tvashtarkatena

It's gettin' so's you can't even taking a nice, relaxing shit without some Republican congressman doing a sneak and peek into your stall. I'd better learn how to wash my hands behind my back. Kinda gives the phrase 'corn lobby' a whole new meaning.

I wanna know where I can go and pay a Republican to blow me AND give me $20? No, not you, KKK. That chipped tooth of yours could second as a hedge trimmer.

I really hate when men make blanket statements about women, too.

See what you've caused, KKK? Now STFU.

Never too retarded. Consider your audience.

I couldn't tell from the video whether or not he had a 'center wheel'.

I've found many spent party balloons in the mountains. I can't for the life of me figure out what climbers are using them for.

The former should cut the latter down by half, as you don't have to worry about taking anyone out for a bite.

My knees hurt.

Not to mention flukes, biners, and slings!

As long as those leathers were produced sustainably, I love him.

Well, I hate to refute an expert who has DONE some crop work, but... ...the amount of our total annual corn production used for feed (and associated byproducts) is twice as much as for all other uses...so I think the way we raise animals has just a little bit to do with the issue. Graze 'em and the corn issue (and a whole bunch of other environmental and health issues) go away. The majority of the remaining corn production goes into high fructose corn syrup production: an absolutely essential ingredient for a balanced diet. The idea is not to hoe corn by hand: it's to stop growing so much of the shit altogether. Everything you never wanted to know about corn

Since you're refering to my previous post, I'll answer your question. BTW, 2 out of the three main sources of I mentioned previously happen to be commuting and home energy usage: not industry. In the past 5 years I've installed an energy efficient refrigerator, dishwasher, furnace, on demand water heater, switched to compact flourescents, timed low volume irrigation, an organic garden, cancelled my yard waste and do full composting, started riding a motor cycle, and stopped commuting. My home energy consumption is now 20% of other similar households in my area (our utilities provide this statistic). So...what have YOU done, heli-boy?

Dru's made up his 50% figure and, of course, it's bullshit. Also, organic farming often requires the same or less manpower than conventional. Here's an example from an organic dairy I just visited: Instead of keeping the cows penned up and bringing them siloed grass and hay (conventional farm), they graze their cows on a rotation schedule that allows native grasses to grow sustainably. Their calves are healthier. Their vet bills are lower. And the kicker: WAY less manpower for the same yield: and they loose 100 times less soil per acre during heavy rains than their conventional neighbors. What you read from guys like Dru is a non-practitioner's erroneous opinion of an industry he knows little to nothing about in any depth. Unfortunately, this kind of ignorance is widespread. Gee, I wonder why?

It's all part of the PR game... Just like Michael Vick's staged apology. That's what this country has come to with our pervasive media circus and 24 hour news cycle. The guy should just resign already (as should have Bubba). Hell, in Japan, someone who did this would commit suicide. Resignation ain't all that bad. Yeah, our values used to be SO MUCH BETTER in the past. I harken for the good ole days of lynching blacks and beating gays to death, far from the prying eyes of an overly nosy media. If it weren't for the 24 hour news cycle/media circus, Vicks would probably still be electrocuting dogs and Craig's guilty plea would have been swept under the table without a whisper. The 'media circus' is OK by me.

Jesus Christ, I loves me some mountains! Amen.

Yes. I should think that the emissions from the production of gasoline are of a similar quantity if not the same chemically. As I spent 10 minutes googling and skimming. One of the major accounted benefits of biodiesel is that producing more biodiesel pulls more CO2 out of the air. Not if produced by conventional 'factory farm' agricultural practices, and that is the main catch. Yeah and organic farming will do a better job, since organic yields are ~50% of factory farm yields? It's apparent from this blanket statement that you not only do not know a thing about organic farming, but that you also don't know how to put together an argument. It's well known that organic agricultural yields per unit of fuel are far, far higher than factory farms. It's also well known that they maintain sustainable top soil health; something factory farms do not.

Damn. I was actually thinking about relocating to one of those two sweltering shitholes.

Yes. I should think that the emissions from the production of gasoline are of a similar quantity if not the same chemically. As I spent 10 minutes googling and skimming. One of the major accounted benefits of biodiesel is that producing more biodiesel pulls more CO2 out of the air. Not if produced by conventional 'factory farm' agricultural practices, and that is the main catch.

This just in from CC's most consistent and vociferous Guantanamo Bay fan. What an...let's see, how does KKK so often put it...ass clown.

hey dumb ass - he plead guilty - that means he's guilty. 1) he reversed his plea 2) many people plead guilty who aren't - for various reasons Perhaps he took his cue from Miss Carolina and simply misspoke. 300 sources say that the guy's been soliciting and, by some accounts, getting, bathroom blowjobs since 1967. Now, that's fine, as far as I'm concerned, except for one little problem: he's a U.S. senator that has consistently fought against any form of gay rights. Craig is, simply put, a lying, self-hating gay. Which is fine, too...unless you are a U.S. senator...or his wife.

1) No, it doesn't. The best estimates (from Scientific American article on biofuels) is that a gallon of fossil fuel will get you approximately 1.3 gallons of ethanol from corn. Or 1.9 gallons of biodiesel from soy. or ~20 gallons of ethanol from brazilian sugarcane..... 2) you don't get biodiesel from corn. Mazola aside, corn doesn't make a lot of oil. You get biodiesel from oilseed crops like soy, sunflower, etc. Yes, I read the article, but your synopsis of it is flawed. For example, you're ignoring the fact that a gallon of ethanol has far less energy than a gallon of gasoline, negating the 'net gain' of producing ethanol from corn. Secondly, you're not addressing the long term environmental damage from conventional corn production. Third, Brazil does enjoy the ability to produce biofuels sustainably: because it's on the fucking equator and has more solar energy to put into plant biomass production. Last time I checked, we were in a temperate zone that does not have that luxury.

Now I know you are a retard I might have just come to the same conclusion... Corn fields are freaking huge. You could probably put a corn field AROUND an oil well. Also consider fertilizer, herbicides, pesticides... farms create a lot of pollution. I also do not concede your point about utilizing a waste product- if McDonalds uses a bunch of cooking oil and throws it away... well who knows where it goes, but it probably stays oil. If you take that oil and burn it, you just liberated all the carbon that was bound up in that oil and put it into the air. Maybe the thing biodiesel has going for it is, when you grow a plant and then burn it, you're binding and then releasing carbon that is in the atmosphere to begin with? Whereas with dino juice you're just liberating carbon that was buried? I would like to hear from someone who knows what they're talking about. Google Reduced Carbon Monoxide and hydrocarbons, increased Nitrogen compounds. Give a little, take a little This report focuses only on the emissions produced from the final burning of the fuel, and does not include the emissions from it's production.

Now I know you are a retard I might have just come to the same conclusion... Corn fields are freaking huge. You could probably put a corn field AROUND an oil well. Also consider fertilizer, herbicides, pesticides... farms create a lot of pollution. Canada gets the majority of its oil from the oil sands... see pictures previous page. It takes two tons of oil sand to get one 42 gallon barrel of oil and uses an enormous amount of energy to make the conversion. How a cornfield is more destructive that that, is beyond me. Canada's oil sands production is uniquely destructive: essentially, Canada is using it's plentiful and cheap natural gas to fuel oil extraction: the result is actually net NEGATIVE energy production, but Canada makes a profit because of the high price of oil verses natural gas. Conventional oil drilling doesn't have this problem.

A gallon of biodeisel or ethanol (by far the more common fuel product from this source, and one that contains far less energy per gallon than gasoline) made from corn oil grown by conventional agricultural means takes more than a gallon of gas in fertilizer, pesticides, transport, and processing costs to produce. One need not be a 'scientist' to recognize the implications of this simple equation. It's therefore better to just keep drilling and refining oil than to make bio fuels in this manner. As for oil wells, they generally don't destroy the top soil over the long term. Conventional corn production is the most destructive type of agriculture in this sense. What is needed is a way to make ethanol from organisms that do not require intensive and destructive agriculture, such as trees or algae. The technology is not there, yet. For now, we'll have to settle for promoting bio fuels from sustainably grown sources. Unfortunately, this represents a tiny fraction of the total today. The current love affair growing corn for for fuel is a political ploy by agribusiness to boost market share and profits. It's utter bullshit from an environmental standpoint.