Bio-fuel lunacy.

"Robin Faichney" wrote in message
...
Can I take it that uk.tech.digital-tv is in favour of world starvation?

plonk

As I understand it, 'plonk' means "I can't answer the question."

Bill

"Chas Gill" wrote in message
...

"Lord Turkey Cough" wrote in message
...

"Mike Thomas" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:06:44 +0000, Lord Turkey Cough wrote:

The idea of biofuel was to combat global warming which would cause
land loss due to rising sea levels.
Well f*ck me, it seems biofuel has destroyed land available
for food crops in a couple of months than global warming would have
done in the next century.

Seems like some overpaid moron w*anker scientist/enviromentlist
has got his sums wrong somewhere down the line.

What has this got to do with uk.tech.digital-tv?

You eat food in uk.tech.digital-tv don't you?
Or do you live off transistors, aerials and old set top boxes?

Can I take it that uk.tech.digital-tv is in favour of world starvation?




OK, let's explore this. Petrol etc gets so expensive and rare that we
turn to bio fuels. Farmers (who - poor souls - have been suffering under
the hands of the Supermarkets) turn to growing bio fuels instead, because
they get paid more to grow this stuff. Staple food prices go up, because
the farmers give us a choice (pay more for it or we won't grow it). We
have to choose between personal transport and food. We make our choices
and the market levels out. Farmers are laughing all the way to the bank
and everyone else is a little worse off. Those that can't afford the new
food prices starve to death.

They may well starve to death but I imagine most people faced with this
prospect would not be willing to go quietly. You will see riots and wars
before
that happens, you might not be able to afford to feed your self but
a gun is a going look very cheap in comparision food prices.
Torching fuel stations selling biofuel or torching cars which run on biofuel
would be a sensible starting point.



World population goes down, resulting in less of all the current problems
in the world. None of this has anything whatsoever to do with global
warming or climate change. However, much of this possible scenario could
be avoided with a bit of thought. Perhaps bio fuel harvesting will be the
focus we all need to get our priorities right. Or perhaps
not........................


Chas

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:05:23 GMT, Maverick
wrote the following to uk.misc:

"Bill Wright" wrote:


"Robin Faichney" wrote in message
. ..
Can I take it that uk.tech.digital-tv is in favour of world starvation?

plonk

As I understand it, 'plonk' means "I can't answer the question."

It also means, "I am an ostrich".

or "ICBA to read the tedious whitterings of spammers and halfwits", unless
you *like* reading about counterfeit watches and clothes.

mh.
--
http://www.nukesoft.co.uk
http://personal.nukesoft.co.uk

From address is a blackhole. Reply-to address is valid.

In message , Bill Wright
wrote

"Robin Faichney" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:06:44 GMT, "Lord Turkey Cough"
wrote:

Well f*ck me, it seems biofuel has destroyed land available
for food crops in a couple of months than global warming would have
done in the next century.

Some idiots will believe any old claptrap, even from a well-known
troll, as long as it leans in the "right" direction.

I was going by the big item about this in yesterday's Times.


There was an 'expert' on Radio 4 around lunch time today suggesting that
engine technology had to change to accept bio-fuel/petrol mix but this
was not happening. The current level of bio in petrol will not harm
engines but it is legislated that levels will rise by 2010. This will
f**k up petrol engines in cars being sold at the present time.

Your car repair bills will be yet another green tax!

Anyone want to buy a windmill to stick on your roof?


--
Alan
news2006 {at} amac {dot} f2s {dot} com

"Alan" wrote in message
...
In message , Bill Wright
wrote

"Robin Faichney" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:06:44 GMT, "Lord Turkey Cough"
wrote:

Well f*ck me, it seems biofuel has destroyed land available
for food crops in a couple of months than global warming would have
done in the next century.

Some idiots will believe any old claptrap, even from a well-known
troll, as long as it leans in the "right" direction.

I was going by the big item about this in yesterday's Times.


There was an 'expert' on Radio 4 around lunch time today suggesting that
engine technology had to change to accept bio-fuel/petrol mix but this was
not happening. The current level of bio in petrol will not harm engines
but it is legislated that levels will rise by 2010. This will f**k up
petrol engines in cars being sold at the present time.


I will vandalise any car using biofuel and torch any petrol
station selling biofuel.

I don't like starving to death you see - it's not nice.

Shove that in you tank.


Your car repair bills will be yet another green tax!

Anyone want to buy a windmill to stick on your roof?


--
Alan
news2006 {at} amac {dot} f2s {dot} com

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:06:44 GMT, "Lord Turkey Cough"
wrote:

The idea of biofuel was to combat global warming which would cause
land loss due to rising sea levels.
Well f*ck me, it seems biofuel has destroyed land available
for food crops in a couple of months than global warming would have
done in the next century.

Seems like some overpaid moron w*anker scientist/enviromentlist
has got his sums wrong somewhere down the line.


It had to happen one day - you actually appear to be completely
correct on this one :-(
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Press Ctrl-Alt-Del to continue...
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

"Alex Heney" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:06:44 GMT, "Lord Turkey Cough"
wrote:

The idea of biofuel was to combat global warming which would cause
land loss due to rising sea levels.
Well f*ck me, it seems biofuel has destroyed land available
for food crops in a couple of months than global warming would have
done in the next century.

Seems like some overpaid moron w*anker scientist/enviromentlist
has got his sums wrong somewhere down the line.


It had to happen one day - you actually appear to be completely
correct on this one :-(

No thats you.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Press Ctrl-Alt-Del to continue...
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

On Apr 16, 7:07*am, Alex Heney wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:06:44 GMT, "Lord Turkey Cough"

wrote:
The idea of biofuel was to combat global warming which would cause
land loss due to rising sea levels.
Well f*ck me, it seems biofuel has destroyed land available
for food crops in a couple of months than global warming would have
done in the next century.

Seems like some overpaid moron w*anker scientist/enviromentlist
has got his sums wrong somewhere down the line.

It had to happen one day - you actually appear to be completely
correct on this one :-(

No, he's completely trolling, and also completely mistaken.

I'd be interested in the modelling you assume to make the link between
biofuels and world food prices.

Fran

"Fran" wrote in message
...
On Apr 16, 7:07 am, Alex Heney wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:06:44 GMT, "Lord Turkey Cough"

wrote:
The idea of biofuel was to combat global warming which would cause
land loss due to rising sea levels.
Well f*ck me, it seems biofuel has destroyed land available
for food crops in a couple of months than global warming would have
done in the next century.

Seems like some overpaid moron w*anker scientist/enviromentlist
has got his sums wrong somewhere down the line.

It had to happen one day - you actually appear to be completely
correct on this one :-(

No, he's completely trolling, and also completely mistaken.

I'd be interested in the modelling you assume to make the link between
biofuels and world food prices.

Fran

"Lord Turkey Cough" wrote in message
news

"Fran" wrote in message
...
On Apr 16, 7:07 am, Alex Heney wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:06:44 GMT, "Lord Turkey Cough"

wrote:
The idea of biofuel was to combat global warming which would cause
land loss due to rising sea levels.
Well f*ck me, it seems biofuel has destroyed land available
for food crops in a couple of months than global warming would have
done in the next century.

Seems like some overpaid moron w*anker scientist/enviromentlist
has got his sums wrong somewhere down the line.

It had to happen one day - you actually appear to be completely
correct on this one :-(

No, he's completely trolling, and also completely mistaken.

I'd be interested in the modelling you assume to make the link between
biofuels and world food prices.


Yes its real complicate.
More bio-fuel = less bio-food.

Maybe get a rocket scientist to explain it to you?


Fran