate all 'carbon units' 'infesting' both the USS Enterprise and Planet Earth. If only there were some way to merge them with reality! Stewart · December 25, 2009 05:50 PM If "environmentalists" really cared about the environment, they'd kill themselves to save the earth. BTW, Tim Blair's got you all beat in the dog department - and it's not even his. :-D Barbara Skolaut · December 25, 2009 06:39 PM "Environmentalists propose that people eat their dogs. I propose that it would be more ecologically sound for dogs to eat the environmentalists." Heck, WE should eat environmentalists! Eat an Environmentalist for Earth Day! Mmmm, long pig... /Homer Simpson Jim C. · December 25, 2009 07:33 PM Spoken like a groveling slave. Best point of the article. Defiance is the best answer. And I agree, we should feed our dogs ground environmentalist. Peter Buxton · December 25, 2009 07:34 PM I may not understand the terms, but I have to call BS on these numbers. Given the 6 billion people and the, at least, 6 billion dogs, (not to mention cats, hamsters, goldfish, and chia pets) we must have another planet we are farming. Dan · December 26, 2009 01:08 AM You got 'lanched. M. Simon · December 26, 2009 05:24 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
December 2009
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2009
November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Happy Boxing Day!
• Merry Christmas! • A Free Market In Health Care • A Mathematical Education • Just Words • What Are You Doing Here? • One last thought • Merry Almost-Christmas! • Tom Ligon On The Space Show • my dog is better than ten environmentalists!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
As usual, these people only care about the impact to plants and chemicals. There are plenty of studies done on the positive effect pet ownership has on people's mental well being. Removing all of that would have a cost to society, since people less happy will behave differently usually more negatively. People who aren't free tend to be negative too :)
But you know that doesn't matter, who cares about humans?