Originally posted by astralis
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Carter Doctrine (Our N. American future)
Collapse
X
-
:Sighs: Where to start...
Originally posted by glow View PostEither way you look at it, we're going to run out. Your biggest ally Canada which is supplying you with 15-20% of your oil can only supply so much. Yeah its 15-20% but thats 50+% of their oil per year.
Originally posted by glow View PostThe evolutionary debate analogy you gave me was amusing
Originally posted by glow View PostEvolution exists, hate to tell ya. Dinosaurs did exist too. People were around longer than 6000 years.
Originally posted by glow View PostAre you one of those folks who goes to church and asks forgiveness if you break the law too? I hope not you seem smarter than that and maybe not that quite brainwashed.
Now, are you going to actually pay attention to what people are saying to you and who it is that is saying it, or continue to rant against imaginary bogeymen?In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.
Leibniz
Comment
-
Originally posted by glow View PostDid you also believe there wasn't a hole in the ozone too? I bet you thought that was bunk. You realize that theres more and more health problems resulting from c02 emitions I don't think you can fight that.
Ironically, you are shielded from the full ravages (I'm assuming you're from the northern hemisphere) of ozone depletion because of the filtering effects of the carbon you pump into the atmosphere.In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.
Leibniz
Comment
-
Originally posted by glow View PostIf some of you disagree you guys need to go take a first year geology or simple science class at a university.
"peak oil" and all the other scares are pointless, and ALWAYS incorrect.
Besides, and I'm not the first guy to point this out either, even if we found out tomorrow that we could get cheap power from doing the Macaraena inside of a magnetic field, we'd STILL use oil in addition because a growing economy and society will ALWAYS use all available cheap energy.
We're going to use it all until there ain't no more, because it's deliciously energy-riffic, bottom line.
-dale
Comment
-
glow I invite you ponder the fact that the US has the largest recoverable oil reserves on Earth (in fact US reserves are nealry 400 billion barrels more than all of the rest of the world combined). US reserves via Kerogen ammount to 3.3 trillion tons or 1.5 trillion barrels.
Now that oil has past 50 a barrel and not collapsed the economy the stuff is commerically viable, now what were you saying about peak oil?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Parihaka View Post:Sighs: Where to start...
I think he's talking about me.
He seems to think anyone who's smart believes in global warming. Anyone who doesn't believe in global warming, is a Christian conservative working for the oil company in the south while married to his cousin pumping out buck-toothed inbred offspring.
What a prime example of "tolerant and open-minded" liberal we have here.
I'm an atheist who lives in southern California, driving a compact station wagon, using all energy efficient florecent bulb at home (have been for 10 years), recycling maniac, who just happens to disagree with global warming hoax."Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
Comment
-
Originally posted by gunnut View PostWhen we run out, we switch to something else. What is so difficult to understand?
There is no reasonable alternate to oil today. Not in the quantities we use. Cold fusion is still a dream and nuclear fuel disposal is still a problem. (Admittedly thats a better solution than fossil fuels) Still barring the discovery of a stable fuel-cell alternate I see nothing on the horizon.
So where does that leave us? Control of oil is strategically vital. It would be criminal of the US govt to not do all they can to control oil. War with China? Would they even dare?
Also on another point:
There is Global warming. Are we responsible? Even arguing we're not I'd rather wake up a decade later and find we erred on the side of caution than wake up to a flooded SF. And then what? Oops?"Of all the manifestations of power, restraint impresses men the most." - Thucydides
Comment
-
Originally posted by chankya View PostUmmm.. like what? We're running outta fossil fuels. Your contention is that when we run out of gas we'll come up with a solution? You really think we can wake up and switch all our automobiles(Arguing of course that industries can switch relatively easier) to some alternate one fine day? or even one fine year? Every other alternate : wind, tide, solar all have scale of generation problems.
Originally posted by chankya View PostThere is no reasonable alternate to oil today. Not in the quantities we use. Cold fusion is still a dream and nuclear fuel disposal is still a problem. (Admittedly thats a better solution than fossil fuels) Still barring the discovery of a stable fuel-cell alternate I see nothing on the horizon.
Originally posted by chankya View PostSo where does that leave us? Control of oil is strategically vital. It would be criminal of the US govt to not do all they can to control oil. War with China? Would they even dare?
Originally posted by chankya View PostAlso on another point:
There is Global warming. Are we responsible? Even arguing we're not I'd rather wake up a decade later and find we erred on the side of caution than wake up to a flooded SF. And then what? Oops?
The arrogance of the global warming cult is:
1. They believe humans are responsible for heating up the earth
2. They believe the climate that we have right now is OPTIMAL
3. They believe we can change or hold the climate to what they consider to be optimal"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
Comment
-
Originally posted by chankya View PostUmmm.. like what?
Originally posted by chankya View PostCold fusion is still a dream and nuclear fuel disposal is still a problem.
And I also have a hard time seeing the down side to a flooded San Francisco.The more I think about it, ol' Billy was right.
Let's kill all the lawyers, kill 'em tonight.
- The Eagles
Comment
-
Originally posted by gunnut View PostWilliam, the market will provide. That is a fact. Your contention is that it won't provide it "cheaply." Which I never said will be the case. A transition might be painful, but bearable. We have gone through many different economic and industrial transitions in our history. Each time we come out better and stronger.
The market was going to supply ethanol to ease are problems but that drives up the cost of corn, beef, fertilizer etc.
The market was going to supply syncrude but that puts a heavy burden on the water supply.
The way the market is going, it cannot provide something new, it has to feed on itself and that is not exactly a healthy condition. That is not growth.
I see where your coming from; I just do not share your optimism. I think the issue at hand has a degree of complexity that management rather than markets is more likely to fix.
The market has failed to provide energy solutions in the past. This is why management was required to float the Synthetic Liquids Act of 1944, The Energy Security Act of 1980, the JBUFF, just to name a few. Where was the market while all of this was going on?
Your assessment of 2 oil men meddling in the mideast is interesting, especially with regards to throttling China and India's development. However, that requires quit a bit of foresight and conspiracy. Maybe Bush and his team hatched the plan. Maybe that was a US plan, hatched prior to Bush's term. Maybe that's just a conspiracy theory.
Objective, rational analysis of United States foreign policy since 1945 viz. the Middle East yields three consistent themes:
1. Energy (e.g. oil);
2. Keep competing powers out/at bay;
3. Honor the Quincy Pact.
The Bush Administration seems to be following the general, long term trend in U.S. policy.
But here's the central issue that the left can't seem to wrap their brains around. Bush and just about all capitalists believe that oil is a commodity, not a utility. Commodity can be and should be bought and sold on the open market. We have no need to invade anyone if we can buy this stuff. Wars are expensive. A simple cost-benefit analysis will show that a war for oil is simply not economical. The only people who will launch a war for oil are non-capitalists.
Regards,
WilliamPharoh was pimp but now he is dead. What are you going to do today?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Major Dad View PostGas hydrates
Cold fusion was always a dream. 'Hot' fusion, though, isn't. Spent fuel can, and should, be reprocessed. Disposal of activated reactor components is problematic, but only as much as we make it.
As to fission, moving towards a Thorium 232/Uranium 233 fuel cycle adresses many issues quite nicely. It is not vaproware. It has been done for decades and really needs more attention in this country.
And I also have a hard time seeing the down side to a flooded San Francisco.
Have a good afternoon,
WilliamPharoh was pimp but now he is dead. What are you going to do today?
Comment
-
Creationism states that god created everything. New creatures cannot come about on their own. Things stay static. Species can only extinct, not emerge.
Off topic, and this is all I'll say about it. Creationists believe that things can adapt, and that new species can come about. We have problems with apes to human type thing that takes millions of years..."I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever."
- Thomas Jefferson
Comment
-
Originally posted by glow View PostPeople pulling research from scientists who've been paid by oil companies/ governments aren't exactly educated I'de say misinformed. You know global warming and signs of it keep popping up all over but never all at once. Kinda like plane crashes. Well **** happens time to time but obviously until it starts happening in horrendous numbers people really never seem to make a big deal out of them.
Originally posted by glow View PostWho was that Oil industry exec a while ago came out and said we knew what was happening but "whats the big deal, everyone likes warmer weather anyways" Something like that.
Originally posted by glow View PostI agree with Swift Sword, Especially on Alaskan Oil, at the rate the US uses oil even if it grabbed it out of Alaska we could use it up in 4 days. Not only that but it would be a huge expense to even get it. It already takes 1/3 of a barrel of oil to get 1 barrel of Oil from the Oil sands in Alberta.
Originally posted by glow View PostEither way you look at it, we're going to run out. Your biggest ally Canada which is supplying you with 15-20% of your oil can only supply so much. Yeah its 15-20% but thats 50+% of their oil per year.
Originally posted by glow View PostThe evolutionary debate analogy you gave me was amusing but none the less, I really don't see how you can debate it. Did you also believe there wasn't a hole in the ozone too? I bet you thought that was bunk. You realize that theres more and more health problems resulting from c02 emitions I don't think you can fight that.
Health problems? And would you care to list those health problems. They've obviously helped humans, or at the very least, not affected them when it comes to the lifespan.
Originally posted by glow View PostSo if it's not good for Organic creatures how could it be good for anything else? c02 is about 350ppm and increasing. Kinda ironic things are changing more and more with it. The bush administration has finally recognized it, the world has, and theres been study after study altered and edited to show that it might not exist.
Originally posted by glow View PostI mean c'mon. I always here this from generally brain washed conservatives who live in Southern states where the oil industry and jesus tend to play a big roll. Well move to a climate where it is vastly different than the one you might get in California or Southern US. I don't think anyone in Scandinavian or Northern regions share your views.
Originally posted by glow View PostEvolution exists, hate to tell ya. Dinosaurs did exist too. People were around longer than 6000 years.
Originally posted by glow View PostOil industry has lied about global warming and your in some sort of denial. I mean c'mon Bush put an Oil man incharge of environment. Gimme a break
Originally posted by glow View PostThis really sounds like the Ogallala aquifer debate. It's going down every year in the US. Use of it goes up every year, has use slowed or has there been any real stops on over use? not really. So what do people do? Oh just dig deeper wells. Same concept.
So what happens when farmers cant produce as much and get in an uprawr even though they screwed themselves over for water? Go after the great lakes, well thats not so broght since they screwed themselves over. Or what is the US going to go "spread democracy" like it did in Iraq to control another commodity it didn't bother to regulate and over use in the first place?
You should read about the Tragedy of the commons.
Originally posted by glow View PostGunnut what are you talking about why would you want to slow Indias economy or Chinas other than preventing them from using more oil? Think also who's fueling chinas economy more than anyone really? So if they wanted to slow Chinas economy hell stop flooding walmarts and everywhere else full of Chinese goods. That will hurt more than anything. At least China is goeing to be approaching ZPG. (zero population growth) not like some other countries.Originally posted by glow View PostIndia is a good ally in the world and despite the Billion+ people they have they use hardly any energy. Less than even Canada a lot less actually."I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever."
- Thomas Jefferson
Comment
-
Originally posted by ExNavyAmerican View Post-posted by gunnut
Off topic, and this is all I'll say about it. Creationists believe that things can adapt, and that new species can come about. We have problems with apes to human type thing that takes millions of years...
Humans did not evolve from monkeys or apes. Apes will not evolve into humans, not even in a million years.
Humans shared a common, but distant ancestor with monkeys and apes."Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
Comment
-
Originally posted by gunnut View PostThat's a common misperception of people who don't understand the mechanics of evolution, even those who believe in evolution.
Humans did not evolve from monkeys or apes. Apes will not evolve into humans, not even in a million years.
Humans shared a common, but distant ancestor with monkeys and apes.
-dale
Comment
Comment