How inconvenient can the truth be?

Question

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2008/03/12/big_corn_and_ethanol_hoax

Is it a bad thing to have conventional wisdom and assumed facts challenged?

Answer 1

Sweet Walter Williams puts one outa the park again!

Why should we have to settle for a p**s ant like Obama as our second Black President, with intellectual giants like Dr. Williams and Tomas Sowell out there?  (I could add another 30 or 40 to that list too.)

Answer 2

The corollary is probably, "what are the consequences of adhering to an obsolete technology as long as the middlemen can milk it for a profit?"  I think the first 4 headlines on my news page, in the order they occur, illustrate it nicely/

Answer 3

It is a good thing to have conventional wisdom challenged.  When someone tells you "the debate is over," I would advise first to check your wallet and second to see whos pocket their hands are in.

I answered a question from someone asking about using Nitrogen as a primary fuel.  According all the conventional wisdom that I know, that was an absurd idea, however, I do commend the person for questioning and thinking of new ideas.

Most people laugh when they hear or read comments regarding the phrase "If man were meant to fly, he would have been born with wings," but if someone had not challenged that assumption, we would not have airplanes now.

If ethanol is good, then all ethanol is good and we should import from Brazil.  After all, we are friends with them.  If there is something better, then let's not tie us down to ethanol.  After all, I personally think our farmers get enough subsidies as it is.   Butenol is a better choice, but you really have to dig to even find the research on it.

Answer 4

conventional wisdom should be challenged on a regular basis. however we must also be responsible in how we challenge that wisdom. Dr Williams is right in that ethanol is not the solution to our future energy needs. it however may be one small component for those who want to make their own fuel though. we need to examine many other sources of energy, such as liquefied coal, hydrogen, solar, etc. we are not going to have a single solution to our energy needs.

Answer 5

Just follow the money. The oil Co are making billions .

Answer 6

Well, when the whole world order changes in the next 30 years, you tell me.  The US will not be at the top of the food chain; we didn't know what to do with it when we had it, too irresponsible, all for a dollar.

Answer 7

Global Warming is just another religion where faith is required and questioning anything about it is a sin. They use emotional arguments about polar bears and receding coastlines because there are too many facts to counter their claim. If you cant out debate them, use emotions like religion does. I

nstill fear and tell them you are the salvation.

Answer 8

This typifies the belief that the government isn't in the business of permanently solving ANY problem.  The understanding is that a problem solved is a step toward a diminished role and less power.  The government thrives on outrage, crisis, injustice and calamity.  Each presents an opportunity for false promises of salvation and relief, and a new justification for intervention and taxation.  Isn't it funny how our biggest, most insurmountable problems are the ones created by our government?

Social Security

Health Care

Man-invented Global Warming

Economic Meltdown

Colapse of the Dollar

Medicare/MedicAid Bankruptcy

National Debt

Over-regulation

Unlawful Taxation through an Incompliable Tax Code

Et cetera, ad infinitum