23 October 2009

A modest proposal for pets with big carbon footprints

I'm not talking about big footprints, like dinosaur footprints. I'm talking about carbon dioxide, CO2. You know, that gas that every frikking animal in the entire world breathes out and every single frikking plant in the entire world breathes in. The animal kingdom inhales O2 and exhales CO2; the vegetable kingdom inhales CO2 and exhales O2. The Cycle of Life: It's funny how that works like a perpetual motion machine, almost like it's designed that way. You know, CO2, that gas that comprises about 1% of the atmosphere. The gas 99% of which is generated by geological processes like oceanic warming, volcanic eruptions and earthquakes. The gas that is causing the greening of the Sahara Desert. Let me repeat. The gas that is causing the Sahara Desert to have more green vegetation on it than it has had in recorded human history. Right, that "greening gas" is the gas that the "green movement" hates.

Fact: the greens don't like green.

The gas that makes plants grow green is the gas the "green movement" hates most of anything in the whole world, except for humanity itself, which they believe should just go extinct. At least if you ask a "green movement" type of person, that's what they'd believe. Whether they'd say it or not probably depends on whether there is an audience.

You might as well get mad at O2. At least that is what humans actually breathe, and if humans are the enemy then why not attack them directly? But these are greens. They don't have to make sense. They worship GAIA, and communism, and Barack Milhous Obama, and they hate CO2, political rivals, and waiting around to judge their stupid ideas by their disastrous results. Thou shalt not judge their ideas by anything except their psychedelic fueled imaginations. And in the meantime, Katie bar the door it's time to have another mental spasm and do something randomly stupid that seemed like a good idea when they were sitting around smoking medicinal marijuana. So they've already called a gas (that is necessary for plant life and therefore necessary for animal life) "carbon" and fooled all the stooges into thinking they're talking about soot or some other particulate form of carbon that really would be nasty in the atmosphere, now it's time to fool the stooges into betraying their pets, Fido Castro the dog and Mousy Tongue the cat.

For in the classic words of Barack Milhous Obama, and Richard Milhous Nixon, 'let me make this perfectly clear.' It is clear as crystal, humans have to go. And since the greens have clearly already convinced their green-cult stooges to stop making human babies and to live sterile, meaningless lives with their precious miniature poodle dogs and ferrets that fit in purses and the like, it's time for those so-smart "green movement" types to drop the other braided-hemp and recycled-tire flip-flop.

Brenda and Robert Vale of Victoria University in New Zealand have computed the carbon footprint of domestic animals and determined that pet dogs and cats have fucking huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge carbon footprints (reminder, that means CO2, the gas that green plants love more than anything in the world), much larger than domestic food animals like chickens and rabbits, and just about the same carbon (dioxide) footprint as one of those Toyota Landcruisers the Taliban and Al Qaeda carry their jihad murderers around in.

Sounds like we should be killing more Taliban and Al Qaeda jihad murderers and blowing up their fucking Land Cruisers to me. Anybody agree? But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! The vicious Vales think that means you should eat your dog for lunch. Or dinner. Maybe breakfast. They don't much care which meal. Forget the dog biscuits, and have some dog, egg, and cheese biscuits. Don't get the cat chow, chow down on cat au vin. Pad thai becomes poodle thai.

The eco-footprints of the family pet each year as calculated by the Vales:

  • German shepherds: 1.1 hectares, compared with 0.41ha for a large SUV.
  • Cats: 0.15ha (slightly less than a Volkswagen Golf).
  • Hamsters: 0.014ha (two of them equate to a medium-sized plasma TV).
  • Goldfish: 0.00034ha (an eco-finprint equal to two cellphones).
Eco-finprint. That's cute.

And here I had been thinking that when my twelve vicious rescued from Michael Vick rottweilers leave turds all over the backyard and the grass shoots up like weeds on the spot, that was making the back yard greener. I mean, sure by the mundane meaning of things that's a fact. But in the super-special double-secret-probation "green movement" meaning of things, the color green you see with your own eyes is a false narrative. Are you going to trust the "greens," or your own lying eyes?! Eat your dog. They are serious!

Can you spot the false narrative too? I can. I think everyone can.

What will we do after we eat all 83 pounds of Fido Castro or Mousy Tongue al'Orange? The vicious Vales suggest we buy chickens and treasure them, for the eggs if not for their loyalty, pack instincts, and house guarding abilities, until we chop off their fowl heads and devour the beheaded remnant of the chicken. Chickens are funny when you do that. They're always funny! They run around like chickens with their head cut off regardless of whether their heads are detached or still firmly attached. So, post chicken guillotine, let's all sit around drinking free trade coffee and laughing at the precious antics of the headless chickens. And of course, for those who like to get a nice hug in with the pets, there is nothing like a headless chicken when it comes to cuddle time, unless it is a headed chicken that keeps on pecking your crotch while you try to pick the nits out of its anal feathers. Ah, memories! Why did we ever stop keeping chickens inside the house, anyway?! What an error that was for our culture.

Let's keep geese, goats and cattle in the house too! What could possibly go wrong?

You know, this is awfully fucking complicated. How many pets do you think we have in America? And how many dedicated "green movement" types like the vicious Vales? It seems to me that our pets outnumber the greens. So why don't we guillotine the "green movement" types and serve "greenie biscuits" and "kibbles and greens" to our dogs? Cats might even like it, though I'm sure most of those greens are pretty tough and stringy. Not to mention tasteless. But I've tried dogfood and it's already tasteless. Fido Castro and Mousy Tongue will never notice.

Imagine an actual use for "green movement" douchebags. And imagine the dog's "green" bowel movements afterwards. That green movement should make the grass grow super-duper green!

Do green good by doing greens in; and feeding them to the dogs. It's just about time for a nice little Thermidorian Reaction, isn't it? The Kiwis can take care of the vicious Vales themselves. I think they might have a few rather large sheepdogs in New Zealand that could do with an extra meal.

In other words, "green movement" douchebags could do some good by reducing the carbon (dioxide) footprint of hungry and vicious man-eating dogs. And by becoming scooby snacks. Now that's a (soylent) green goal that is worth it!

Bookmark and Share


Post a Comment

Blog Archive

Why pick on Progressives?

Progressives are neo-barbarian, luddite fools who want to replace all scientific progress with their failed, pseudo-scientific, utopian fairy tale and take us back to the paleolithic period. In other words they are douchebags.

Q: Do you have a problem with Progressive Insurance?

We don't have a problem with their insurance product. But the company is also a major giver of money to politically progressive causes, and because of that the owners and managers are total douchebags.

Tweet me like you love it

    follow me on Twitter

      © Blogger template The Business Templates by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

    Back to TOP