Owning pets no so environmentally responsible?
Just saw this post on slashdot:
Of course, like any good slashdot reader, I didn’t RTFA, but I’m guessing that Jake will find this concept so inflammatory that he will, and then tell me why it’s totally wrong.
How’s that for flame-bait?
Comments
Wiley
Oct. 27, 2009
+361
93% What does this percentage mean?
@myself
Apparently not as good as I thought…
Is this useful?
93% What does this percentage mean?
AlexCuse
Oct. 28, 2009
+218
93% What does this percentage mean?
You aren’t alone, seeing this pop up in flame bait posts everywhere.
Somehow I have a hunch the whole thing is rather ridiculous, but I don’t want to give them the attention they are clearly seeking so I haven’t read too much about it. And I’d gladly give up my car for my dog, if a serious effort was underway to promote telecommuting
Is this useful?
93% What does this percentage mean?
Jake
Oct. 28, 2009
+467
93% What does this percentage mean?
Isn’t one big piece of the answer to feed our animals something different? It’s the pet food industry, not the pets themselves, that cause the problems, right? And isn’t that industry just an extension of the unhealthy people food industry? This seems to me to be another compelling reason for people to demand something other than a feed-corn-centric agricultural sector.
Is this useful?
93% What does this percentage mean?
AlexCuse
Oct. 29, 2009
+218
93% What does this percentage mean?
Exactly. Something tells me this release was timed to have something to throw back at those dirty hippies who dare question our corporate overlords’ need to pollute the air.
Is this useful?
93% What does this percentage mean?