Peak Oil Nonsense revisited.

[Gobbo]

Alright…

So I’m sitting here and I’m trying to think of how I can demonstrate one of the many media coverups. See the problem with the truths like this is that one peice of evidence is not going to be enough to change anyone’s mind, especially if it’s from a suspect source.

So, in that light, this is just another peice of reading for you to dwell on. And from a credible (to most of you) author- no… not author, institution.

Here is the article, from the Wall Street Journal:

Doesn’t work? Of course it doesn’t, they wouldn’t want you reading something like this.

But, being oh so tricky, Gobbo has yet again unearthed the truth of the matter:

Click for an interesting read.

Five years later, the U.S. Department of Energy ponied up $10 million to investigate the Eugene Island geologic formation, and especially the oddly behaving field at its crest. A consortium of companies leasing chunks of the formation, including such giants as Chevron, Exxon Corp. and Texaco Corp., matched the federal grant.

Government Grants sure. Media exposure… nada.

So not only is there more oil left where we’re drilling, but there is more, even deeper which is flowing out like mad. Or at least in some places. The point here is that we are being kept ignorant of this stuff, just like things such as the electric car which ran fine, but yet was yanked off the market because the US couldn’t possibly afford a purely energy driven economy. All so that we can pay more, for something we do not need. I won’t even get into the hydro motor that is more than ready to be implemented, or the many inventors who suspiciously ‘have heart attacks’ at conveinient times.

The contention that oil comes from dinosaurs is fucking moronic. Please ask yourself know: Do I honestly think oil comes from dinosaurs? Please truly consider the definition of the phrase ‘fossil fuels’, consider how much oil we use daily and consider how these ‘dinosaurs’ somehow made it to the center of the earth.

If you’re going to repond to this by saying I’m a biased stoner then please fuck off in advance. That is, and will continue to be irrelevant.

[Peter_Kropotkin]

an interesting thing I read years ago, oil is created
from the pressure of grinding rocks. This means oil
is being created all the time inside the earth.
The dinosaur/oil theory is over 50 years old and never
been really been reexamined.

Kropotkin

[Gobbo]

The dinosaur/oil theory is over 50 years old and never
been really been reexamined.

It’s been re-examined, it’s just that it’s hard to find studies and articles when they’re being actively hidden. I used to bookmark different obscure stuff I found… it’s useless because 6 months later when I check back it’s deleted or the link doesn’t work. I mean actually look at the error message in the first link. It hasn’t been re-located or anything, they just don’t want it seen period, so some IT dude at the CIA inserted a blocking script.

[aspacia]

Gobbo, how deep is the Morrison Formation? Have you taken a geology class? What other scientific studies have you investigated?

magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0406/feature5/

Hum, look at the Grand Canyon—how deep is it? How about Brice. How deep have dinosaur been been found?

With regards,

aspacia

[Gobbo]

Gobbo, how deep is the Morrison Formation?

Not sure.

Have you taken a geology class?

No.

What other scientific studies have you investigated?

prouty.org/coment13.html
voicenet.com/~wbacon/documents/newoil.html
csun.edu/%7Evcgeo005/Energy.html
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=5 … rmat=print
manhattan-institute.org/html … il_oil.htm
oralchelation.com/faq/wsj4.htm
wired.com/wired/archive/8.07/gold_pr.html
prouty.org/oil.html
worldnetdaily.com/news/artic … E_ID=38645
physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/9/9/1

You’re so out of your league. I hope you have something better in that link of yours. The one you always seem to have as you don’t ever appear to say anything on your own other than ‘Hum’ or 'My mom told me… ’

The ship is driving a well toward an estimated one billion barrels of oil below the seafloor—the biggest oil field discovered in United States territory in three decades.

Hey… thanks for proving my point. Tons of oil, deep deep oil. How did it get there? Here keep reading cause you’re about to do it again.

There’s no global shortage yet; far from it. The world can still produce so much crude that the current price of about $30 for a 42-gallon barrel would plummet if the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) did not limit production.

Uh oh!

Humanity’s way of life is on a collision course with geology—with the stark fact that the Earth holds a finite supply of oil. The flood of crude from fields around the world will ultimately top out, then dwindle. It could be 5 years from now or 30: No one knows for sure, and geologists and economists are embroiled in debate about just when the “oil peak” will be upon us. But few doubt that it is coming. “In our lifetime,” says economist Robert K. Kaufmann of Boston University, who is 46, “we will have to deal with a peak in the supply of cheap oil.”

The stark fact?

The article spends the whole time talking about irrelevant bullshit, and then simply makes a claim with no supporting facts or evidence. I mean I can understand why you like the author… but go back and find where it says ‘This is the reason we’re running out of oil’.

[NoelyG]

Hi Gobbo,

I liked the wall street journal article, it is definitely food for thought. However, Eugene Island could simply be a geological anomaly and I think more research is needed before any solid conclusions can be made.

Just a point I want to pick you up on though:

The contention that oil comes from dinosaurs is fucking moronic. Please ask yourself know: Do I honestly think oil comes from dinosaurs? Please truly consider the definition of the phrase ‘fossil fuels’, consider how much oil we use daily and consider how these ‘dinosaurs’ somehow made it to the center of the earth.

I don’t think the Biogenic theory ever claimed that oil comes from dinosaurs. Let me quote wiki:

Most geologists view crude oil, like coal and natural gas, as the product of compression and heating of ancient organic materials over geological time scales. According to this theory, it is formed from the decayed remains of prehistoric small marine animals and algae. (Terrestrial plants tend to form coal.)

So firstly, the fossil fuels aren’t in the centre of the earth, they are in the crust a few k’s down. Secondly, it didn’t come from dinosaurs, it came from small marine animals and algae. You might think it is ludicrous to believe that so much oil comes from such forms of life, but think in terms of hundreds of millions of years and consider how much life lives and dies in the oceans. That is a shit load of carbon.

No offense, but I think your above comment highlights your lack of understanding of an opposing theory to the one you are trying to push forward. In my opinion, it is best to be knowledgable about both views, and then try to make an informed decision knowing as much information as possible, rather than a decision based more on emotion than reason.

In saying all this, there is some interesting opposing theories (to the conventional thought) coming to light, and I look forward to what may be discovered in the coming years after more intensive studies.

[aspacia]

@Old_Gobbo

Gobbo, how deep is the Morrison Formation?

Not sure.

Have you taken a geology class?

No.

What other scientific studies have you investigated?

prouty.org/coment13.html
voicenet.com/~wbacon/documents/newoil.html
csun.edu/%7Evcgeo005/Energy.html
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=5 … rmat=print
manhattan-institute.org/html … il_oil.htm
oralchelation.com/faq/wsj4.htm
wired.com/wired/archive/8.07/gold_pr.html
prouty.org/oil.html
worldnetdaily.com/news/artic … E_ID=38645
physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/9/9/1

You’re so out of your league.

I doubt that.

I hope you have something better in that link of yours. The one you always seem to have as you don’t ever appear to say anything on your own other than ‘Hum’ or 'My mom told me… ’

How about valid scientists told me…

I am reviewing your links, will do so in depth tomorrow. Pa is home and it is time for a swim.

Regardless, oil is a major pollutant. I lived in SoCal, now here on vacation, and see the daily effects. We need to get off this.

And I have taken geology classes and went on a field trip regarding the geologic formations. This was back in 96, and new data may have emerged.

The ship is driving a well toward an estimated one billion barrels of oil below the seafloor—the biggest oil field discovered in United States territory in three decades.

Hey… thanks for proving my point. Tons of oil, deep deep oil. How did it get there? Here keep reading cause you’re about to do it again.

So what! There are many finding deep within the earth. The Artic was once a jungle climate. Dig down in Rome sometime for insight. Huge layers of civlization covered up by new civilizations.

Probably, by dead critters, but I will read more.

There’s no global shortage yet; far from it. The world can still produce so much crude that the current price of about $30 for a 42-gallon barrel would plummet if the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) did not limit production.

Humanity’s way of life is on a collision course with geology—with the stark fact that the Earth holds a finite supply of oil. The flood of crude from fields around the world will ultimately top out, then dwindle. It could be 5 years from now or 30: No one knows for sure, and geologists and economists are embroiled in debate about just when the “oil peak” will be upon us. But few doubt that it is coming. “In our lifetime,” says economist Robert K. Kaufmann of Boston University, who is 46, “we will have to deal with a peak in the supply of cheap oil.”

Yes.

The scientist know more than us in other disciplines.

The stark fact?

The article spends the whole time talking about irrelevant bullshit, and then simply makes a claim with no supporting facts or evidence. I mean I can understand why you like the author… but go back and find where it says ‘This is the reason we’re running out of oil’.

What, you describe valid scientific data as irrelevant? Gobbo, are you a valid source to refute the claim. NO.

Geez…

[Gobbo]

Aspacia,

Thanks for you input. Not many on here can make me laugh like you do.

So firstly, the fossil fuels aren’t in the centre of the earth, they are in the crust a few k’s down. Secondly, it didn’t come from dinosaurs, it came from small marine animals and algae. You might think it is ludicrous to believe that so much oil comes from such forms of life, but think in terms of hundreds of millions of years and consider how much life lives and dies in the oceans. That is a shit load of carbon.

No offense, but I think your above comment highlights your lack of understanding of an opposing theory to the one you are trying to push forward. In my opinion, it is best to be knowledgable about both views, and then try to make an informed decision knowing as much information as possible, rather than a decision based more on emotion than reason.

Noely,

I don’t have all day to spell it out for you/everyone. Sure I’m theatrical but just because I present one side doesn’t mean I haven’t looked at the other. I orginally started out in sciences at college, I’ve learned all about this stuff and that’s why the bullshit stories the government feeds us doesn’t make sense in my head.

Here, check this out – from one of the links.

“The overwhelming preponderance of geological evidence compels the conclusion that crude oil and natural petroleum gas have no intrinsic connection with biological matter originating near the surface of the Earth. They are prim ordial materials which have been erupted from great depths.”

Academician Professor Vladimir B. Porfir’yev, senior petroleum exploration geologist for the U.S.S.R., at the All-Union Conference on Petroleum and Petroleum Geology, Moscow, 1956.

Statistical thermodynamic analysis has established clearly that hydrocarbon molecules which comprise petroleum require very high pressures for their spontaneous formation, comparable to the pressures required for the same of diamond. In that sense, hydrocarbon molecules are the high-pressure polymorphs of the reduced carbon system as is diamond of elemental carbon. Any notion which might suggest that hydrocarbon molecules spontaneously evolve in the regimes of temperature and pressure characterized by the near-surface of the Earth, which are the regimes of methane creation and hydrocarbon destruction, does not even deserve consideration."

Professor Emmanuil B. Chekaliuk, at All-Union Conference on Petroleum and Petroleum Geology, Moscow, 1968.

Sure, it probably came from marine life. I don’t doubt that at all. Carbon can’t just appear out of nowhere. But it did not come from finite surface level ‘fossils’.

Has no one out there learned to read through the lines when I type?

[NoelyG]

Gobster,

I don’t have all day to spell it out for you/everyone.

I wasn’t asking you to spell it out for me or anyone. I was pointing out that it was obvious you hadn’t examined both sides of the arguement with equal vigor. Your ‘oil from dinosaurs’ comment made that quite clear. Or were you just being “theatrical”?

Thanks for the Russian scientists quotes. I’m sure I could dig up opposing arguments to those theories as well (if I could be arsed), so where does that get us? Neither of us are experts, so how can we truly decide which theory, biogenic or abiogenic, is correct? There are Professors who argue for both theories. Which ones are correct? Are you capable at arguing at an expert level? I know I’m not capable, and I seriously doubt that you would be.

Has no one out there learned to read through the lines when I type?

[Faust]

I have a question. I don’t read the papers much anymore. Dinosaurs or no, who is saying that we are running out of oil?

Oh, and this. About media coverups. The Wall Street Journal is not some underground commie blog. You don’t get much more mainstream, or Big Buisiness than the WSJ. Are you, Gobbo, complaining that Stone Philips isn’t talking about it?

Have you ever read The Skeptical Environmentalist, by Bjorn Lomborg? It was a sort of best-seller. Still in print. Lomborg makes the argument that we are not running out of oil any time soon. The CIA didn’t burn it. It was reviewed extensively by commonly-available media (I think I first learned of it in The Economist, which you can get at any Barnes & Noble - where I think I bought the book).

I cannot fathom why you would say that there is some double-secret conspiracy trying to kep this information from us. Maybe if you looked somewhere besides the internet. Like the mall.

[Gobbo]

@NoelyG

Gobster,

I don’t have all day to spell it out for you/everyone.

I wasn’t asking you to spell it out for me or anyone. I was pointing out that it was obvious you hadn’t examined both sides of the arguement with equal vigor. Your ‘oil from dinosaurs’ comment made that quite clear. Or were you just being “theatrical”?

Thanks for the Russian scientists quotes. I’m sure I could dig up opposing arguments to those theories as well (if I could be arsed), so where does that get us? Neither of us are experts, so how can we truly decide which theory, biogenic or abiogenic, is correct? There are Professors who argue for both theories. Which ones are correct? Are you capable at arguing at an expert level? I know I’m not capable, and I seriously doubt that you would be.

Has no one out there learned to read through the lines when I type?

Noely,

You never seem to really ‘say’ much, if anything, in the threads where I bring up world issues. In fact, this seems to be where you redline:

I was pointing out that it was obvious you hadn’t examined both sides of the arguement with equal vigor

I don’t know what constitutes ‘equal vigor’ in your mind, but ALL I DO is research this stuff. Sure it’s in my own way, but I’ve looked at both sides. You think I don’t know that disinformation flows in both directions?

So what is it you’re really saying here? It seems to me like, ‘I have a problem with the way you worded things’. Well, if that’s the case… sorry, but I don’t see it changing. Not when I post this out of consideration instead of trying to stimulate consideration. Let’s look at my original assertions:

1. We are not running out of oil
2. Someone doesn’t want us to know this

Dinosaurs, Surface level organic matter, whatever aesthetic label you want to throw on it, it doesn’t matter cause we’re not ‘experts’ – another be all and end all catchphrase you like to use. Experts get paid off, scared, distorted, dumber, drunk, highgasps, biased, loyal. There is a lot of information floating around out there and it’s our job as philosophers to sift through that information on the macro scale. Two scientists arguing about which is right isn’t going to get us anywhere.

The macro data I’ve looked at implies the fact is there is no surface level link – see 1. Why not switch it up and prove me wrong instead of this argumentative agnosticism?

Faust,

I have a question. I don’t read the papers much anymore. Dinosaurs or no, who is saying that we are running out of oil?

Propaganda sponsored by the oil companies. THAT IS MY WHOLE POINT whe no longer even need oil, at all. But we are forced to not only use it, but use it under the pretense that it’s so valuable. It’s not, it’s plentiful; and you can’t make any money off something that is bountiful.

Oh, and this. About media coverups. The Wall Street Journal is not some underground commie blog. You don’t get much more mainstream, or Big Buisiness than the WSJ. Are you, Gobbo, complaining that Stone Philips isn’t talking about it?

Yes! Exactly! It does me no good knowing the truth if the rest of the populace doesn’t.

I cannot fathom why you would say that there is some double-secret conspiracy trying to kep this information from us. Maybe if you looked somewhere besides the internet. Like the mall.

Why not? Every conspiracy is about money and power, this one seems to fit the profile quite nicely.

Again, it always comes back to me with this stuff. Always on the defensive, trying to divert attention away from the data I’m presenting. Yeah I’m a stoner, but I emphasize it for a reason… maybe someone will get it one day.

[NoelyG]

Gobbo,

You never seem to really ‘say’ much, if anything, in the threads where I bring up world issues.

Perhaps. My main goal in replying to you is usually to try and find weaknesses in your arguments. Why would I want to do this? Well, the things you claim in your ‘world issue’ threads are important, with far-reaching implications if they are correct. Now, perhaps because of my occupation, I am very careful to consider as many angles as I can of the issue, before forming an opinion on what is subjectively more true or ‘factual’. When I reply to your posts, I therefore try to find areas of weakness, because if none can be found, I am more confident that the view is reliable.

That is my main goal. Now my second goal is to try and get you to follow a similar line of reasoning. Why would I want to do that? Not sure really, but it’s something to do to past the time and a fine way to procrastinate while I’m writing my thesis.

I don’t know what constitutes ‘equal vigor’ in your mind, but ALL I DO is research this stuff

Equal vigor in my mind, in this case, was at least the basics of both theories. Some of your comments didn’t give me confidence that you had examined at least the basics, but I’ve already got into that and there is no need to repeat it.

So what is it you’re really saying here? It seems to me like, ‘I have a problem with the way you worded things’. Well, if that’s the case… sorry, but I don’t see it changing.

Yeah, pretty much. I am trying to get you to examine things a little more clinically. Why would I want to do that? See above. How is the best way to get you to do that? To point out what I see as problems in your reasoning.

Dinosaurs, Surface level organic matter, whatever aesthetic label you want to throw on it, it doesn’t matter cause we’re not ‘experts’ – another be all and end all catchphrase you like to use. Experts get paid off, scared, distorted, dumber, drunk, highgasps, biased, loyal.

If experts are all those things, why did you feel the need to quote two russian experts in your previous post to support your point? Maybe because that is the only way you can support your point (other than pointing your finger at a dead link), seeing as you are a non-expert. See what I am getting at? What if I post a few quotes from professors who promote the biogenic theory? How are we non-experts going to try and figure out which one is giving the more plausible explanation?

There is a lot of information floating around out there and it’s our job as philosophers to sift through that information on the macro scale. Two scientists arguing about which is right isn’t going to get us anywhere.

This information on a macro-scale relies on information at the micro (technical) scale. If abiogenic theory was proven by the scientific community to be absolutely, unequivocally incorrect, then your macro speculations would fall flat on their face.

The macro data I’ve looked at implies the fact is there is no surface level link

I don’t really know what you mean when you say ‘surface level link’.

Why not switch it up and prove me wrong instead of this argumentative agnosticism?

I’ll tell you why. I may be able to convince you that you are wrong (though I doubt it), but there is no way that I can prove the abiogenic theory (which your whole case rests on) wrong, or vice-versa. So in my view that would be a waste of time. We could phaff on for many pages and still be no closer to the “truth” regarding this matter.

Yeah I’m a stoner, but I emphasize it for a reason… maybe someone will get it one day.

I don’t care if you’re a stoner, why do you feel the need to mention it?

[Phaedrus]

What does it matter if we’re running out of oil or not? Are you disputing the fact that burning oil causes myriad environmental problems (eg acid rain, smog, groundwater pollution, increasing the acidity of the oceans, and possibly contributes to global climate changes)?

I know you love a good conspiracy theory, and that plausibility isn’t a factor in how much you love said theory, but isn’t this one really irrelevant? Whether we have 10 years worth left or a million years worth, we really ought to stop burning the stuff anyway. Shouldn’t we?

[Gobbo]

What if I post a few quotes from professors who promote the biogenic theory?

I would show you why I believe them to be incorrect. So far you haven’t told me why you think that my theory is wrong, merely pointed out that it could be.

I don’t really know what you mean when you say ‘surface level link’.

Basically, if Oil comes from the ocean, then to me at least, it makes a hell of a lot more sense that it would be a resource which is constantly availible. The research in the article about the Island advances that theory.

Likewise, it seems unplausible to me that finite organic materials from the surface of the earth that we no longer see any tracce of, somehow bypassed the menthane layer which the professor(s) claim is unsuitable enviroment for the manifestation of crude oil, to go even lower, somehow bypassing the fault that oil is now pouring out of at at least one location. The articles Aspacia posts advance this unplausibilty for me personally.

I’ll tell you why. I may be able to convince you that you are wrong (though I doubt it), but there is no way that I can prove the abiogenic theory (which your whole case rests on) wrong, or vice-versa. So in my view that would be a waste of time. We could phaff on for many pages and still be no closer to the “truth” regarding this matter.

Again, projection. I think you’d be suprised how many times I publically appolozie and restract statements.

I know we’re philosophers, but it’s really not that hard to access something close to the evolving objective truth. This isn’t about proving right or wrong, philosophy and science have never been about it. It’s about advancing theories under that mindset. If the Abiogenic theory turns out to be more inaccurate than the fossil fuel approach not only will I publically appologize, I’ll fly to Australia and shake your hand for a lesson well learned.

Rhetorical pinky swear.

[aspacia]

@Old_Gobbo

Gobbo, how deep is the Morrison Formation?

Not sure.

Have you taken a geology class?

No.

What other scientific studies have you investigated?

prouty.org/coment13.html

Hum,

http://www.voicenet.com/~wbacon/documents/newoil.html

More information regarding this. The oil is no replenishing itself in Eugene.

csun.edu/%7Evcgeo005/Energy.html
news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=5 … rmat=print
manhattan-institute.org/html … il_oil.htm
oralchelation.com/faq/wsj4.htm
wired.com/wired/archive/8.07/gold_pr.html

http://www.prouty.org/oil.html

I enjoyed the prouty one. It does support your claim.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38645

http://www.physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/9/9/1

The physicsweb article is great.

You’re so out of your league. I hope you have something better in that link of yours. The one you always seem to have as you don’t ever appear to say anything on your own other than ‘Hum’ or 'My mom told me… ’

I hope your ego is not becoming oversized Gobbo. I am here to learn, not win. You evidence appears sound.

The ship is driving a well toward an estimated one billion barrels of oil below the seafloor—the biggest oil field discovered in United States territory in three decades.

Hey… thanks for proving my point. Tons of oil, deep deep oil. How did it get there? Here keep reading cause you’re about to do it again.

There’s no global shortage yet; far from it. The world can still produce so much crude that the current price of about $30 for a 42-gallon barrel would plummet if the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) did not limit production.

Uh oh!

Okay, I still would like us to get off the polluting oil fix, but am glad of this news as we may be able to shake-off the Middle-East without fear.

Humanity’s way of life is on a collision course with geology—with the stark fact that the Earth holds a finite supply of oil. The flood of crude from fields around the world will ultimately top out, then dwindle. It could be 5 years from now or 30: No one knows for sure, and geologists and economists are embroiled in debate about just when the “oil peak” will be upon us. But few doubt that it is coming. “In our lifetime,” says economist Robert K. Kaufmann of Boston University, who is 46, “we will have to deal with a peak in the supply of cheap oil.”

The stark fact?

The article spends the whole time talking about irrelevant bullshit, and then simply makes a claim with no supporting facts or evidence. I mean I can understand why you like the author… but go back and find where it says ‘This is the reason we’re running out of oil’.

I read this ages ago, and was concerned. Again, I hope you are correct and we can break-away from the Middle-East oil crutch. I am not a scientist, but enjoy Discover, Popular Science and National Geographic as they use laypeople terms to better understanding.

The Oil Barrons are probably shitting their pants at the moment.

With regards,

aspacia

[Faust]

Gobbo - Oil company propaganda?

How about diet plan company propaganda?

Or the propaganda of automoblie companies that the right car will make you sexier?

Or the constant propoaganda from media that they are the fair and balanced source of news?

Or the “propaganda” of every industry to promote its products?

Just get on with it, and call for the nationalisation of the energy industry.

Private enterpirise is always propagandising - some call it advertising.

In fact, I have read oil execs stating that supply is in itself not a problem, but that refining capacity is - have you ever tried to put up a refinery? In the NE US, companies have been trying to build just one LNG plant for years - the populace has fought against this bitterly. Just the average Joe.

These all-powerful companies - they are oil compnaies, like Hesse, and Exxon-Mobil - can’t get it done - because the voters, the peons, the victimised proletariat have stopped them.

There is a conspiracy, all right - and it is us against us.

[Gobbo]

@faust

Gobbo - Oil company propaganda?

How about diet plan company propaganda?

Diet plans don’t rule the world

Or the propaganda of automoblie companies that the right car will make you sexier?

What runs automobiles?

Or the constant propoaganda from media that they are the fair and balanced source of news?

What ultimately runs the media?

Or the “propaganda” of every industry to promote its products?

Just get on with it, and call for the nationalisation of the energy industry.

Private enterpirise is always propagandising - some call it advertising.

In fact, I have read oil execs stating that supply is in itself not a problem, but that refining capacity is - have you ever tried to put up a refinery?

The oil execs told you? It must be true…

In the NE US, companies have been trying to build just one LNG plant for years - the populace has fought against this bitterly. Just the average Joe.

One case, but good for them

These all-powerful companies - they are oil compnaies, like Hesse, and Exxon-Mobil - can’t get it done - because the voters, the peons, the victimised proletariat have stopped them.

Like I said… that’s a good thing

There is a conspiracy, all right - and it is us against us.

What?

[Faust]

Gobbo -

Diet plans don’t rule the world

This is just rhetoric. It ignores my example of Hesse Oil failing at every turn to build an LNG plant in the NE US. There are many other examples. Hesse has been trying to build such a plant in my home town for years. Ted Kennedy must rule the world, for he has stopped them. It is not one case. This is a country that recycles trash despite that there is no good economic or environmental argument to do so.

The oil execs told you? It must be true…

You just don’t get it. You claim that the oil companies are saying it’s a supply problem. That’s not all they are saying. It is a simple point. Economists, since about the turn of the (20th) century, have been saying that we are soon going to run out of oil. Geologists have. Of course, you will say that since the oil co’s rule the world, that they control all economists and geologists. I say it’s extra-terrestrials that control the oil companies.

You are making a religious argument here, Gobbo. Oil companies are omnipotent. Therefore, everything that happens is caused by them - is their will enacted.

Religious arguments (which is, of course, a misnomer) all rely on one premise. There is just that - a premise and a conclusion.

[Gobbo]

You are making a religious argument here, Gobbo. Oil companies are omnipotent. Therefore, everything that happens is caused by them - is their will enacted.

Wow… are you tired from that jump?

This isn’t a religious argument, it’s based on very observable evidence. It’s called the science of money.

You’re way off base here and you need to wake up.

@http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/05/some_like_it_hot.html

[size=75]This concerted effort reflects the shared convictions of free-market, and thus antiregulatory, conservatives. But there’s another factor at play. In addition to being supported by like-minded individuals and ideologically sympathetic foundations, these groups are funded by ExxonMobil, the world’s largest oil company. Mother Jones has tallied some 40 ExxonMobil-funded organizations that either have sought to undermine mainstream scientific findings on global climate change or have maintained affiliations with a small group of “skeptic” scientists who continue to do so. Beyond think tanks, the count also includes quasi-journalistic outlets like Tech CentralStation.com (a website providing “news, analysis, research, and commentary” that received $95,000 from ExxonMobil in 2003), a FoxNews.com columnist, and even religious and civil rights groups. In total, these organizations received more than $8 million between 2000 and 2003 (the last year for which records are available; all figures below are for that range unless otherwise noted). ExxonMobil chairman and CEO Lee Raymond serves as vice chairman of the board of trustees for the AEI, which received $960,000 in funding from ExxonMobil. The AEI-Brookings Institution Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, which officially hosted Crichton, received another $55,000. When asked about the event, the center’s executive director, Robert Hahn—who’s a fellow with the AEI—defended it, saying, “Climate science is a field in which reasonable experts can disagree.” (By contrast, on the day of the event, the Brookings Institution posted a scathing critique of Crichton’s book.)[/size]

The world is heating itself to death because of oil, and these companies don’t want to give up their power, and so far they’re doing a pretty good job. Not only do we not need to use Oil, but we’re paying absorbant prices because they’re convincing us we’re running out, just to drive our ecosystem closer to destruction. The entire economy you/me/they operate in is a complete and total poisonous facade and you dismiss it as the regular another day at the capitolist office?

I say it’s extra-terrestrials that control the oil companies.

You’re not far off.

[Faust]

I am not far off.

I rest my case.