PDA

View Full Version : Your dog is killing the environment...


voltz
22-12-09, 01:34
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.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091220/sc_afp/lifestyleclimatewarminganimalsfood

:(

patriots88888
22-12-09, 01:40
"Pets are anti-depressants, they help us cope with stress, they are good for the elderly," Huttin told AFP.

Don't care what anyone says, their companionship and importance far outweighs any negative implications.

TRfan23
22-12-09, 01:42
I'm not actually convinced this is true. I'm starting to hear of lot of unusual things causing chaos to the environment. Goldfish equate to two mobile phones? I'm not that convinced :(

I don't care if they're bad for the environment. Either this is a way to say humans aren't doing that much damage to the environment, or I dono?

Even though I'm not that keen on dogs, I still would like them protected.

AmericanAssassin
22-12-09, 01:43
I love my dogs. That's all. :D

ThatNorskChick
22-12-09, 01:48
Cats, dogs, cows, humans...

I have a solution, let's just blow up the planet. There! Nothing to worry about now!

TRfan23
22-12-09, 01:50
Cats, dogs, cows, humans...

I have a solution, let's just blow up the planet. There! Nothing to worry about now!

We are but very slowly, except not blowing up the planet. Just need to get some speed :D

Wow times going so fast.

Catapharact
22-12-09, 01:51
On the bright side:

For all you red blooded males out there who happen to have an S.O. who owns a "kick dog," here is your opportunity to reduce your carbon footprint.

Kill the chiuaua. Buy a Hummer.

TRfan23
22-12-09, 01:53
^ When I get a cat what you recommend I do with it?

interstellardave
22-12-09, 01:57
I don't like some of the language in that article, like the statement "I should be allowed to own a pet". That implies that there is some current, or future, impetus towards denying people the right to own pets; towards making it "unacceptable".

Anyone who pays attention to my posts knows I have a healthy respect for the environment and I think immediate--but always prudent--actions should be taken to reduce emissions of harmful gasses... or any pollutants, really. Let's be realistic, however, and not fascistic.

I don't want eco-nazis telling me to get rid of my cat!

When I get a cat what you recommend I do with it?

Love it!

TRfan23
22-12-09, 01:59
I don't want eco-nazis telling me to get rid of my cat!

I'm pretty sure those folks are hypocritical ;)

Love it!

And I shall :D

I'm gonna call him Eric or if it's a girl Juliet. But I have a wait till I live in my own place. My parents and my bro's allergic to them :(

Catapharact
22-12-09, 02:00
^ When I get a cat what you recommend I do with it?

Hummer > Cat. What can I say... I hate my own kind.

Paddy
22-12-09, 02:11
Lol as if dogs would be doing any worse harm then what humans have done to this planet.

Aphrodite22
22-12-09, 02:13
Who cares?

Capt. Murphy
22-12-09, 02:24
Them being barking poop machines is bad enough. & What about the energy that Animal shelters use? They're usually killing the ones that have stayed there too long. I know, just feed the carcasses of the euthanized dogs to the remaining living dogs.

*shakes head*

:mad:

The only statement in that above paragraph I was remotely serious about was the first sentence.

asherz
22-12-09, 02:31
lmao wow

voltz
22-12-09, 03:06
I honestly think farmers are the worst offenders. How many cattle/chickens is it they raise for slaughtering? In combination with all the methane that's produced, I don't see why they don't get kicked for destroying the environment on their own end.

But then again, I luv's me some chicken! :D

Solice
22-12-09, 04:00
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091220/sc_afp/lifestyleclimatewarminganimalsfood

:(

Hippies need to join the Real World :rolleyes:;)

Aranara
22-12-09, 06:42
I don't have pets but that isn't possible:D

LightningRider
22-12-09, 07:22
I was and am a Cat Person. :p

Mystery-King
22-12-09, 07:26
I love it how Man are prepared to blame every other defenceless species for damaging the environment. Obviusly, we never contributed to it because we're perfect. Honestly, and that stupid meeting at Copenhagen. Its not gonna change anything! Soz but I'm a dog person and love the companionship! :D

viper456
22-12-09, 07:32
seriously? LOL. Would rather have a dog/cat any day! :(

aurora89
22-12-09, 08:09
This is the view of a bunch of grumpy breeders-not-parents who are upset because people pointed out having kids are bad for the environment. They want to twist it around so pets are the real evil (yeah right). I'm obviously not advocating we never have kids, but all of the decent people I know admit that having biological kids (in modern America/the western world) is selfish. It's not a sin, it's nothing to be judged by, but it is selfish and bad for the environment. *shrugs* The people who can take that in stride without getting defensive aren't the people who worry me, honestly! My baths and cell phone and lack of recycling are bad for the environment, but darnit sometimes I really want baths/long showers/electricity! Same difference (though having children is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, way to double--or more-- your carbon footprint).

Anyways, yeah, the article is BS written out of bitterness against the new studies showing that having kids in the western world is terrible for the environment. The difference is that those studies were objective, fact-based, and simply stating the truth. No one EVER suggested eating kids, killing kids, or even keeping people who want them from having them! It's just a fact-- having kids is bad for the earth. These people need to get the frell over themselves.

ETA: I don't know about THIS article, but the original movement had nothing to do with hippies or people who care about the environment. It was totally a satire/reaction against research about the effects of western childbearing on the environment, and I'm inclined to think the original people to propose the idea (recently) if not this article too actually cared very little for the environment.

voltz
22-12-09, 08:13
I've been getting sick of hearing about green supporters alot lately. All it really amounts to is political correctiveness being shoved down our throats.

Quasimodo
22-12-09, 08:24
I've been getting sick of hearing about green supporters alot lately. All it really amounts to is political correctiveness being shoved down our throats.

More likely this is just another ploy to get people all guilty enough to buy more "green" products. Reminds me a lot of indulgences!

voltz
22-12-09, 08:29
There's a lot of guilt trips run by other groups like peta, vegetarians or even pro-life activists. I would like to see them go into all-out war with each other and leave everyone else who gives a **** out of it. Of course if that happened, I might die of a heart attack from eating too much popcorn. :D

EscondeR
22-12-09, 08:31
Hmm... whatever :rolleyes: I can be hardly surprized by any level of hypocricy now *sigh*

Punaxe
22-12-09, 11:05
This singling-out of various products/species is rather nonsensical. The main point anyone would need to make is "consumption is killing the environment, to a more or less degree depending on what exactly you're consuming and how".
The food we eat is produced, prepared, transported, etc. and that means there's a certain carbon footprint to go along with that. Dogs eat too, but that doesn't mean the dogs have a carbon footprint as such: their food, just like ours, has one.
Pointing fingers at end-users (e.g. dogs) may work a little bit, but we really need to focus on the source, in this case the energy used to prepare and transport the food. We can probably trace everything back to the energy. Hence, time to stop singling out individual products and species because we're all using the same energy anyway.

larasbestm8
22-12-09, 11:10
Yo dawg heard that you wanted to stop climate change so he put a hole in the ozone layer...

Doesn't quite work, does it?

lara c. fan
22-12-09, 12:17
All I need say is : cows.

Lara Croft!
22-12-09, 13:03
Don't care what anyone says, their companionship and importance far outweighs any negative implications.


That's right. We should protect the environment from the greater dangers it faces because of humans.

Ikas90
22-12-09, 13:11
Where is the logic in this article?

These people need to get a life. Focus should be diverted to something that is actually damaging the environment, such as car emissions. But no, let's all kill the animals. :rolleyes:

Sgt BOMBULOUS
22-12-09, 13:41
What about my pet Hummingbird? What's his carbon footprint? :rolleyes:

remote91
22-12-09, 13:49
I'd rather have my 2 smelly dogs than a nice environment.

snork
22-12-09, 14:08
^ When I get a cat what you recommend I do with it?
:D There used to be a German book "1000 ideas for what to do with dead cats" but it seems to be out of print or sth. All i found now was "What to do with dead cats - 101 practical suggestions".
I remember the drawing of a dead-cat-toilet-brush from the 1000-ideas book. :vlol:

This singling-out of various products/species is rather nonsensical. The main point anyone would need to make is "consumption is killing the environment, to a more or less degree depending on what exactly you're consuming and how".
The food we eat is produced, prepared, transported, etc. and that means there's a certain carbon footprint to go along with that. Dogs eat too, but that doesn't mean the dogs have a carbon footprint as such: their food, just like ours, has one.
Pointing fingers at end-users (e.g. dogs) may work a little bit, but we really need to focus on the source, in this case the energy used to prepare and transport the food. We can probably trace everything back to the energy. Hence, time to stop singling out individual products and species because we're all using the same energy anyway.

Hm, agree and disagree.
Living alone is already doing a "carbon footprint", and the "food" - before being processed, transported and stored - if meat, it needed to be raised and live for a while. Thus having dogs and cats that need food adds up to the insane number of cows that run the earth. (goats, etc.)
Which is another one of the major reasons I live(d) most of my life with meatless food.

I usually hypocrite my way out of this dilemma by arguing that my cat eats my meat portion. :ton:

Maybe also goes to just show that the "carbon footprint" should not be seen as "the final truth". Imo it's just a tool for generalisation, something you could measure each and everything by, which is also its major flaw.

Have to go, my cat says NOW is cuddling time.

xXhayleyroxXx
22-12-09, 14:38
this is pathetic. its the factories pouring out poison to be honest.

im not believing it.

Dustie
22-12-09, 20:01
Goldfish equate to two mobile phones?

Lol. Shall I throw mine out already? I don't want to get a brain tumour, after all...

Mad Tony
22-12-09, 20:09
Where is the logic in this article?

These people need to get a life. Focus should be diverted to something that is actually damaging the environment, such as car emissions. But no, let's all kill the animals. :rolleyes:Actually, cows are pretty bad. Methane is 25 time more damaging than carbon dioxide apparently.

I've got a better solution to killing animals though - let's not kill animals for reasons as trivial as this and let's not cut down on emissions because there are more important things to be worrying about. :D

Sgt BOMBULOUS
22-12-09, 20:31
Actually, cows are pretty bad. Methane is 25 time more damaging than carbon dioxide apparently.

I've got a better solution to killing animals though - let's not kill animals for reasons as trivial as this and let's not cut down on emissions because there are more important things to be worrying about. :D

This is why refineries flare methane. I guess we haven't found a way to attach a flaring nozzle to a cows rear yet...

This argument is technically sound, but come on. Pets contribute nothing to society right? Neither does a jetski or a yacht, and I'm pretty sure they have a much larger C-footprint than a Golden Retriever.

Tommy123
22-12-09, 20:32
Where is the logic in this article?

These people need to get a life. Focus should be diverted to something that is actually damaging the environment, such as car emissions. But no, let's all kill the animals. :rolleyes:

i agree, what do they expect us to do just kill everything and call it a day:mad:

Phlip
22-12-09, 20:47
Cats, dogs, cows, humans...

I have a solution, let's just blow up the planet. There! Nothing to worry about now!

Yes (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=55895866085&ref=ts)!!

TRUgamer
22-12-09, 20:54
What the :cen: did i just read :(
That is ridicculous! I have a dog. And i think they need to get their minds right (those who wrote the article)!

Alex Shepherd
22-12-09, 21:07
All the creatures and natures causing the pollution but human-beings causing it to get even faster, period.

Raider Man

xXhayleyroxXx
22-12-09, 21:25
All the creatures and natures causing the pollution but human-beings causing it to get even faster, period.

Raider Man

couldnt agree more x

Rai
22-12-09, 21:58
I take it working dogs such as those working for the Police and disabled are all right then?

Isn't dog and cat food the meat that we'd only throw away if we didn't make it food for our animals? I'm sure I read that somewhere. Pets have had their places in our homes for thousands of years, and often they're a person's only company. Why should we start blaming them for their carbon pawprints now. Talk about scapegoat. Humans need to look at all ways to improve our environment, maybe we could find environmentally friendly ways to manufacture pet food, if there isn't already.

Love2Raid
22-12-09, 22:08
Yes, let's blame global warming on our dogs! :jmp:

>_>

aurora89
23-12-09, 18:57
Since my original post seems to have been unnoticed, I just want to say again that the authors of this book aren't actually environmentalists at all. It's intended to be a satirical poke against researchers who calculated that having biological kids was the single worst thing you can do for the environment (which is true, but no one is saying to kill kids for food!). Bitter people who need to get over themselves, IMO.

Romantics Inc.
23-12-09, 18:59
Who cares? We love our dogs.