China's Enormous New Appetite Drives Food Price

There are many reasons for higher world prices for food. High energy and fertiliser costs, local droughts-famines-wars, the low value of the dollar driving commodities market speculation, etc. But one particular country appears to be more responsible than the rest of the world combined: China.

A change in Chinese meat consumption habits since 1995 is diverting eight billion bushels of grain per year to livestock feed and could empty global grain stocks by September 2010, according to a new study from Biofuels Digest, now available for download here in an expanded version.

...even if the U.S. ethanol industry were shut down tomorrow, rising Chinese demand for meat, and the ensuing livestock feed demand, will empty global grain stocks as soon as 2013. The report offers gloomy news for policymakers who have hoped to address global food vs. fuel concerns by restraining U.S. ethanol demand.

“It’s not food, it’s not fuel, it’s China,” said Jim Lane, editor of Biofuels Digest and author of the report....The US ethanol industry, which has been criticized as the primary cause of grain shortages and rising prices, increased its grain usage by 31 million tonnes during the 12 year period. By contrast, livestock grain demand to supply Chinese meat consumption increased by 199 million tonnes.

“Given that the US population has grown 15 percent in the past 13 years, the 82 percent increase in US corn production left plenty for people, plenty for livestock, and plenty for ethanol.” said Lane. “The truth is that the grain was Shanghaied, leaving us with a fuel crisis and a food crisis. The good news is that it’s easier to find a good steak in Beijing.” __BiofuelsDigest

While the clueless blankers continue blaming biofuels for high costs of food, the reality of the problem is far more complex--and possibly too much of a political hot potato for most of them to touch! While it is politically correct to blame the US for the world's problems, China is often given a free pass.

The media has made a monkey of itself over global warming (CAGW). Now it is making itself the fool over food prices. It is past time for a new media regime that looks at all the evidence, rather than following cliquish fads and political correctness in deciding what news it will cover, and what spin it will take. It is rumoured that journalism students are required to fail IQ tests before being admitted to journalism school. Perhaps they must also take an oath of oafishness as well.

Update: Another factor adding to food shortages is crop damage from frost and unanticipated cold climate (both northern and southern hemisphere). See here and here. H/T Tom Nelson

Here's a look at a country that is truly facing food shortages.

US Economy Deathwatch: Economic Nihilism Chic?

Every writer--including journalists--learns how to "shade" the nuance of a story. Two news stories reporting on the exact same phenomenon, can read startlingly differently in terms of nuance and implication. The naive reader of newspapers, and viewer of newscasts, will typically fail to detect the implicit bias of the writer. If the consumer of news were only more aware of the "marketing" nature of news organisations, he would be just as skeptical of the news as he is of advertising.

The world's largest national economy, the US economy, is far from predictable--yet most economic analysts of the world appear to be writing from the deathbed of that economy. In my experience, economic prognostication as filtered through the journalistic and news media, is exceptionally poor and unreliable.

Certainly both widespread optimism and pessimism toward an economy can be self-fulfilling prophecy. Given the news and popular media's dominant function as chief dispersers of economic "memes", or "mind viruses", it is not surprising that the media can--over time--propagate a profound sense of economic malaise. This sense of malaise eventually percolates to the highest levels of economic decision-making, potentially bringing about in economic reality, the malaise which had only been psychological.

I will provide links to two stories, as examples--and exercises, if you wish. The Geography of Recession from the Economist, and America for Sale, from Fortune (via CNNMoney).

Bruce Hall provides the links and more commentary.

We Are All Nobel Laureates Now--Dumbing Down the Nobel Prize

Steven Running is a University of Montana Forestry professor, who was one of the many authors of a recent IPCC climate report. Running's association with the IPCC as a "co-author" of this report made Running a "co-recipient" of Al Gore's 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. Interesting, perhaps, but what is truly fascinating is what Professor Running is doing with his miniscule chunk of the prize--he is leveraging his "distinguished Nobel status" into a local public speaking guruship. Behold, the distinguished Nobelist, coming to our hometown--just imagine!

But some Montanans are apparently better informed than the typical easily impressed Missoulan. Some Montanans actually expect a scientist to have EARNED his Nobel prize.

...when some residents complained that his presentation here would be one-sided because no opposing view would be offered, the superintendent of Choteau School District No. 1, Kevin St. John, canceled it....Mr. St. John said that numerous residents had complained to school board members and that they in turn had suggested that the program be called off. NYT

The forestry professor models his talk rather pretentiously, after Elisabeth Kubler-Ross's "Five Stages of Grief" to dying. Except in the professor's talk, it is the "Five Stages of Grief" to climate change. Clever? Not so much. In fact, Running's public lecture is apparently a miniaturized version of Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" slideshow.

Last spring, University of Montana ecologist and forestry professor Steve Running presented an abbreviated version of his increasingly popular lecture, “The Inconvenient Truth for Montana,” to a room full of environmental journalists.

Near the end of his keynote, Running outlined what he called his “Five Stages of Climate Grief.” Running’s adaptation of Swiss psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’ groundbreaking “Five Stages of Grief” starts with stage one: denial that global warming exists.

Missoula Independent

Reading the NY Times account would lead the typical member of the public to assume that the Montanans who demanded a balancing viewpoint to Running's "catastrophic climate change cant" are typical flat earthers, science deniers. But in truth, it requires far more scientific sophistication to understand how the lock-step climate change industry is slanting the data, than it does to go along with the flock--the flock that swallows the mainstream media sensationalism and catastrophism.

It is a shame that the public concept of "Nobel laureate" has to be dumbed down by quasi-impostors such as Running. It is a huge shame that the NYTimes and most of the rest of the mainstream media abets in that process.
"

A Collapsing Europe? Things You are not Supposed to be Told

On June 10-11, Pepperdine University in Malibu will host a two day conference on "The Collapse of Europe?" Boasting participants such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq, Claire Berlinsky, Phyllis Chesler, Wafa Sultan, and many more, the conference looks into the dark corners of European decline, and what may be coming next for the rest of the world.

Many people lack an understanding of exponential demographic growth among sub-populations in a multicultural society, and what that can portend for the indigenous, hosting society--even if the hosting society is more advanced than the rapidly growing subculture.

Postmodern analysis is incapable of taking an honest look at the most salient population trends in the developed world, out of incompetent methodology and a general disinclination to look at concepts that contradict the underlying principles of postmodernist multiculturalism. Given the postmodern ideological training of most journalists, it is not surprising that they cannot bring themselves to address the demographic decline of their own culture.

Which is why such conferences as this are necessary.

Durham-in-Wonderland

The recent Durham, North Carolina case against the Duke lacrosse players is a fascinating study into the US system of law, and how various factions in US society are continuously trying to influence US law--with varying degrees of success.

One particular website has captured this spectacle in all its shame and splendor--Durham-in-Wonderland. Written by a history professor at Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, the weblog carefully documents the chronological statements and actions of prosecutors, defendants, journalists, Duke faculty members, and other important players in this drama.

The weblog author, Professor KC Johnson, has painstakingly laid out the entire scenario from start to finish--in fact he continues documenting the significant aftermath of the case, even after all charges are dropped.

Professor Johnson illustrates what academic and public scholarship should be. His weblog is far more professional than the writings of over 99% of big-publication journalists. For anyone who aspires to write a weblog, essay, or book on a topic bearing on society and the law, a study of Durham-in-Wonderland would provide a quality goal toward which to aim.

Global Cooling--The More Frightening and More Likely Climate Catastrophe: Nuclear War in the Third World

Very few members of the general public are aware of the stealthy growth of the threat of a climate crisis beyond "global warming." Global cooling has always been a greater danger to humans than global warming. The recent little ice age resulted in a loss of life in the many millions. Another severe episode of global cooling would be immeasurably worse.

We've been warned about nuclear winter for decades now. Before catastrophic global warming became so fashionable in the popular media, nuclear winter was fashionable among politicians and journalists. But the nuclear winter that appears more likely with each passing day is not the same nuclear winter that Carl Sagan warned against. Sagan was worried about an all-out nuclear war between super-powers, with a resulting nuclear winter that could potentially finish humans for good.

The new concerns about nuclear winter center upon the growing likelihood of a small scale nuclear war that originates in a third world nation such as Iran or Pakistan. It seems that even a limited nuclear war could have devastating consequences for the world's climate--far more devastating than global warming is likely to be.

The scientists' research is a new twist on the nuclear winter hypothesis, which attracted attention in the early 1980s. Back then, planetary scientist Carl Sagan and others warned that a much larger nuclear war between the United States and Soviet Union would lead to extensive atmospheric cooling and agricultural failure on a much greater scale and kill far more people.

The hypothesis sparked widespread scientific and political controversy. It faded from public attention toward the end of the Cold War, after which many U.S. strategists concluded that major nuclear wars that threatened all civilization were improbable.

But that judgment was premature, because of the recent emergence of small- and medium-sized nations that either have or are trying to develop nuclear weapons, the scientists warned. They said that worldwide, a regional nuclear war could kill tens of millions of people, partly because even a small number of nuclear blasts could generate enough smoke to trigger a global climate change.

The nuclear explosions and smoke could also damage the ozone layer in the upper atmosphere, they said. That layer shields Earth's surface from cancer-causing radiation from the sun.

Initially, about 20 percent of the soot would be washed out of the atmosphere by rainfall, said Turco, who was one of the pioneers of the original nuclear winter hypothesis.

However, much of the rest of the soot would rise skyward and warm as it was baked by the sun. That warming would make the soot more buoyant and force it even higher into the sky until it penetrated the stratosphere -- just above the tops of thunderclouds -- where high-speed winds would quickly spread the soot throughout the atmosphere, Turco and his colleagues said.

Source.

Personally, I think the threat of severe global cooling from a low level nuclear war in the third world is overblown. The threat of global cooling, on the other hand, is dire enough to be taken seriously. Climate on earth is a chaotic phenomenon--constantly changing, and not well simulated by current overly simplistic climate models. There is no reason to believe these models by Turco et al are any better. Nevertheless, long before humans reached the top of the food chain, earth's climate changed abruptly and unpredictably.

If the northern hemisphere suffers another Little Ice Age scale disaster, billions of people would be a risk of starvation, or dying of violence or ordinarily preventable disease.

It is not surprising that the media focuses on the less likely and less dangerous phenomenon of "catastrophic global warming." The crisis du jour is all the media, and most politicians understand. Thinking people, on the other hand, must look at all the possibilities--all the possible etiologies.

Waiting for Bird Flu

You can look at the top ten public health stories of 2006 for the US below, and not find a trace of Bird Flu.

1. AHA Dietary and Lifestyle Recommendations Revised
2. Guidelines Updated for Mumps Immunization
3. High Carb, Low Glycemic Index Diet Best to Reduce CV Risk
4. CDC Recommends HIV Testing and Screening in Routine Clinical Care
5. Calcium Plus Vitamin D May Not Reduce Hip Fracture or Colorectal Cancer Risk
6. CDC Updates Guidelines for Immunization Against Hepatitis B Virus Infection
7. Fat-Reduced Diet May Not Reduce Risk for Cancer or Cardiovascular Disease
8. Guidelines Updated on Secondary Prevention for Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease
9. Children May Need 90 Minutes of Physical Activity Per Day
10. New Guidelines Issued for Beverage Classification and Consumption

Sadly for Bird Flu, it did not even make it to the top ten "junk science" list of 2006. What does an over-hyped medical story need to do to get some respect? At least bird flu made it to #24 of the Discover top science stories of 2006. But the Discover blurb on Bird Flu was merely to explain why bird flu was not the global pandemic that all the newspapers and "science" blogs predicted it would be.

There are several emerging viruses that have the potential to mutate or recombine into pandemic killer viruses. This has always been true. It is the job of the CDC to remain vigilant to influenza transmission and infection worldwide, to advise governments, medical authorities, and vaccine makers how to prepare for the next six months or so. Meanwhile, viral surveillance and research into new vaccines is proceeding apace, just as it would do without all the hype.

In March University of Wisconsin virologist Yoshihiro Kawaoka looked for H5N1 receptors in the human respiratory tract and found them only deep within the lungs, on the tiny air sacs through which oxygen passes into blood. That deep location would make it difficult for an infected person to spread the avian flu virus through coughing or sneezing.

Source.

Science, including medical science, is too complex for most journalists to understand. Journalism students are typically among the least competent and least intelligent students in university. Paradoxically, journalists act as public filters of science, and magnifying glasses--selecting the stories the public will hear, often inflating selected stories to incredible size and significance. Such was the case with bird flu.

Why do the public and many bloggers fall for media hype of science and medicine, time after time--without catching on? Waiting for bird flu. Waiting for climate catastrophe. Waiting for Godot. Actually, the list of catastrophes the media would have us wait for is much longer. But the public has a short attention span for almost everything except faux catastrophe. They would rather wait, thanks.

Journalists May be Unintelligent, But They are Certainly Biased

Journalists are a lot like actors in many ways. Generally flakey and prone to superstition and groupthink. Few journalists have the talent and courage to stand out from the crowd, and present original, fact-based stories. The more we learn about how modern journalism is done, the more typical Jayson Blair seems to be of journalists. Most simply do not get caught.

James Q. Wilson, an expert in government and public policy, takes a look at how the media has presented the Iraq military action by the US coalition.

Between January 1 and September 30, 2005, nearly 1,400 stories appeared on the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news. More than half focused on the costs and problems of the war, four times as many as those that discussed the successes. About 40 percent of the stories reported terrorist attacks; scarcely any reported the triumphs of American soldiers and marines. The few positive stories about progress in Iraq were just a small fraction of all the broadcasts.

When the Center for Media and Public Affairs made a nonpartisan evaluation of network news broadcasts, it found that during the active war against Saddam Hussein, 51 percent of the reports about the conflict were negative. Six months after the land battle ended, 77 percent were negative; in the 2004 general election, 89 percent were negative; by the spring of 2006, 94 percent were negative. This decline in media support was much faster than during Korea or Vietnam.

....Thankfully, though, the press did not cover World War II the way it has covered Vietnam and Iraq. What caused this profound change? Like many liberals and conservatives, I believe that our Vietnam experience created new media attitudes that have continued down to the present. During that war, some reporters began their coverage supportive of the struggle, but that view did not last long. Many people will recall the CBS television program, narrated by Morley Safer, about U.S. Marines using cigarette lighters to torch huts in Cam Ne in 1965. Many will remember the picture of a South Vietnamese officer shooting a captured Vietcong through the head. Hardly anyone can forget the My Lai story that ran for about a year after a journalist reported that American troops had killed many residents of that village.

....Reporters and editors today are overwhelmingly liberal politically, as studies of the attitudes of key members of the press have repeatedly shown. Should you doubt these findings, recall the statement of Daniel Okrent, then the public editor at the New York Times. Under the headline, is the new york times a liberal newspaper? Okrent’s first sentence was, “Of course it is.”

What has been at issue is whether media politics affects media writing. Certainly, that began to happen noticeably in the Vietnam years. And thereafter, the press could still support an American war waged by a Democratic president. In 1992, for example, newspapers denounced President George H. W. Bush for having ignored the creation of concentration camps in Bosnia, and they supported President Clinton when he ordered bombing raids there and in Kosovo. When one strike killed some innocent refugees, the New York Times said that it would be a “tragedy” to “slacken the bombardment.” These air attacks violated what passes for international law (under the UN Charter, people can only go to war for immediate self-defense or under UN authorization). But these supposedly “illegal” air raids did not prevent Times support. Today, by contrast, the Times criticizes our Guantánamo Bay prison camp for being in violation of “international law.”

....mainstream outlets like the New York Times have become more nakedly partisan. And in the Iraq War, they have kept up a drumbeat of negativity that has had a big effect on elite and public opinion alike. Thanks to the power of these media organs, reduced but still enormous, many Americans are coming to see the Iraq War as Vietnam redux.

....This change in the media is not a transitory one that will give way to a return to the support of our military when it fights. Journalism, like so much scholarship, now dwells in a postmodern age in which truth is hard to find and statements merely serve someone’s interests.

The mainstream media’s adversarial stance, both here and abroad, means that whenever a foreign enemy challenges us, he will know that his objective will be to win the battle not on some faraway bit of land but among the people who determine what we read and watch. We won the Second World War in Europe and Japan, but we lost in Vietnam and are in danger of losing in Iraq and Lebanon in the newspapers, magazines, and television programs we enjoy.

Source.

Not many people are motivated to look beyond exclusively negative media coverage, to the "new media" outlets run by veterans of Iraq. Fewer still are motivated to look at the history of the various political and religious movements that come together in the current violence in today's Iraq, and neighboring countries. The multi-level truth of Iraq and today's middle east (including Lebanon, Syria, and Iran), is somewhat beyond the interest and comprehension of most people--who are otherwise occupied.

Iraq is a disaster, no question of that. The entire arab world is a disaster, if the truth be known. Oil wealth conveys a false image of progress in some arab states that fools many.

The trick is to find better ways to keep the disaster of arab countries contained to the arab countries--without paying too high a cost in western lives. Because if the arab madness escapes to the world at large, many intelligent people will look back on the current "quagmire" in Iraq with nostalgia.

A Journalist's Worst Nightmare: Robot Fact Checkers

Recent cases of journalists caught red-handed fabricating and obscuring the news includes the memogate scandal by CBS News, the Eason Jordan coverups by CNN, the New York Times fabrications of Jayson Blair, CNN's fabrication of war crimes in the Tailwind report, and many other examples of the mainstream media attempting to influence public opinion through false reporting.

Now journalists will have even more reason to be looking over their shoulders. Advanced computer programs will be constantly scanning news reports, and scrupulously evaluating journalistic sources for evidence of fabrication and misrepresentation.

The new research will use machine-learning algorithms to give computers examples of text expressing both fact and opinion and teach them to tell the difference. A simplified example might be to look for phrases like "according to" or "it is believed." Ironically, Cardie said, one of the phrases most likely to indicate opinion is "It is a fact that ..."

The work also will seek to determine the sources of information cited by a writer. "We're making sure that any information is tagged with a confidence. If it's low confidence, it's not useful information," Cardie added.

....The results, she added, will always include pointers to the original sources, so that when a computer draws some conclusion, human beings will be able to look at the original material and determine whether or not the conclusion was correct.

Source.

The blogosphere has been successful in exposing a great deal of journalistic misconduct, which has become endemic in the news media. Now the big money is being put behind the effort to hold frequently dishonest and capricious journalists to account for their well-paid manipulations.