Bah.

I assumed it would be like a container truck full of manure then I read the story. Just how pathetic a protest is that? A couple of shovelfulls of dung and six people holding a banner. I don't know if he was in or not but if he was I doubt he'd do more than laugh in their faces. Or maybe offer them all a cup of tea. Or, if he's half as smart as he thinks he is, ask them how they got the dung to his driveway in the first place, and how much CO2 that generated.

TBH it looks almost entirely like 'look at us, we're protesting' self-serving codswallop to me.

Whether the human influence on climate change is significant or not I'm not even vaguely qualified to talk about but this is not going to do anything useful for anyone.

Jon

+2

I only glanced at the article, but did I see that they'd used a horse drawn cart?

Horses still produce carbon dioxides.

Found this:

http://www.river-swimming.co.uk/trespass.htm

But I'm still none the wiser if what happened at Clarkson's is actually trespassing etc

I think horses are carbon neutral. The CO2 they produce is made from grass. Grass turns CO2 into, err, grass.

Personally, I'm not a fan of horses though. They're not indigenous and we treat them like slaves. They always look nervous, and I'm always worried they might do something unpredictable in traffic causing unnecessary death or suffering. Nobody "Needs" to ride a horse along the the B4525 at rush hour. I'd be a lot happier if they weren't allowed on main roads, and it would be good if they cleaned up their manure.

There's a £500 fine for letting your dog poop in the street, so for a horse it should be about £10,000!

No, that just tells us horses are part of the carbon chain.

Horses are responsible in the same way cows are - they don't know they're producing methane and carbon dioxide but it's because of humans that there are more of them than there probably would be in the wild.

Methane is a different issue (ahem), but the carbon chain is carbon neutral. What goes in, comes out.

Regardless, I still don't like horses outside of their natural environment. Not that most horses are very "natural"...

Horses do spend time eating grass, but that's not the limits of their diet. They also require medical treatment, dentistry, grooming, and shoeing. The cost of keeping a horse is far from carbon neutral.

All good reasons not to keep them in captivity. They managed to run on a 100% organic diet for eons before we enslaved them.

Personally I think the fastest way to reduce one's carbon footprint is to not breed. The current prevalent assumption that one's life is not complete until one has children is rather stupid IMO.

The planet cannot support 2.4 children per couple indefinitely - something's got to give.

(And I'm not keen on the little buggers anyhow. Children are like eating soup - they should be seen and not heard)

Actually I think that Earth can support 2.4 children indefinitely, so long as there's a matching death rate.

So what we either need to do is decrease the birth rate or increase the death rate.

Hmmm.....

+1.

[/thread]

lol, I was going to post my favourite "nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure" quote

The most mathematically sound method to eliminate human suffering for ever more is simply to eliminate humans. Most of the other species would be perfectly content with that solution, so it would be the correct democratic decision.

Of course, most people are selfish, nepotistic, racist and speciest. They put themselves first, family second, foreigners a long way behind and they really couldn't give a sh!t about the rest of life on Earth. Our "democracy" is a sham excuse for the exploitation of "others".