George wrote:
>
> modom (palindrome guy) wrote:
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/bu...l?ref=business
> >
> > It just ain't right.
> > --
> >
> > modom
> > ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>
> I do agree that the totally clueless and unplanned grinding up of food
> to make ethanol to keep the SUVs going wasn't such a great idea:

Ethanol has nothing to do with keeping SUVs going, it's all about yet
another example of a poorly thought out plan pushed by a loud mouthed
environmentalist minority that once again causes more harm than good.

Previous examples have been oxygenate additives to gas i.e. MTBE and the
resulting massive pollution, banning Freon based on junk science and the
resulting switch to refrigerants that are toxic, less efficient and far
worse "greenhouse" gasses, as well as the huge impact of replacing
otherwise perfectly serviceable equipment.

Plenty more examples too, but those who point out all these
environmentalist caused disasters and point to the need to fully study
any possible drastic changes and validate the often junk science
supporting them get attacked as "deniers", or apologists for big
business or some such.

If our schools weren't failing hopelessly, perhaps these so called
environmentalists would have the critical thinking and scientific skills
to realize the error of so much of what they push.