Banned from Treehugger forums!

[t walgamuth]

Is that you W?

Tom W

[MS Fowler]

I find it distressing that the argument on so many issues is so bound up with political agendi (?) that we cannot even get agreement on basic facts.
Its "our" facts versus "your" facts. This ought not to be. There are FACTS and then there is interpretation of those facts. We can argue about interpretation, but there should be no argument over the facts, themselves.
Is it that no one trusts anyone else to make the "right" decision--meaning, "agree with me"? So we have to tilt the facts to make the "right" decision obvious, even to the silly people that don't agree with me.

[Botnst]

Originally Posted by tompaah7503

About 58,000 days of US consumption (based on estimated reserves in giant and supergiant oilfields). Why are you asking?

There's a lot of people screaming right now in the US that "we have vast oil reserves and could supply our own needs for [insert number here] decades if it weren't for those envirofascists!".
That is not true, nor will it be regardless of how much money you pour in it or what areas you will open up for exploration.
.....

OOps, my bad. I meant to ask a more parochial question: If we removed every pool of oil 500 days or less from US production, etc. My point being that much of available oil in the US is in smaller pools than the vast formations of the Arabian Gulf or Venezuela, etc.

Concerning oil sands, shales and what not, with oil prices as high as they are, there is tremendous incentive for innovation in all areas of energy production and utilization. I think in the next 3-5 years we will see tremendous advances in sources and systems. More than a few will be in alternative methods. One of those will be nuclear, IMO, this country has been bamboozled by an environmentalism rum amok, resulting in burning carbonaceous material rather than nuclear fission. I'd like to see policy and perception shift in that regard. Maybe one of the 2 geniuses running for office will rediscover it and push for changes in the laws and in perceptions.

I believe we can all agree that the planetary oil supply is finite. Where people seem to begin their disagreements is whether oil should be controlled by some centralized authority or whether it should be uncontrolled, other than the forces of a free market. In my own experience, and I believe a long view of human history will support me, when people institute controls on markets, mischief ensues. Conversely, when markets are most free, the people make the greatest advances.

B

[Chad300tdt]

Originally Posted by ForcedInduction

I say kill the trees, drill the tundra, burn all the oil, burn all the coal, and burn all the gas as quickly as we can without care, let the next generation figure a way out of the mess we make.

Your post reminds me of the "Onceler".

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by Matt SD300

Conservative liberal ??...Now thats a oxymoron!!!...LOL!!!!!!!

There is something about a moron in here for sure.......

Google Sam Nunn for the beginnings of an education on the subject.

[aklim]

Originally Posted by Botnst

I believe we can all agree that the planetary oil supply is finite. Where people seem to begin their disagreements is whether oil should be controlled by some centralized authority or whether it should be uncontrolled, other than the forces of a free market. In my own experience, and I believe a long view of human history will support me, when people institute controls on markets, mischief ensues. Conversely, when markets are most free, the people make the greatest advances.

B

Another thing we can't agree on is how much longer it can stay the way it is. Nobody argues that oil is finite. Just how much is the question.

I'll let market forces control it. Too much mischief has already happened when people try cost control.

[Mistress]

CG- Some people don't want to know the truth.

[Dee8go]

"Truth? you want the TRUTH?! You can't HANDLE the truth!"

[Matt L]

They don't like to hear things that are against their beliefs.

Am I talking about the extreme left or the extreme right? No! It's both of them.

[aklim]

Originally Posted by Matt L

Am I talking about the extreme left or the extreme right? No! It's both of them.

True. However, which side claims to be accepting of other points of view?

[TheDon]

Originally Posted by Chad300tdt

Your post reminds me of the "Onceler".

Books A Million has that book with all of the other green books.

[TheDon]

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1769/68

there you go...


I got into an argument with someone at work about HHO generators... They said it works and went on and on for minutes about how it works..

my reply

"Nope, doesn't work that way. It violates the laws of physics(explained how and why it breaks them) and you're a sucker that was parted with your money."

[Dee8go]

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Please don't lump all liberals in with the ones who are uninformed.

I am a conservative liberal and I drive a diesel. (three of them).

You can take my diesel when you pry it from my cold dead hands!

Tom W

A "conservative liberal?" Wouldn't that be a moderate, Tom?