Corn Price Denialism

A study has found that climate change is causing higher corn prices. Let the higher-corn-prices denialists begin their wonderful dance!

14 thoughts on “Corn Price Denialism

  1. Having lived in Mexico for the past 5-1/2 years, I find that corn prices are relatively stable. Therefore, this whole “higher corn prices” thing must be a hoax (since it doesn’t affect me).

  2. Environmentalism FAKE, Climate Change REAL.

    Ted’s all over the fucking map at this point. There’s no credibility anymore. It’s just ranting.

  3. Ex,

    Environmentalism — as practiced by the brain-dead middle class who use recycling plastic soda bottles as some sort of shield against having to confront any of the harsh realities of what true environmental stewardship would mean — is not contradicted by climate change being real.

  4. Corn prices are going up because of the INCREASED demand of ethonol due to ethonol mandates put in place to fight climate change.

    Due to the mandates, the price of corn would go up whether their is global warming or not!

    supposed global warming has nothing to do with the increased corn prices.

  5. PS the study says there ‘may’ also be higher corn prices IF the number of high heat days increase (which has not happened yet).

    Ted claims in the first panel that climate change IS causing higher corn prices. Sorry…hasn’t happened yet.

  6. On the bright side, maybe Mid West farmers are weaned off their addiction to government subsidies and/or Uncle Sam decides to stop subsidizing corn. Yeah, right…

  7. Get a clue here Ted – some of your regular readers are starting to notice that you seem to be focused on Obama too much – ignoring what’s really going on, and whining continuously for more donations. I understand that you need to make more bucks, but you are sacrificing everyhting to get it. For goodness sake – do really believe anyone wants to hear about your experiences in Afghanistan or other topics that have long since been beat to death?

  8. Actually if panel 2 read “But right-wingers claim that higher corn prices are just the result of fed policy and economic stimulus debasing the currency and causing hyper inflation” this would be a perfectly accurate reflection of their response.

  9. According to the abstract, authors Diffenbaugh, Hertel, Scherer, and Verman claim to have found that :
    «Recent price spikes (1), (2) have raised concern that climate change could increase food insecurity by reducing grain yields in the coming decades (3), (4). However, commodity price volatility is also influenced by other factors (5), (6), which may either exacerbate or buffer the effects of climate change. Here we show that US corn price volatility exhibits higher sensitivity to near-term climate change than to energy policy influences or agriculture–energy market integration, and that the presence of a biofuels mandate enhances the sensitivity to climate change by more than 50%.»

    «Response of corn markets to climate volatility under alternative energy futures» (

    Please note the last sentence I cite above. Given that Ted’s profession is that of satirist and editorial cartoonist, it strikes me that he has an excellent job of interpreting the gist of the findings – and certain types of responses to them, examples of which are not lacking on this thread….


  10. Uh yeah, if the abstract is really the document in question, it really doesn’t seem to have a definitive answer, in fact it seems that it admits that short term factors play more of a role in cost than the slow march of climate change. It should also be noted that many of the champions of climate change have backed off the “We’re all going to die” train and admitted that the consequences are likely going to be mixed, and some research suggests that warmer temps will actually reduce severe weather, droughts, and the other issues of concern. As far as proving its caused my man, I still say, good luck ever proving that, the current research really doesn’t. I suspect having this many humans on the planet alone affects it add in the shit we do and we affect our environment greatly, how that might translate into real world climiat

  11. There acually is a dictionary defintion that relates the word ‘rall’ similar to ‘rant’. Ted has been good for this for many years – extremely good. Good enough to make a decent living for a while, but the recent begging for money attempts – whether for a book or a radio or money for a trip to alphabetsoupastan are sad. I see the same crap over here in eastern Europe. People with no ability to help themselves and others whining and crapping their way to begging and whining more – trying to create something from nothing when there is no demand for what they want to sell. Seminars on business practices, blogs about one or another topic, crap about stuff no one really has an interest in. Everyone has a keyboard – everyone has an opinion – but no one wants to actually DO anything except bark and holler. Bark on!

  12. Rikster,

    If I understand your argument correctly, Ted, who is very good at what he does and has been doing it for a long time, has nothing to offer. Do you see a, um, discontinuity there?

    Stephen King is one of the best-known writers in the world. In his writing memoir “On Writing” he writes about how he started out as a writer just as the last hurrah of paid magazine fiction was coming to a close. King was able not just to make a living (not a great living, but still, something that hinted at better times ahead), he was able to gain objective validation of his ability and hone his skills. Paid editors with years of experience read his manuscripts and passed on them or accepted them. That’s how it used to work.

    Alison Bechdel, to bring this more closely into cartooning, drew a strip for years called Dykes to Watch Out For. She started drawing the strip while working in an office. It was directly a result of her being able to get PAID for her work that she was able to devote more time to the strip. The payment also generated self-validation.

    Today, King and Bechdel would both starve to death. As would have Harlan Ellison, Robert B. Parker, John D. MacDonald, Kurt Vonnegut, Robert Heinlein, and Philip Jose Farmer, all of whom wrote because it was a way to make a living, not a hobby.

    As the money dries up, writers take fewer and fewer chances. “Hobbits? Look buddy, I need a book I can pitch in a sentence. You’ve got too many crazy characters in this thing as it is. And it’s too damn long. Look, drop the elves and dwarves, and the wizard. Change the hobbits to humans, put the thing in Merry Olde England, slip in a couple sex scenes — you know, make it what everyone expects — and I can sell it.” No one disputes that having health insurance is a benefit because it spreads risk over a large group. That’s what publishing used to do. A cartoonist or a writer could devote some time to an “out there” project because there were other streams of revenue. Not anymore.

Leave a Reply