On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 10:40:01 -0400, ATP* wrote:
"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 08:47:12 -0400, ATP*
wrote:

The major problem with corn based ethanol is the energy input to make a
gallon of ethanol, which is very close to a gallon of fossil fuels.

You'll be providn' a cite for that claim, right?

Land use
issues, corn prices and pollution from agriculture are all just
additional
nails in the coffin, as far as I'm concerned. Let's admit that the
whole program is just a big give away to agribusiness and get moving on
other alternative energy sources, including nuclear.

Call it what you want, I don't care, but when you have to lie and
distort about it to make your points, it weakens your point of view's
credibility.

When you have to include insults and personal attacks in every post, you
have ZERO credibility. Address the issues, if you can.

The whole global warming thing is a crock. "Agribusiness" isn't the
culprit - they're just trying to make a buck. The problem is stupid
governments making bad policies based on bad science.

You could cease all human activity immediately, and it would have
absolutely no effect on the Sun's output, or the perturbations of
Earth's orbit, or the precession of Earth's axis. In other words, it
wouldn't make any difference.

If human-caused "global warming" has had any impact at all, it is to
postpone the next cold phase of the current ice age. I mean, if you
want to look at the big picture, you have to look at the BIG picture.

And the warmingists' "computer models" are nothing but GIGO, but
"OOh! The _Computer_ says so! It MUST be right!"

Feh.
Rich