The difference between Science and Politics

| 1 Comment
From the UK Guardian:
Secret report: biofuel caused food crisis
Internal World Bank study delivers blow to plant energy drive

Biofuels have forced global food prices up by 75% - far more than previously estimated - according to a confidential World Bank report obtained by the Guardian.

The damning unpublished assessment is based on the most detailed analysis of the crisis so far, carried out by an internationally-respected economist at global financial body.

The figure emphatically contradicts the US government's claims that plant-derived fuels contribute less than 3% to food-price rises. It will add to pressure on governments in Washington and across Europe, which have turned to plant-derived fuels to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and reduce their dependence on imported oil.
There are a lot of factors affecting the current spike in food prices: drought, excessive precipitation, global warming, the marked cooling trend of the last ten-fifteen years and the re-allocation of crop-land to Corn in order to get the US Government subsidies. At our Grocery Store, we have seen a spike in our costs but a lot of those are due to the current fuel bubble as much as the rising price of corn. While I think the US figures of 3% are a tad low -- I would put it (as a wild-assed-guess) closer to 10%; 75% is ludicrous. A number picked out of some politicians hat, not the result of a scientific analysis. I wonder who spiked their coffee -- and then I read the next two graphs:
Senior development sources believe the report, completed in April, has not been published to avoid embarrassing President George Bush.

"It would put the World Bank in a political hot-spot with the White House," said one yesterday.
Ahhh -- yet another cheap shot at Chimpy McGeorge Bushhhhitler... And of course, since this 'report' has been leaked, there is no publication of any of their citations so we peons cannot fact check it ourselves, we just have to trust that our social betters have our poor best interests at heart and we should just do whatever they say. I found about this through a link on Gary Jones' site -- Muck and Mystery: Liberty Feast -- where he concludes his excellent post with these words:
The next time you hear some outraged fool screeching that we must do something, take action about some issue that obsesses them, bear in mind that this is nearly always destructive. Useless flailing about poorly understood problems is wasteful and worse.
Truer words have never been spoken!

1 Comment

there really isnt any difference. in science and politics you have to have same things. Fame, contacts, money. now bringing washington politics into science which is what bush did by ignoring science because it didn't jive with what he wanted to be the truth, is just wrong. in science though the same thing could happen to other scientist, could you imagine having a fellow scientist say they dont believe global warming is happening or that theres no evidence for evolution over creationism, it wont happen because that scientist would be rightfully fired but one could argue that thats wrong, i wouldnt.

http://sensicology.wordpress.com/

October 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

Environment and Climate
AccuWeather
Cliff Mass Weather Blog
Climate Depot
Ice Age Now
ICECAP
Jennifer Marohasy
Solar Cycle 24
Space Weather
Watts Up With That?


Science and Medicine
Junk Science
Life in the Fast Lane
Luboš Motl
Medgadget
Next Big Future
PhysOrg.com


Geek Stuff
Ars Technica
Boing Boing
Don Lancaster's Guru's Lair
Evil Mad Scientist Laboratories
FAIL Blog
Hack a Day
Kevin Kelly - Cool Tools
Neatorama
Slashdot: News for nerds
The Register
The Daily WTF


Comics
Achewood
The Argyle Sweater
Chip Bok
Broadside Cartoons
Day by Day
Dilbert
Medium Large
Michael Ramirez
Prickly City
Tundra
User Friendly
Vexarr
What The Duck
Wondermark
xkcd


NO WAI! WTF?¿?¿
Awkward Family Photos
Cake Wrecks
Not Always Right
Sober in a Nightclub
You Drive What?


Business and Economics
The Austrian Economists
Carpe Diem
Coyote Blog


Photography and Art
Digital Photography Review
DIYPhotography
James Gurney
Joe McNally's Blog
PetaPixel
photo.net
Shorpy
Strobist
The Online Photographer


Blogrolling
A Western Heart
AMCGLTD.COM
American Digest
The AnarchAngel
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Babalu Blog
Belmont Club
Bayou Renaissance Man
Classical Values
Cobb
Cold Fury
David Limbaugh
Defense Technology
Doug Ross @ Journal
Grouchy Old Cripple
Instapundit
iowahawk
Irons in the Fire
James Lileks
Lowering the Bar
Maggie's Farm
Marginal Revolution
Michael J. Totten
Mostly Cajun
Neanderpundit
neo-neocon
Power Line
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Questions and Observations
Rachel Lucas
Roger L. Simon
Samizdata.net
Sense of Events
Sound Politics
The Strata-Sphere
The Smallest Minority
The Volokh Conspiracy
Tim Blair
Velociworld
Weasel Zippers
WILLisms.com
Wizbang


Gone but not Forgotten...
A Coyote at the Dog Show
Bad Eagle
Steven DenBeste
democrats give conservatives indigestion
Allah
BigPictureSmallOffice
Cox and Forkum
The Diplomad
Priorities & Frivolities
Gut Rumbles
Mean Mr. Mustard 2.0
MegaPundit
Masamune
Neptunus Lex
Other Side of Kim
Publicola
Ramblings' Journal
Sgt. Stryker
shining full plate and a good broadsword
A Physicist's Perspective
The Daily Demarche
Wayne's Online Newsletter

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by DaveH published on July 4, 2008 9:10 PM.

When SPF-30 does not mean SPF-30 was the previous entry in this blog.

Take a few minutes to save an incredibly valuable scientific resource is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Monthly Archives

Pages

OpenID accepted here Learn more about OpenID
Powered by Movable Type 5.2.9