Once again, I am exposed to some rampant idiocy in my back links. This time in reference to this post. This little gem for your delectation came via MagogMuffins on Twatter.
Will stick with low-carbon muffins (but might eat ‘Longrider’) RT @Tobystevens time to eat the dog? http://bit.ly/2nnVKa
Er, the two major ingredients in muffins are sugar and flour. These are carbohydrates. The clue is in the word “carbohydrate”.
Ahem…
———————————
Update: Just in case anyone suggests that MagogMuffins means “carbon miles” in the production of the flour and sugar, it’s worth remembering that muffins are a confection and therefore wholly unnecessary for human survival. Consequently everything about them is high carbon using greenie logic. I wonder how many muffins make an SUV?
Au contraire, sir…
http://mreugenides.blogspot.com/2009/05/enviro-lunacy-of-week.html
.-= My last blog ..Parris on Free Speech =-.
“it’s worth remembering that muffins are a confection and therefore wholly unnecessary for human survival.
Say what now? Anything that contains absorbable calories is necessary for human survival, whether it’s a confection, an apple or a milkshake. I’ve no idea, and not much interest, in the relative CO2 emissions in deriving calories from muffins vs potatoes / dogs / lettuce / butter, but it’s not obvious that they’re the least efficient.
.-= My last blog ..What I’ve been up to, week ending 2009-10-18 =-.
Yes, it’s a silly point. That is the point I was making…