A modest proposal

[tomtom]

A modest

[knelson]

...I'm glad you weren't running the show in 1941. We might not be at war with Islam, but they sure seem to be at war with us...or at least unwilling to rein in their most rabid dogs.

 

Thinking that there is "someone" within the whole Islamic religion that can speak for others or reign in their extremists is like thinking the Pope can reign in Jerry Falwell.

[Fairweather]

How long ago were the crusades? C'mon. We are talking current events here, so let's at least try to stay within the past 100 years, or so. Srebrinica, you ask?? You mean that UN declared safe haven?? The butchers there were not acting under the banner of religion. They were acting on behalf of a racist mentality that had previously been kept under wraps by a communist dictatorship. Pick your poison.

 

And what is the only major religion that has not undergone a reformation?

[Fairweather]

...I'm glad you weren't running the show in 1941. We might not be at war with Islam, but they sure seem to be at war with us...or at least unwilling to rein in their most rabid dogs.

 

Thinking that there is "someone" within the whole Islamic religion that can speak for others or reign in their extremists is like thinking the Pope can reign in Jerry Falwell.

 

Jerry Falwell isn't telling people to kill non-believers by decapitation or bus-bomb. If he were, I suspect the Christian world would shout him down without ambiguity.

[knelson]

How long ago were the crusades? C'mon. We are talking current events here, so let's at least try to stay within the past 100 years, or so.

 

"Current" events seem to have little impact on those involved in religious arguments. How long have the Jews and Palestinians been spitting at each other?

 

Srebrinica, you ask?? You mean that UN declared safe haven?? The butchers there were not acting under the banner of religion. They were acting on behalf of a racist mentality that had previously been kept under wraps by a communist dictatorship. Pick your poison.

 

What if part of what defines a race is religion? While not a historian on the issue, I thought Srebrinica was primarily Christians killing Muslims.

 

And what is the only major religion that has not undergone a reformation?

 

Don't know. I'm guessing... Islam? And your point is?

 

Christianity underwent a Reformation, but at the time, I'm pretty sure the Catholics thought the Reformers were a bunch of extremists! Sure... we don't have indulgences anymore, but it's not like the Catholics and Lutherans and Episcopalians and Tom Cruise all agree on everything now. Isn't it the same with Islam? Don't we have different sects of Islam for that very reason?

 

My main problem is when people paint all of Islam with the same broad brush. The old "us versus them" mentality. Call me stupid (you won't be the first) but I actually believe many of the Imams when they say they are outraged by what is going on "in the name" of Islam. Just as I am outraged, as a Christian, at how our home-grown extremists highjack my religion.

[knelson]

...I'm glad you weren't running the show in 1941. We might not be at war with Islam, but they sure seem to be at war with us...or at least unwilling to rein in their most rabid dogs.

 

Thinking that there is "someone" within the whole Islamic religion that can speak for others or reign in their extremists is like thinking the Pope can reign in Jerry Falwell.

 

Jerry Falwell isn't telling people to kill non-believers by decapitation or bus-bomb. If he were, I suspect the Christian world would shout him down without ambiguity.

 

My point is... and I think you got it... is there is no one living voice that represents Islam. Just as there is no one living voice that represents Christianity.

[cj001f]

Fuck Saudi Arabia, and FUCK their oil too. 17%. We can make do without it. Screw Pakistan. Musharraf is a backstabbing weasel afraid to take a stand against the islamo-thugs within his own borders.

That's the swing producing 17%. Hard to fuck 'em until we get Iraq online. They are a paranoid repressive theocracy, but they've been or freind in need and can ease our oil addiction better than anyone. As for Pakistan,I believe W did just say fuck you to them.

 

I'll ignore your reference to a tinfoil hat wearing fatman whose works I've never watched or read.

[JoshK]

FW, my point with the Christians, Jews, etc. is that, whether you like it or not, they are very related to Islam and WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE? Right now we are trying to erradicate the extremist muslims who are doing the killing. this is good. but what you are essentially saying is that anybody in the religion as a whole is reasonably sacrificed in the name of vengance. Can you honestly believe this!!?!! It is pretty sick too.

 

Comparing the Japanese in WWII to the current situtation is ridiculous. You are talking about a COUNTRY with borders, citizenry, a military, etc. versus a religion that spans many people, countries, variations, etc. Don't even trying to compare the two, a second grader can figure out the differences.

 

I raised a tone because what you said is so unbelievably insane. I got to the point where I could at least respect your opinions , and would still like to, but man, come on, nuking cities for certain people's actions is way over the top.

 

As, about saying fuck off to the Saudis, I agree, but you aren't going to get it with the currently administration. It makes me hard thinking about how energey independent we could become by focusing hard core on bio-fuels. Good luck getting that with the current jackasses in power however. They'd rather make sure everybody can drive an Excursion that have us be energy independent.

[Dru]

Just think how quickly Britain could have stopped Irish terrorism if they'd nuked the Vatican in 1980.

[catbirdseat]

Fuck Saudi Arabia, and FUCK their oil too. 17%. We can make do without it. Screw Pakistan. Musharraf is a backstabbing weasel afraid to take a stand against the islamo-thugs within his own borders.

That's the swing producing 17%. Hard to fuck 'em until we get Iraq online. They are a paranoid repressive theocracy, but they've been or freind in need and can ease our oil addiction better than anyone. As for Pakistan,I believe W did just say fuck you to them.

I'll bet that get's Pakistan's attention!

[Fairweather]

It makes me hard thinking about how energey independent we could become by focusing hard core on bio-fuels. Good luck getting that with the current jackasses in power however.....

 

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.html

[Dru]

Ethanol and biodiesel are apples and oranges.

[JoshK]

Exactly. They also state it in terms of producing those fuels with fossil fuel energy. Hmm...that seems an awfully slanted way to think about it. Clearly the energy per unit contained in fossil fuels is very high, but is it worth the cost.

 

How can you be so anti middle-east (for god reasons) yet also so anti alternative energy? Until we start moving in the right direction we aren't going to get fucking anywhere. It is about short term sacrifice for long term benefit. Improving fuel economy standards for cars and, especially, shit useless vehicles would be a great start, but no, Bush and his scumpublican congress couldn't possibly consider bringing the automotive industry in line.

 

I don't get how people can claim we need new energy strategies yet vote for the guys that keep us in the oil-age. It is hypocracy at its finest.

[archenemy]

Americans need to walk more.

I wonder how much fuel would be saved if every fatass just walked to the market for their apples and oranges rather than drive two miles.

[Camilo]

No, JoshK and Dru. Fairweather's right: Alternatives don't work. . . we should just give up .

[archenemy]

Good.

I didn't want to get up from my chair anyway.

[Dru]

Americans need to walk more.

I wonder how much fuel would be saved if every fatass just walked to the market for their apples and oranges rather than drive two miles.

 

walking is for POOR PEOPLE!! bicycles are for the Chinese.

[JoshK]

No, JoshK and Dru. Fairweather's right: Alternatives don't work. . . we should just give up .

 

Yes, after all, it isn't ingenuity (sp??) and exploration that has made this country what it is. Oh wait, maybe it is.

 

Wind power also has tremendous potential, but I am sure FW has a reason why we shouldn't use more of it. In the long run (and not even that long) this country will be so much better off by investing now and paying a little more to get away from an oil dependency.

[EWolfe]

First we need to get the auto and fuel companies out of the government bed, obviously.

 

Good luck with that.

[Fairweather]

I'll post the article here, since you all seem more interested in hurling insults than actually reading the story. I'm not anti-alternative fuels, but when a Cornell/Cal-Berkley (for God's sake!) story raises questions, don't you think you should use some of that critical thinking you tout so often?? Catbird seems to get it....

 

Cornell ecologist's study finds that producing ethanol and biodiesel from corn and other crops is not worth the energy

By Susan S. Lang

 

 

 

ITHACA, N.Y. -- Turning plants such as corn, soybeans and sunflowers into fuel uses much more energy than the resulting ethanol or biodiesel generates, according to a new Cornell University and University of California-Berkeley study.

 

"There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel," says David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell. "These strategies are not sustainable."

 

Pimentel and Tad W. Patzek, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Berkeley, conducted a detailed analysis of the energy input-yield ratios of producing ethanol from corn, switch grass and wood biomass as well as for producing biodiesel from soybean and sunflower plants. Their report is published in Natural Resources Research (Vol. 14:1, 65-76).

 

In terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that:

 

* corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced;

* switch grass requires 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; and

* wood biomass requires 57 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.

 

In terms of energy output compared with the energy input for biodiesel production, the study found that:

 

* soybean plants requires 27 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced, and

* sunflower plants requires 118 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.

 

In assessing inputs, the researchers considered such factors as the energy used in producing the crop (including production of pesticides and fertilizer, running farm machinery and irrigating, grinding and transporting the crop) and in fermenting/distilling the ethanol from the water mix. Although additional costs are incurred, such as federal and state subsidies that are passed on to consumers and the costs associated with environmental pollution or degradation, these figures were not included in the analysis.

 

"The United State desperately needs a liquid fuel replacement for oil in the near future," says Pimentel, "but producing ethanol or biodiesel from plant biomass is going down the wrong road, because you use more energy to produce these fuels than you get out from the combustion of these products."

 

Although Pimentel advocates the use of burning biomass to produce thermal energy (to heat homes, for example), he deplores the use of biomass for liquid fuel. "The government spends more than $3 billion a year to subsidize ethanol production when it does not provide a net energy balance or gain, is not a renewable energy source or an economical fuel. Further, its production and use contribute to air, water and soil pollution and global warming," Pimentel says. He points out that the vast majority of the subsidies do not go to farmers but to large ethanol-producing corporations.

 

"Ethanol production in the United States does not benefit the nation's energy security, its agriculture, economy or the environment," says Pimentel. "Ethanol production requires large fossil energy input, and therefore, it is contributing to oil and natural gas imports and U.S. deficits." He says the country should instead focus its efforts on producing electrical energy from photovoltaic cells, wind power and burning biomass and producing fuel from hydrogen conversion.

[Fairweather]

Better check the Bio-Fuels Farce thread, JoshK. Even j_b sees the issue clearly.

[minx]

this might not be the right way to switch from oil but...

 

consider that if we can produce bio-fuels that operate the trucks and equipment involved in raising the crops that will significantly reduce the the amound of fossil fuels used in their production.

[Dru]

These studies all demonstrate the garbage in, garbage out dictum. Start by assumning you will use fossil fuels to make green fuels and you guarantee that it will be unproductive to do so.

 

Not to mention it's hard to run a car on wind or solar power, or burning biomass to make thermal energy. But hey, what if you use solar or wind energy to make biofuels? Hmm?

[JoshK]

Better check the Bio-Fuels Farce thread, JoshK. Even j_b sees the issue clearly.

 

 

Thanks, I have. And I care to listen to more of the issue than what is in one article. I am sick and fucking tired of people bitching about us being dependent on middle east oil and at the same time supporting administrations like the one we have. NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE WITH THEM IN POWER!!! Vote in people who actually see the point of doing long term work to reduce our dependence, such as, again, fuel efficieny standards, alternative energies, etc. rather than giving oil companies more money.

[JoshK]

These studies all demonstrate the garbage in, garbage out dictum. Start by assumning you will use fossil fuels to make green fuels and you guarantee that it will be unproductive to do so.

 

Not to mention it's hard to run a car on wind or solar power, or burning biomass to make thermal energy. But hey, what if you use solar or wind energy to make biofuels? Hmm?

 

This is a very hard concept for the pro-oil folks to grasp, but well said Dru.