Thursday, February 19, 2009

Liberals need to help save the planet for a change

This story gets to combine two of my least favorite things in life: pork and global warming hysteria. Observe:

The use of crop-based biofuels could speed up rather than slow down global warming by fueling the destruction of rainforests, scientists warned Saturday.

Once heralded as the answer to oil, biofuels have become increasingly controversial because of their impact on food prices and the amount of energy it takes to produce them.

They could also be responsible for pumping far more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than they could possibly save as a replacement for fossil fuels, according to a study released Saturday.

Whoops.

Now, we've all had this massive rush in Washington to subsidize corn based ethanol, mainly because they grow a lot of corn in Iowa and they happen to have a Presidential Caucus there. All of the Democratic pork producers love it, because they get to bolster their Presidential cred, make environmentalists happy, and get to say they are "protecting the family farm."

And remember: this 'aint our first rodeo with noting the dangers of biofuels.

One of the big problems that Republicans like myself have has little to do with the idea of using alternative fuels; exploring new ideas and innovation makes good sense. But our problem has been and continues to be this rush to judgment for the latest and greatest fad that will purportedly "save the environment" when, in fact, the science on that is unproven at best or shows that we are doing even more damage at worse.

Rushing to judgment means we all pay. And we are all paying dearly for rushing to judgment and pork barrell spending on envirofuels.

Next thing you know, we're going to be taking about perpetual motion engines as a national priority....

(Crossposted)

8 comments:

warpmine said...

"Next thing you know, we're going to be taking about perpetual motion engines as a national priority...."

Why not? We already maintain a schools system run by progressive liberals that keep our children perpetually stupid.

You would expect that rushing to judgement is what liberals hated about the Iraq war, but in fact almost every way waged except WWII was a rush to judgement. I strongly believe the correlation is valid. Politics today has a real problem of installing total emotion into every problem, however what is needed is patience and logical thought to analyze the what happens in phase two, you know , consequences.

Anonymous said...

censorship or protection of minors ? Is there not an assumption of parental accountability ?

http://www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bin/read/2009/02_20-10/TOP

FUWR said...

Ethanol has been a boondoggle of Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa, who is a Republican the last time I checked. Serious global warming scientists and activists have been opposed to ethanol for years, which actually takes more energy to process than it actually provides as a fuel. However, you wouldn't know this since you, once again, decided to give a skewed, Cliff's Notes version of the facts rather than actually research and learn about something. Just like you do with Global Warming.

Brian Griffiths said...

Maybe you want to try that once more and have it make, you know, sense there skippy.

FUWR said...

Do you have trouble with reading comprehension? Is this why you can't understand the facts about global warming? Or do you just believe whatever Rush & Friends tell you?

Mark Newgent said...

FUWR,

As opposed to your regurgitation of Al Gore's pablum!

Please explain why if Co2 is the main driver for climate/or warming or whatever catastrophe your side is hawking--does it lag hundreds of years behind warming? Why do actual climatic observations not match up with alarmist modeling?

Why are green progressive groups alinging with rent seeking corporations to feed at the public trough?

As Brian said go back and find some common sense before you beclown yourself again.

Anonymous said...

Wow.

Don't make and argument Mark just throw out any nonsense that comes to mind so you don't have to think or prove a point.

Anonymous said...

Bog a discussion down in irrelevent questions and you might fillibuster to a draw.

Whistling past the graveyard gets you nowhere....

So, let the howling begin. There is a template response somewhere you can rely on, Mark.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/12/021206075233.htm
Climate Change Surprise: High Carbon Dioxide Levels Can Retard Plant Growth, Study Reveals

http://www.independentmail.com/news/2009/feb/22/guest-column-man-does-make-his-impact-environment/
Man does make his impact on the environment

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/21/opinion/21sat3.html?ref=opinion
Changing Climate Numbers

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2009/784/40385
UN climate report understated dangers, co-author warns

ShareThis