"Steve Firth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Since we seem to have acceptance that four cyclists produce as much CO2 as one SUV. I think we can now solve global warming at a stroke.
Quoted message said:
Each SUV owner should be required to remove as much CO2 producing capacity from the ecosystem as is represented by their consumption of fuel.
Quoted message said:
This can be achieved most simply by each SUV owner removing four cyclists permanently from the population. The method of dispatch is largely irrelevant but in the spirit of eco-friendly direct action I suggest bullbars or possibly a crossbow. Most small saloon car owners could get by with mowing down just a couple of cyclists.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 20:29:16 +0100, "JNugent" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"Steve Firth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Since we seem to have acceptance that four cyclists produce as much CO2 as one SUV. I think we can now solve global warming at a stroke.
Quoted message said:
Each SUV owner should be required to remove as much CO2 producing capacity from the ecosystem as is represented by their consumption of fuel.
Quoted message said:
This can be achieved most simply by each SUV owner removing four cyclists permanently from the population. The method of dispatch is largely irrelevant but in the spirit of eco-friendly direct action I suggest bullbars or possibly a crossbow. Most small saloon car owners could get by with mowing down just a couple of cyclists.
Just a moment...
You haven't specified the frequency.
Is this per diem? Per annum? What?
It would be per lifetime (on average).
However, since the CO2 emmisions of getting rid of the body (by whtever means), and the extra emmisions caused by the funerals would all be brought forward, causing an unnecessary peak, I would suggest that it would actully be more eco friendly if four cyclists were to get together and throttle a 4x4 driver.
It would have the added benefit of reducing petrol consumption, a benefit that the original proposal sadly lacked.
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 20:29:16 +0100, "JNugent" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"Steve Firth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Since we seem to have acceptance that four cyclists produce as much CO2 as one SUV. I think we can now solve global warming at a stroke.
Quoted message said:
Each SUV owner should be required to remove as much CO2 producing capacity from the ecosystem as is represented by their consumption of fuel.
Quoted message said:
This can be achieved most simply by each SUV owner removing four cyclists permanently from the population. The method of dispatch is largely irrelevant but in the spirit of eco-friendly direct action I suggest bullbars or possibly a crossbow. Most small saloon car owners could get by with mowing down just a couple of cyclists.
Just a moment...
You haven't specified the frequency.
Is this per diem? Per annum? What?
It would be per lifetime (on average).
However, since the CO2 emmisions of getting rid of the body (by whtever means), and the extra emmisions caused by the funerals would all be brought forward, causing an unnecessary peak, I would suggest that it would actully be more eco friendly if four cyclists were to get together and throttle a 4x4 driver.
It would have the added benefit of reducing petrol consumption, a benefit that the original proposal sadly lacked.
However, since the CO2 emmisions of getting rid of the body (by whtever means), and the extra emmisions caused by the funerals would all be brought forward, causing an unnecessary peak, I would suggest that it would actully be more eco friendly if four cyclists were to get together and throttle a 4x4 driver.
Nah, just feed the bodies to pigs. They'd be eating something anyway so there would be no *increase* in their emissions from the consumed cyclists...
-- www.pickuptruckracing.com - UK's closest race series Spotter for the PWR truck #9 Watch us here: http://tinyurl.com/79xxg
"JNugent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Peter B" <[email hidden]> wrote...
Quoted message said:
Trolling, Just trolling, With a lassie by my side...
I think you've got your songs mixed up there.
Think Flanagan and Allen, rather than Harry Lauder.
Thanks, I didn't think it seemed right but it was a bit before my time.
Then there is always Flanders and Swan
Troll, troll, glorious troll Nothing quite like it for making blood boil So follow me follow Down to the hollow And there let us swallow His glorious troll
-- Tony
"Don't argue the matter, the difficulties will argue for themselves" -W.S. Churchill
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:38:32 GMT, [email hidden] (Steven)
Quoted message said:
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 20:29:16 +0100, "JNugent" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"Steve Firth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Since we seem to have acceptance that four cyclists produce as much CO2 as one SUV. I think we can now solve global warming at a stroke.
Quoted message said:
Each SUV owner should be required to remove as much CO2 producing capacity from the ecosystem as is represented by their consumption of fuel.
Quoted message said:
This can be achieved most simply by each SUV owner removing four cyclists permanently from the population. The method of dispatch is largely irrelevant but in the spirit of eco-friendly direct action I suggest bullbars or possibly a crossbow. Most small saloon car owners could get by with mowing down just a couple of cyclists.
Just a moment...
You haven't specified the frequency.
Is this per diem? Per annum? What?
It would be per lifetime (on average).
Will they be able to restrain themselves and live with this new frugal agression ration?
And as a motorist/cyclist, can I just get to kill just one other cyclist and then top myself?
