“UN official holds rich nations accountable for food shortages” http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/03/europe/food.php. “criticized policies like those in the United States that subsidize growing crops for energy.”
Isn’t this the same United Nations who wants to move from fossil fuels to “alternative energy” sources?
I hate to break it to you, but you can’t invest in biofuels and keep making food, too, if you want to make ethanol from corn. “Nobody understands how $11- to $12-billion-dollar-a-year subsidies in 2006 and protective tariff policies have the effect of diverting 100 million tons of cereals from human consumption, mostly to satisfy the thirst for fuel for vehicles.”
Personally, I want to see industry focus on cellulose-based ethanol production, because then you can ethanolify more-or-less anything that grows.
Turning corn into ethanol is horribly inefficient.
But that’s beside the point: you have a choice. You can grow food, or you can grow “fuel”.
Take your pick.
…Wired choses to “expose” that many science teachers “still teach creationism”. http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/05/one-in-eight-hi.html
Are evolutionists really that concerned? If they’re right, who cares if such an “alternative” is presented?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120847988943824973.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries - Our Climate Numbers Are a Big Old Mess
“The earth’s paltry warming trend, 0.31 degrees Fahrenheit per decade since the mid-1970s, isn’t enough to scare people into poverty. And even that 0.31 degree figure is suspect.
“For years, records from surface thermometers showed a global warming trend beginning in the late 1970s. But temperatures sensed by satellites and weather balloons displayed no concurrent warming.
“These records have been revised a number of times, and I examined the two major revisions of these three records. They are the surface record from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the satellite-sensed temperatures originally published by University of Alabama’s John Christy, and the weather-balloon records originally published by James Angell of the U.S. Commerce Department.
“The two revisions of the IPCC surface record each successively lowered temperatures in the 1950s and the 1960s. The result? Obviously more warming – from largely the same data.”
