Study Reveals That Dogs and Cats Offend the Planet

Many people enjoy owning pets. If you enjoy something, it must be sinful — i.e., it must cause global warming. Sure enough, the high priests of enviromoonbattery have spoken:

Pet ownership in the United States creates about 64 million tons of carbon dioxide a year, UCLA researchers found.
According to liberal ideology, carbon dioxide is bad, although plants would beg to differ. Another thing libs don’t like is meat:

The problem lies with the meat-filled diets of kitties and pooches, according to the study by UCLA geography professor Gregory Okin.
These days, even geography professors spout moonbattery at taxpayers’ expense.

Dogs and cats are responsible for 25 to 30 percent of the impacts of meat production in the United States, said Orkin. Compared to a plant-based diet, meat production “requires more energy, land and water and has greater environmental consequences in terms of erosion, pesticides and waste,” the study found.
So all we have to do is convert our dogs and cats to veganism, right? No:

And what goes in, must come out. In terms of waste, Okin noted, feeding pets also leads to about 5.1 million tons of feces every year, roughly equivalent to the total trash production of Massachusetts.
It is unclear whether Okin included Teddy Kennedy and Barney Frank in his estimation of tons of trash produced by Massachusetts.

Since even vegetarian pets produce waste, the best thing for the planet is for there to be no pets at all, or animals period, or even plants, since decaying plant matter also causes the dreaded carbon emissions that are produced by all life.
If only we could relocate environmentalists to Mars; there, they would not be offended by life and its byproducts. Plus, we wouldn’t have to listen to their self-righteous screeching.  

Thanks to Moonbattery

No comments: