Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum Enviro-PLONK!

http://www.nature.com/news/2006/060710/full/060710-4.html

"if all the corn (maize) produced in the United States last year were removed from food supplies and turned into ethanol, just 12% of US gasoline demand would be offset. Turning soybeans into diesel would account for only 9% of US diesel demand"

Maybe if we extended daylight-savings time some more the plants would grow bigger in the extended sunlight. "8^>)

"A US Department of Energy report released on Friday 7 July said that biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol could displace 30% of the fuel consumed in US transportation by 2030."

Dust from Tinkerbell's behind is elevating. I saw the movie, it must be true.

Maybe if we didn't look for magic bullets, one cure fits all, and other simplistic jingo spin-doctored solutions we could make some progress.

Oh that's right. Voters have simple minds and vote for simple politicians with simple solutions forgetting as Einstein said:
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler"

and

"Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created them"

Which is it Al? Going to put that intellect to solving the problem or just whining about the solutions?

30% sounds good to me. Do you prefer 30% more dependence on unreliable foreign suppliers? How far will we be toward energy independence by 2030, if we sit on our hands and denigrate the state of alternative energy sources today?

We'd have never made it to the moon with the likes of Uncle Al running the program.

In fact we'd still be hiding in trees from the saber toothed kittycats ... you know those bow-and-arrow contraptions. Totally unproven technology. Bow's break, strings get worn, arrows go astray.

Xorg the cave man: "Look, I rub these two sticks together and they get hot. Maybe we could make fire!"

Uncle Al, the cave man: "No, everyone, it will never work. Look at me, I am really smart. Don't worry, those glaciers will be here forever, I can prove it..."

So, I dunno the history here, but it seems like Uncle Al makes an excellent point. The government guy quoted is clearly inaccurate in his assessment. Wildly inaccurate.

Why all the goofy, ad hominem attacks?

The government guy is wildly inaccurate? Specifically which statements. Provide references that show how he is inaccurate.

you appear to be fairly new here. if da cant find a scientific reason to attack something, he figures that an insult about the poster is just as good an argument about science. after all, if the person has feelings he cant be a real scientist. IF that dont work, the attacking into a different area will take it away from the arguement he cant win to something he feels he can.

For my part, it is because Uncle Al is a troll. This subject has been beaten to death in other threads. Note the lack of participation of Uncle Al since the thread was started.

It isn't as though he doesn't have the time to read discussion groups
http://forums.hypography.com/earth-science/7499-enviro-plonk.html

It's not as though this is the only time he posts identical threads on multiple forums:
http://forums.hypography.com/earth-science/7438-inconvenient-truth.html

It isn't as though they take him seriously either

"I can't believe the people that take Unc so seriously..... "--C1ay (editor and moderator).

dehammer I didn't attack anybody or anything I asked for supporting references: Something you have never provided. So I guess asking someone to substantiate something with a reference to you is an insult. Live with it!

show me here where you were asking for references.
the reason i never gave a reference in this thread is that you never asked. in other threads when i had them i supplied them. the interesting things is that you insult people that ask you for references if you cant find one that supports you. you even supply references that support my side of the arguement then insulted me for disagreeing with you.

why should i not tell new people that you are trying to drive them away with your insults. we know how you are. life with that.

dehammer just wrote:
"show me here where you were asking for references."

Is this what you wanted?
"The government guy is wildly inaccurate? Specifically which statements. Provide references that show how he is inaccurate."
posted: uly 16, 2006 11:15 PM

roflol. you obviously have a problem distinguishing between things that happen at different times. you insulted someone, and someone asked why. i responded to that. you later asked for reference, not before the question was asked.

therefore telling me that the insult was to ask for references was totally stupid. can you make yourself look any more stupid that this. do you have any more credibility to destroy. i think not. you have none to destroy.

cant you see the sequence. the question was asked about something you posted 6 hours before you asked for references. the question had nothing to do with your asking for references, it had to do with the fact that you insult everyone here. i simply gave him the warning that you do that to everyone and why.

the 'why' is that if you cant win a debate with facts, or your facts support your opponents view point (something that you don't seem to be able to figure out in advance or even after its been pointed out to you), then you resort to insult hoping to win the augment by chasing off the other people.

Easier to dissemble than to provide a reference eh!

1) it would do you no good since you don't read any thing, just insult the people that own the site the link goes to.

2) I'm not the one that was arguing that point. i was explaining why you insulted him. therefore, i was not dissembling.

or was that your explanation of why you were insulting and then dissembling on my explanation.