XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science   
   From: YourName@YourISP.com   
      
   In article , Mike Dworetsky   
    wrote:   
      
   > Robert Bannister wrote:   
   > > On 14/01/2014 3:57 am, Your Name wrote:   
   > >> In article , lal_truckee   
   > >>  wrote:   
   > >>   
   > >>> On 1/13/14 10:06 AM, David DeLaney wrote:   
   > >>>> On 2014-01-13, lal_truckee  wrote:   
   > >>>>> On 1/11/14 6:35 PM, Joy Beeson wrote:   
   > >>>>>> eliminating the horse   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>> resulted in the demise of a true, practical, and widely available   
   > >>>>> self-driving carriage.   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> Though you have to admit that the pollution issue was more   
   > >>>> immediate and terrible than today's cars and trains and trucks   
   > >>>> produce.   
   > >>>   
   > >>> Might be easier to teach a horse to use the toilet than to teach a   
   > >>> car to drive.   
   > >>   
   > >> Plus the waste product from a horse has an actual use (in gardening)   
   > >> whereas waste product from cars doesn't.   
   > >>   
   > >   
   > > But at the height of horse-drawn traffic, there was far more than   
   > > could be cleared up, and in 19th century London, there wasn't much   
   > > room for growing rhubarb or roses.   
   >   
   > Actually, it was picked up each night and the carts took it to fields and   
   > farms outside London where it was composted and used to fertilize farms,   
   > grain fields, grazing land, and orchards.   
      
   Luickily, if we all switched back to horses, we could use all the extra   
   fertiliser since we need more rhubard to feed everyone ... we'd also   
   need more roses to hid the smell of the horses ... win-win-win.  ;-)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)