OT, PLEASE READ, VERY IMPORTANT

DeadlyKungFu · Post by **DeadlyKungFu** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:17 pm

No research required, just common sense IMO.

It takes longer for organic matter to turn to oil than it does to drill, refine and burn it.

By the logic you're presenting me, you seem to be implying that oil is being replaced faster than we're using it, that's not true. It's taken millions of years of organic matter to grow, decay and turn into oil.

So all the oil we've found on the planet in the last 200 years was created in 200 years? Not possible, consumption is far outpaces production.

computo · Post by **computo** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:43 pm

No one said that oil is replaced faster than its taken.

But the oil industry is saying that there is a drying up supply, and that is pure bull.

Im sure not making any claims on how fast oil is created, only on the fact that the industry is manipulating the data, for their own profit.

Dont you think, if there really was very limited supply, that the oil companies would have abandoned the fossil fuel for something more sustainable???

HD1 · Post by **HD1** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:50 pm

can you let us know what your sources are computo

i'd like to read on this topic.

DeadlyKungFu · Post by **DeadlyKungFu** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:51 pm

computo wrote:But the oil industry is saying that there is a drying up supply, and that is pure bull.

Yes, they are not to be trusted at all. Their view of oil reserves would be nothing but selfish.

Im sure not making any claims on how fast oil is created, only on the fact that the industry is manipulating the data, for their own profit.

Agreed.

Dont you think, if there really was very limited supply, that the oil companies would have abandoned the fossil fuel for something more sustainable???

I don't know. I would think they'd find other ways to use their infrastructure of pipelines, ships and refineries for another cause. Why would they change what they're doing, they're making record profits and have the president of the United States on their jock and a Secretary of State with an oil tanker named after her. Why would they quit their jobs?? Their great great great great grandchildren will never have to work.

that's no photoshop

My involvement here is to ask you how can you say that peak oil is a myth. (and I'm only asking you out of respect of your knowlege, not a flame war)

eyeknow · Post by **eyeknow** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 9:11 pm

Here is california, the NUMBER ONE vehicle is SUV's. The bigger, the better. The drivers are not men who use these as utility vehicles, they are generally women/on cell phones/who do not pay attention to what they are doing....

As long as this attitude is going on, we are cursed. It won't matter.

However......I have often wondered what would make ANYONE support the only industry that does not take a hit financially when the economy is down.

Btw, I gave up my F150/redneck mobile YEARS ago when the weird gas way-up thing started.......in favor of..........gulp..........a FOCUS!!!!! (shutters and gags)

kennerb · Post by **kennerb** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 9:33 pm

I heard someone complain about the cost of gas the other day while I was at the store. I looked over at the cooler and there was a gallon of milk on sale. It was still 30 cents more per gallon than gas. So that's when I thought "damn it costs more to hook a tube to a cows teat and suck a gallon of their milk out than it does to dig way into the earth and pull out crude, ship it across the world in a boat, refine it, put it into tankers, drive it to filling stations, and pump it into your and my vehicles." Now that stuff that comes from a cow isn't going to rocket me 20 or so miles down the road so I think it is a pretty good deal.

Can you say subsidy. I would pay much more for gas than I pay now. I would want to see our public transportation infrastructure redesigned before I did so though.

glu · Post by **glu** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 9:41 pm

and what about the affects this all has to our lovely mother earth?

computo · Post by **computo** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 9:43 pm

I dont need to provide you with links, just google peak oil myth.

Im sure that will yield some links.

I dont know what, Ive never done it.

Ive read articles here and there, but its just more of the same old bullshit.

When you take notice of such things, you start to see a pattern, and this is just another
example in a long line of corporate malfeasance. We're living in a fascist state, and once this whole "One world government" thing finishes taking hold, we'll all be in the same shitty, sinking boat.

DeadlyKungFu · Post by **DeadlyKungFu** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 9:49 pm

glu wrote:and what about the affects this all has to our lovely mother earth?

I saw an interesting show the other night on one of the Discovery channels, global warming will lead to the ice caps shrinking, which will open up new trade routes around the arctic. Those channels are already open for a few months. Take a look at the globe, Canada, Russia and the northern EU are really close to each other. There's a new land grab around the northern ice cap.

Oh, but Bush said we need more research into global warming, so it mustn't be true.

computo · Post by **computo** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 9:53 pm

I personally think that the powers that be are pushing global warming along as much as they can. not the concept, the actual warming of the globe. these are old people who are CRAZY with money and power.

eyeknow · Post by **eyeknow** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:21 pm

there is much more that goes into global warming than fossel fuels.

However, it is true that there is global warming.........although you wouldn't notice it in this area............

glu · Post by **glu** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 11:18 pm

After reading so much bad news, i kinda welcome mother purging her cancerous children... kinda morbid, but oh well/./.

ultrasource · Post by **ultrasource** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 11:40 pm

hey hambone,
did you lose your accent and gain a british accent? cause i just saw an interview with madonna and she sounds more british than american. or is she just that pretentious?

forge · Post by **forge** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 12:21 am

snowtires wrote:....... but iran has been a somewhat radical power in the past 20 odd years, they are definitely more likely to use nukes than, say... scotland.

really bad example

Have you ever been to Glasgow?

Scotland has just been declared the most violent nation in the developed world by the UN

If Scotland had control of it's own nuclear weapons the world would have been obliterated long ago when the wrong person got his pint spilled on him.

ishimaru · Post by **ishimaru** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 12:33 am

forge wrote:
snowtires wrote:....... but iran has been a somewhat radical power in the past 20 odd years, they are definitely more likely to use nukes than, say... scotland.
really bad example

Have you ever been to Glasgow?

Scotland has just been declared the most violent nation in the developed world by the UN

If Scotland had control of it's own nuclear weapons the world would have been obliterated long ago when the wrong person got his pint spilled on him.

HAHAHAHA oh man thats funny. YA SPILT YUR PIIINT ON MI TROSSAS MATE! OI OI OI! ::Nuke::

OT, PLEASE READ, VERY IMPORTANT

Are you willing to cooperate and stop buying fuel from Exxon/Mobil?