First they came for the babies, then the cats and dogs...

Error message

(Tim, w/thanks to Jiho) For those still inclined to jump on the bandwagon of anthropogenic global warming, take a look at the latest call for repentance. Turns out pets are as bad as cars--SUVs even. So we must repent of our dogs and cats--even our goldfish.

A medium-sized dog has an annual footprint of 2.07 acres, which is about the same carbon footprint as driving an SUV 12,500 miles. John Barrett of the Stockholm Environment Institute was asked to "calculate eco-pawprints," and he summarized his very scientific findings:

"Owning a dog really is quite an extravagance, mainly because of the carbon footprint of meat," Barrett said.

Showing how serious a problem pets are, further calculations revealed cats have an eco-footprint slightly less than driving a Volkswagen Golf

for a year, two hamsters are about the same as a plasma television, and even a goldfish burns energy equivalent...

to two cellphones.

Meanwhile, "Reha Huttin, president of France's 30 Million Friends animal rights

foundation says the human impact of eliminating pets would be equally

devastating: "Pets are anti-depressants, they help us cope with stress, they are good for the elderly. Everyone should work out their own environmental impact. I should be

allowed to say that I walk instead of using my car and that I don't eat

meat, so why shouldn't I be allowed to have a little cat to alleviate

my loneliness?"

Sylvie Comont, proud owner of seven cats and two dogs -- the

environmental equivalent of a small fleet of cars -- says defiantly,

"Our animals give us so much that I don't feel like a polluter at all.

So what crisis were the men of Sodom and Gomorrah discussing in their parliament, and what evils were their law enforcement officers ticketing?