Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 16:49:52 -0500
Reply-To: "Joe L." <jliasse@TOAST.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: "Joe L." <jliasse@TOAST.NET>
Subject: Re: Amish and polution
In-Reply-To: <001301bf7f5b$a0c54ea0$6e20480c@pavilion>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I dont look on the horse as a step forward. I was mearly replying to a
guy that was condeming SUV's and applauding the possible effect of the
present gas price increase on the folks who have them. I was mearly pointing
out that, unless we can demonstrate some actual, genuine **need** of the old
inefficient Vanagons we all love there is not much separating us from those
he complains about. Imagine the world if we were only permitted to have that
which other people think we NEED while that which they decide we mearly WANT
is taxed beyond our means to possess.
And the severe environmental problems you mention below due to the
concentrations of sh*t is ONLY because the environment endangered (the city)
is as artificial as the SUV. Natural environments have zero trouble
handling the "emmissions" of those occupants naturally there. Even monmuntal
concentrations of "non-properly composted" sh*t present no problems. The
millions of Buffalo being only one example.
A Little Aside: It being an election year each politician is once again
claiming to be an "Environmentalist" while panning similar claims from the
other politicians. To back up these claims and pans each of these
politicians are trotting out herds of other self-proclaimed
"Environmentalists"; including many movie stars, who seem to insist that the
titles they have given themselves convey some kind of expertise on the
subject and an ability to state which of the other "Environmentalists" is or
is not, in fact, a REAL "Environmentalist". This generally separates
claimants along strict party lines with the "True Environmentalist" being
sealed with the sacred "D" after thier names. All the while the press nod
gravly as if all of this actually means something beyond mear PR but also
offer no defination of what an "Envoronmemtalist" is and what is needed to
qualify as one.
Anyone here care to offer a defination?
-----Original Message-----
From: Karl Wolz [mailto:wolzphoto@worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 1:43 AM
To: Joe L.; vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Re: Amish and polution
Joe,
When the automobile was first coming into vogue, it was hailed as the end of
pollution. We occasionally confront a road apple in our modern lives, and
think it's kinda smelly, but quaint, and in its own way, almost cute. A
symbol of simpler times gone by.
Can you imagine just how deep the sh*t would be if we all had horse drawn
carriages instead of cars? Not to mention that those horses keep on
polluting whether they're being used or not! Manure, properly composted is
an aid to agriculture, especially on a small farm, but large quantities of
it, laying in a city street, it is a breeding ground for disease and when
run off into rivers and into the sea, is a severe environmental problem.
The internal combustion engine is not anywhere near perfect, and it will be
replaced in relatively short order with something cleaner, but don't look
backward at horses as a step forward. If you do, you're the one wearing the
blinders, not Ol' Paint.
Karl Wolz
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe L." <jliasse@TOAST.NET>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2000 10:11 PM
Subject: Re: Amish and polution
> But it is all BIODEGRADABLE, is GOOD for the environment and thus NOT
> polution. That we may not like the stuff is our problem. The environment
> LOVES it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com]On Behalf
> Of Joel Walker
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2000 11:31 PM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: Re: Amish and polution
>
>
> > So you don't think the Amish polute the air , is that what you are
saying.
>
> obviously, he's never been around horses very much. them suckers are
really
> effecient methane producers!! and the potential-fertilizer the pours
> incessantly from the output end of the horse doesn't exactly smell that
> great, either! plus a sweaty horse, after plowing the north 40 or pulling
> the buggy to town and back, is not my favorite aroma. better than a sweaty
> cow, i grant you, but still .... :)
>
> is it Friday yet?? :)
>
| 
