Fido And Fluffy Are Ruining The Environment, UCLA Study Says

LOS ANGELES, CA — When it comes to global warming, Fido and Fluffy are part of the problem, a new study by UCLA indicates.

Most cat or dog lovers would say they can't imagine living in a world without pets, but as the threat of global warming increases, environmentally conscious pet lovers may need to make some tough choices, according to the study.

Pet ownership in the United States creates about 64 million tons of carbon dioxide a year, UCLA researchers found. That's the equivalent of driving 13.6 million cars for a year. The problem lies with the meat-filled diets of kitties and pooches, according to the study by UCLA geography professor Gregory Okin.

Fido And Fluffy Are Ruining The Environment, UCLA Study Says

Well, just when you thought environmentalists couldn't get any more insufferable, they come for our pets...

Confession time: I love cats!
There, I said it...
It feels so good to tell y'all, my internet friends...

Anyhow, al Gore and his wife tried to take away good music in the 80s and now he wants my cats..

Well, I love my cats...and soon I will have the entire cast of rent...except cats instead of humans...
[AMAZING sidenote: a woman married me a few decades ago and remains my wife and co-guardian of our kitties]

Ok, I digress...

I'm gonna go into my bedroom and hide under the sheets with my cats and guns and wait for al Gore and UCLA to come get us..

-Chris

a reply to: Christosterone

If the enviro-wackos show up at Casa Augie I think my dogs will be exercising their Second Amendment rights.

One of them is dumb as crap and I'm pretty sure she can't shoot worth a damn so it could get hairy for anyone outside.

a reply to: Christosterone

Look there is a compromise here to be found, as a dog person I say let's get rid of cats. That's a win win situation for all involved.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Look there is a compromise here to be found, as a dog person I say let's get rid of cats. That's a win win situation for all involved.

Ah yes, the Butcherguy Amendment.

I'm all for sacrificing everyone who has ever affiliated themselves with UCLA, any institute of higher learning in Kali, maybe everyone in Kali as a whole ... to preserve our right to 'own' a pet.

And ... you can love your cats. I don't want to 'own' a cat, but I really do like other people's cats. I'm a dog person.

a reply to: Christosterone

Well I suppose they would label me an eco tyrant of some kind, I get on far better with animal's than I do with people actually, dog's are our faithful friend's, cat's just a part of the family and even had a budgie once, it's owner had no were for it so asked if we would take it in, the little blue feathery terror used to let himself out of his cage when ever I made chip's (french fries) and would insist upon landing on the edge of my plate then pecking at them which meant I tended to eat them were he could not see, not sure bird's are supposed to eat fried potato but he seemed to definitely prefer them to his dill and seed.

Also had fish, sorry I am not a big fish fan they are great little pet's for a kid but mostly boring and it is like watching a librarian if even that exciting, still different folk's etc.

But Cat's and Dog's are not so different, Dog's are more playful and Cat's love to sit in your arm's, hog your chest if you are recumbent and go to sleep on it after giving you a free coarse of cat acupuncture as they do that kitten thing with there two front paws like they think you are there parent or something but those razor sharp claw's poke easily through even the thickest cardigan and tend to leave you feeling like a tea bag afterwards (Very cruel to trim them but once again different folk's), worth it for the love though, Dog's are fun but unless you train them properly or have them neutered there is nothing they like more than to hump your leg if they get too excited.

Me think's these UCLA folk are actually anti animal for some reason, that or someone has been walking there mastiff on campus and they only went and trod in it, more likely the latter.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Christosterone

Look there is a compromise here to be found, as a dog person I say let's get rid of cats. That's a win win situation for all involved.

Jast gaze upon the horrible outcome of your dastardly kitty genocide. We will fight!

But you know what this is? We shouldn't be fighting each other. We should be eating green-weenies. We can save the planet by eliminating them and all the hot air they produce ...

Idiots like that are why more and more prefer the company of my cats .

They want to cut co2 emissions they should start by eliminating themselves since humans emit co2 .

Of course, I love all my kitty friends who have shared my life, but with my current one ... they might have a point. She seems to just jump in my lap for the express purpose of relaxing enough to let loose the gas pressure in her colon. And man does she produce a lot ... and STINKS!

look.. I recycle almost all of the plastic that comes into this house (even straws!), plus cardboard, glass, Styrofoam and anything else that can be remotely considered recyclable, even rubber and fabric. Pick up stuff for the neighborhood and take it to the recyclers. I plant trees, grow a small garden, compost veggie and fruit waste, grounds and eggshells. Trade goods with the locals, catch rainwater and use that to water garden and outside animal bowls.. I even cut down meat consumption and upcycle whenever possible. and currently trying to figure out a way to afford to build a sustainable studio with solar. I'm conscientious about hazardous materials I use in my work and their disposal.. BUT.. If anyone wants to come for my pets.. they better Da*# well be prepared!!! UCLA can go %$#@ themselves lol

*cat person, but I love em all

Let's do a study and find out how much those gasbags at UCLA produce every year! Lol

While gearing up to carbon tax people, the next step for them would unfortunately be companion animals.

"It is clear that a transition to pets that eat less meat, and therefore have less environmental impact, would reduce the overall U.S. consumption of meat."

Continued...

Okin noted that the pet food industry has made advancements in manufacturing, product design and alternative protein sources, but more can be done. Simple measures like feeding domestic dogs and cats nutritionally appropriate amounts will certainly reduce their environmental and energetic impact, Okin wrote.

"However, without large-scale reduction in their number and changes to the food system that drastically reduces the per-capita animal product consumption, the environmental and energetic impact of these animals will remain significant."

Op Source
There's already plenty of pets on dangerous grocery store brand diets that contain the top ingredient as corn, and even soy is near the top. "Meat" in those is "animal digest" which is tissue that could contain teeth, bone and feathers for example-more see here.

Commercial pet food companies will say the bone or feathers percentage is not a problem being naturally a part of eating an animal-can't say I'd agree would rather feed them pure meat instead. However, more so the problem is the rules for "digest" do not dismiss use of deceased and euthanized animals(which top commercial brands have been caught using in the past.)

AFFCO measures nutrients( I guess Special Kitty and others pay them not to measure this with their garbage food), not the ingredients used for the nutrients. The corn, soy, etc., is a big factor is making companion animals sickly, let alone the "digest" and the chemicals from it.

If they want a solution to non meat products first some things have to be addressed: Lay off and or have more restrictions on the harmful corn, soy, and other bad ingredients, which likely they won't address and will say that corn and soy is the solution. Also, make sure there is meat included in the diet still, not meat substitutes all alone.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Dog people need to meet a Manx, or other tailless/bob tailed breed. Mine is very dog-like.

a reply to: Christosterone

By that logic, all carnivores and omnivores have got to go.

No doubt farming produces it's share of carbon dioxide also, so the Vegans have got to go also.

Herbivores fart, so they are gone.

Whoops, no animals left including humans.


One-third of our greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture

Yes I'm being ridiculous, but so are the environmental activists.

originally posted by: Christosterone

Well, just when you thought environmentalists couldn't get any more insufferable, they come for our pets...

Fake news. Sad.

""This analysis does not mean to imply that dog and cat ownership should be curtailed for environmental reasons, but neither should we view it as an unalloyed good," Okin wrote in the study."

a reply to: curme

No it's not "fake." They are getting so serious about controlling how people live that they are studying ways to control even our access to companion animals now.

They'll be doing it "for the good of the planet" of course, but the end result is the same - we won't be able to have actual pets. Maybe robot animals will be so good that you won't be able to tell your real one from the replicants ...

Wait ...



But seriously, it was a study like this that led to the Cali law regulating cow farts. Once upon a time, we all laughed at that too.

a reply to: Christosterone

Anyone else feel like universities are starting to look more and more like nursery skools?

"Awww, look at the class project they came up with for publication!"

That's refrigerator magnet material right there.

a reply to: Blaine91555

The vegans gotta go first. They can whip up some nasty broccoli-lentil-quinoa-tofu-turmeric bombs.

a reply to: Christosterone

No one is taking my cats...especially some AGW wuss like Al Gore.

a reply to: Christosterone

I literally do not care.

I have pets.

Suck it future generations and coastal areas.

Drown and suffocate while i pet my dog.

Also, manmade global warming is a hoax.