Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/05/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] OT: Why God Made UV Filters
From: passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro)
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 19:56:36 -0400
References: <6936541.1272983658796.JavaMail.root@wamui-cynical.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <j2l23a0a61f1005040741o650b49bfncd40e64cca222d1@mail.gmail.com> <7C342DD1-4DB6-401C-8A48-2B88AA1F14A1@mac.com> <4BE036DA.8030505@panix.com> <3841018F-D2F8-43C5-8BF0-F3EC24E6AFC1@mac.com>

George,

You're not thinking of the dogs' collective national flatulence. Cow
flatulence in our food production industry gets some blame but -- UNTIL NOW
-- the dogs have been left off the hook. Not all of it gets stuck in the
curtains and couch cushions.

Vince


On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:30 AM, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at 
mac.com>wrote:

> Right.
> I also googled after I posted
> and found only the claim
> without any substantiation, facts or science
> (perhaps the book provides them).
>
> I have a hard time imagining that
> producing and moving dog food for ten years
> takes more energy than
> producing and moving steel, plastic, leather, paint, rubber, oil, gasoline,
> antifreeze, brake and other fluids for ten years;
> not to mention the carbon cost of recycling the SUV vs. DOG.
>
> One of my dogs ate mostly left overs from our kitchen table.
>
> I'll remain skeptical without running out to buy their book.
>
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george at imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
> On May 4, 2010, at 10:01 AM, Rei Shinozuka wrote:
>
>  I guess the Vales want you to buy their book to find out.
>>
>>
>> http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/10/23/Book-Dog-SUV-have-same-carbon-footprint/UPI-30131256332111/
>>
>> I'll bet their models are just like any models: the results are only as
>> good as the assumptions that went into them.
>>
>> -rei
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/04/2010 10:46 AM, George Lottermoser wrote:
>>
>>> find this very hard to believe.
>>>
>>> what methodology was used to arrive at this conclusion?
>>> was the total life from conception to disposal and feeding measured for
>>> 40 lb dog and SUV?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> George Lottermoser
>>> george at imagist.com
>>> http://www.imagist.com
>>> http://www.imagist.com/blog
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>>>
>>> On May 4, 2010, at 9:41 AM, simon jessurun wrote:
>>>
>>>  recently learned that having a pet like a medium sized dog has a
>>>> larger carbon footprint then a SUV
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] OT: Why God Made UV Filters)
In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (Doug Herr) ([Leica] OT: Why God Made UV Filters)
Message from simon.apekop at gmail.com (simon jessurun) ([Leica] OT: Why God Made UV Filters)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] OT: Why God Made UV Filters)
Message from shino at panix.com (Rei Shinozuka) ([Leica] OT: Why God Made UV Filters)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] OT: Why God Made UV Filters)