On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:07:10 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

The rush to ethanol is creating a huge disruption in the food supply
chain. This morning I was down at the local farm taking some
picutures and conversed with the owner. He showed me his feed bill
for his milk cows and beef cattle - he's paying twice what he paid
last year and he can't hedge because his suppliers fully expect it to
double again before spring. He's seriously thinking of cutting back
on his herd because even though beef prices are rising, he can't
afford the same size herd because he can't feed them economically.

Maybe he should feed them grain instead.

Ethanol hasn't anything to do with global warming. The business of
farm subsidies is what pushes corn and ethanol. It's a boondogle,
creating ethanol is a net loss when considering what it takes to
produce a gallon of fuel.

Speaking of which, growing cows is stupid too. Costs to produce a
pound of beef are enormous in comparison to most other foods, not to
mention that it's sucking up the US aquifer, poisoning crops and
people through uncontrolled runoff, etc.

Can't blame it all on Gore, but I'm sure you'd like to.

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:13:02 -0800, jps wrote:

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:07:10 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

The rush to ethanol is creating a huge disruption in the food supply
chain. This morning I was down at the local farm taking some
picutures and conversed with the owner. He showed me his feed bill
for his milk cows and beef cattle - he's paying twice what he paid
last year and he can't hedge because his suppliers fully expect it to
double again before spring. He's seriously thinking of cutting back
on his herd because even though beef prices are rising, he can't
afford the same size herd because he can't feed them economically.

Maybe he should feed them grain instead.

Ethanol hasn't anything to do with global warming. The business of
farm subsidies is what pushes corn and ethanol. It's a boondogle,
creating ethanol is a net loss when considering what it takes to
produce a gallon of fuel.

Speaking of which, growing cows is stupid too. Costs to produce a
pound of beef are enormous in comparison to most other foods, not to
mention that it's sucking up the US aquifer, poisoning crops and
people through uncontrolled runoff, etc.

Can't blame it all on Gore, but I'm sure you'd like to.

Oh go soak your head in the Northwest Passage. :)

PS: I blame Gore for everything.

And you. :)

wrote:
On Dec 20, 10:33 am, "BillP" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Dec 19, 7:08 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/908
I've got a question. Why do you take this article as gospel, the end
all of all ends? After all, everything Canadian you instantly **** on
right here in rec.boats. Then you glean one single article coming from
the great white north, and it's the greatest piece ever written!
Pretty selective, don't you think?
Every day 30,000 people on this planet die of the diseases of poverty
A third of the planet doesn't have electricity.
A billion people have no clean water.
A half a billion people going to bed hungry every night.

Since almost every action called for by the global warming alarmists will
make life even worse for all these people, why do assholes like you care
more about what *may happen* a 100 years in the future instead of paying
attention to what's going on now?

Your childish and low-life name calling shows that you aren't bright
enough to understand an intelligent response, or you're too narrow
minded.


Sally, you sound *exactly* like Kevin/Walter/Basskisser. Coincidence?
Not a chance.

wrote:
On Dec 20, 10:58 am, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:47:41 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Dec 20, 10:13 am, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:04:23 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:
On Dec 19, 4:08?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/908
There is evidence as well as scientific opinion on both sides of the
human-influence factor. Neither your side or the other should trot out
a single study and say "see, that settles it." (Not that you are).
It's amazing the number of people who not only deny that many could
ever have any influence on his global environment, but also insist
that the climate is *not* changing at all...........
It's amazing the number of people who preach that man is solely responsible
for global warming and that many billions of dollars in the right pockets
will stop it.
*That's* what's amazing!
--
John H
John, just *who* preaches that man is "solely responsible for global
warming"?
Whoooosh!
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Whoosh, my ass. Did you make that statement or not? Do you believe the
statement that YOU wrote, or aren't you a man of conviction?

"are you a man"? That sound very familiar, Sally. But that wouldn't
have been you posting it here, right?

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 00:18:35 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:13:02 -0800, jps wrote:

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:07:10 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

The rush to ethanol is creating a huge disruption in the food supply
chain. This morning I was down at the local farm taking some
picutures and conversed with the owner. He showed me his feed bill
for his milk cows and beef cattle - he's paying twice what he paid
last year and he can't hedge because his suppliers fully expect it to
double again before spring. He's seriously thinking of cutting back
on his herd because even though beef prices are rising, he can't
afford the same size herd because he can't feed them economically.

Maybe he should feed them grain instead.

Ethanol hasn't anything to do with global warming. The business of
farm subsidies is what pushes corn and ethanol. It's a boondogle,
creating ethanol is a net loss when considering what it takes to
produce a gallon of fuel.

Speaking of which, growing cows is stupid too. Costs to produce a
pound of beef are enormous in comparison to most other foods, not to
mention that it's sucking up the US aquifer, poisoning crops and
people through uncontrolled runoff, etc.

Can't blame it all on Gore, but I'm sure you'd like to.

Oh go soak your head in the Northwest Passage. :)

PS: I blame Gore for everything.

And you. :)

I knew that. That's a lot of methane you're storing.

Better keep it away from open flame or your head could do what you're
hoping happens to Hillary's. ;^)

Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing that either. I'd like to see if
America is ready to have (what it perceives as) a black man in the
white house.

Wonder if he'd have the balls to do something about campaign finance
reform and getting the lobbyists the hell out of washington (during
the time he's repairing our sullied world image and setting us on a
better course).

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:48:54 -0800, jps wrote:

Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing that either. I'd like to see if
America is ready to have (what it perceives as) a black man in the
white house.

Interesting comment.

Personally, I'm not excited by anybody on either side.

wrote in message
...
On Dec 20, 10:57 am, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:46:07 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Dec 20, 10:33 am, "BillP" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Dec 19, 7:08 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/908

I've got a question. Why do you take this article as gospel, the end
all of all ends? After all, everything Canadian you instantly ****
on
right here in rec.boats. Then you glean one single article coming
from
the great white north, and it's the greatest piece ever written!
Pretty selective, don't you think?

Every day 30,000 people on this planet die of the diseases of poverty
A third of the planet doesn't have electricity.
A billion people have no clean water.
A half a billion people going to bed hungry every night.

Since almost every action called for by the global warming alarmists
will
make life even worse for all these people, why do assholes like you
care
more about what *may happen* a 100 years in the future instead of
paying
attention to what's going on now?

Your childish and low-life name calling shows that you aren't bright
enough to understand an intelligent response, or you're too narrow
minded.

Here, Loogy, same question for you but restated:

"Since almost every action called for by the global warming alarmists
will
make life even worse for all these people, why do you care
more about what *may happen* a 100 years in the future instead of paying
attention to what's going on now?
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I, and a lot of others ARE concerned about what's happening now. Does
that somehow negate the effort to give our progeny an environment to
live in at least as good as ours?

If idiots like you have your way, billions (with a B) of people will
starve, die of curable disease, and live without any hope of progress just
so your "progeny" can live with 10 to 20 parts per million less CO2 in the
atmosphere.

Is that OK with you?

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:07:10 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

It's a boondogle, creating ethanol is a net loss when considering what it
takes to produce a gallon of fuel.

That's the most intelligent statement you've ever said in this group.

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 16:13:02 -0800, jps wrote:

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:07:10 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

The rush to ethanol is creating a huge disruption in the food supply
chain. This morning I was down at the local farm taking some
picutures and conversed with the owner. He showed me his feed bill
for his milk cows and beef cattle - he's paying twice what he paid
last year and he can't hedge because his suppliers fully expect it to
double again before spring. He's seriously thinking of cutting back
on his herd because even though beef prices are rising, he can't
afford the same size herd because he can't feed them economically.

Maybe he should feed them grain instead.

Ethanol hasn't anything to do with global warming. The business of
farm subsidies is what pushes corn and ethanol. It's a boondogle,
creating ethanol is a net loss when considering what it takes to
produce a gallon of fuel.

Speaking of which, growing cows is stupid too. Costs to produce a
pound of beef are enormous in comparison to most other foods, not to
mention that it's sucking up the US aquifer, poisoning crops and
people through uncontrolled runoff, etc.

Can't blame it all on Gore, but I'm sure you'd like to.

Oh go soak your head in the Northwest Passage. :)

PS: I blame Gore for everything.

And you. :)

Not Chuck. Is all those Microsoft weenies.

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 03:26:12 GMT, "BillP"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:07:10 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

It's a boondogle, creating ethanol is a net loss when considering what it
takes to produce a gallon of fuel.

That's the most intelligent statement you've ever said in this group.

Have you suffered a blow to the head in the past few days? Perhaps
your reading comprehension has made an unexplained leap?

AFAIC, this statement is within the statistical mean average of the
bulk of my statements, forgiving a few explitives here and there.