Banned from Treehugger forums!
 

Hi all! I've been banned from treehugger forums because I challenged someone who said I want to muck up the environment just so I can drive a german diesel! The argument was about biodiesel and I posted videos about sustainability and the truth behind the extremem liberal left, BUT that didn't get me banned!

What got me banned is when I posted some really good information from here on this forum about the truth of those hydrogen generators people are paying $500 for to put in their cars! ROFLMAO:D

Forced Induction, Your reply to the topic was sooo good I had to use it in my argument since you did your fact checking very well and you obviously have a very good understanding of the facts and the science, thank you!

Oh, and by the way, your proof is what got me banned!:DROFLMAO!!

I counteracted the claims of "A whopping 40% increase in fuel economy" with the math and no one liked it.

Now I know that shop forum is not my personal army, but I wonder if any of you would like to go to trehugger forums and read my posts. I was "mrbenz7".

Now I really take offense (not) when I'm banned because liberals cannot handle the truth, and this was so blatantly obvious because I was not going along with what was politically correct.

I put forth the videos posted in the video forum about Biodioesel from Algae that Chad300tdt posted about the new algae plants! Thanks Chad300tdt!

It makes me so glad to be a member here because we are for the most part trying to do our part by recycling, even if it is old cars that use alternative fuels. I'm absolutely positive now that being banned is because liberals want to hear only what they want to and freedom of speech is all well and good as long as we approve of the speech your entitled to under Constitutional law.

if anyone cares to peruse this forum, would you do so and post back what you found and your opinion of it? And tell us, does this "green Movement" base itself in science or feel good issues?

http://www.treehugger.com go to the forum section, but watch out! you might have to register!

No thanks for the kind forum invite.
However I do have a dandy 24"Husqvarna chainsaw you can borrow.

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

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

This the only forum, I have not been banned from!!........:D

As a diesel nut AND being environmentally conscious I'd say there are idiots in both camps, as there are idiot democrats, republicans, europeans, asians, blacks, whites and what not.

Take your own reply for example where you blame "enironmentalist liberals" for high diesel prices (ref: http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/showpost.php?p=1863291&postcount=14 ), not much facts there.. I didn't want to hi-jack that thread but this one might be appropriate of asking you, do you have any numbers on US recoverable oil reserves and where are you getting them? If you can present them, please also consider doing the math and divide those reserves (proven and probable) with the current US daily oil consumption and let's see how many days you'd be able to run the US with these oil reserves.

I'll take ANWR as an example so you get the clue: median estimates for ANWR (recoverable, not proven) says there's about 10 billion barrels of crude. That's 500 days of US consumption there. That's right, you'd be able to run the US only 500 days with ANWR. Personally, I don't think that's worth billions of dollars and a ruined environment.

(Came to think about another fun fact: US oil companies are not nationalized, so any crude found and recovered in ANWR would be dumped and priced on NYMEX, i.e. sold to the world market, for world market prices, thus it wouldn't make even a dent in crude prices/your diesel price)

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to be an a--h-le, but if you're going to accuse treehuggers of not being scientific, please do your own math first.

Have a nice day! :)

I do blame environmentalist liberals for our problems, it is a reputation well deserved and hard earned. Even if there is only 500 days (a conservative estimate the liberal media loves to use) it would probably not be worth going after if it wasn't for the AGING PIPELINE WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE! So I stand by my assertion.

Liberals fought us right here in Arizona for trying to build the frist of it's kind in the Nation, the largest Solar Power Plant in history! Gee, I thought that getting away from oil and making the transition was a GOOD thing.:rolleyes:

I spoke of facts and evidence, particularly about hydrogen generators for automobiles and was sent a ton of hate mail since I decided to let other members send me mail, something I won't do anymore, because I pointed out how it is taking MORE horsepower to run the alternator to power electrolysis to generate hydrogen that it gives you in return!:eek:

There is no way to ever achieve the 40% you are promised and you will never make back the $500 cost! But when I posted how it was mathematically impossible and how it is costing you the MPG your currently getting, well then I must be a Rush Limbaugh affiliate because I'm not willing to do my part!:eek:

The whole thread started with a post of videos hosted on You Tube and brought to the forum by Chad300tdt about the promise of algae based Biodiesel.
http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/showthread.php?t=223072

the first video is from 2006 and the second is from late 2007 and we are making algae based biodiesel right here in Arizona!

As far as oil resources go, I fully support getting to the resources where it is logical and ANWR is logical. I post my facts.

http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/showpost.php?p=1850928&postcount=5

The last thread link here was what started the fight. It's how it is logically impossible to use a hydrogen generator to get free fuel in this manner.
The hate mail I got from this was excessive and leads me to stand by my opinion and statement.:D State where you get facts for the ruined environment and billions of dollars spent with a pipeline in place.:confused: A drilling rig that they want to use can fit in a 4X6 foot cement platform, which is a long cry from the huge rigs we saw in the 1960's and 1970's. If the leechate in landfills can be stopped for the spread and seepage of mercury from compact flourescent bulbs, then it can apply to mining and oil exploration. You cant cherry pick one and not the other.;)

You didn't post any facts.. But I have to say I'm sorry, now it's ME that got my facts wrong. Checked the figure and it's actually lower! The mean value estimated to be recoverable is only 7.7 billion barrels which equals to 385 days of US consumption. This figure is from the USGS, not the liberal media.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/fs-0028-01.htm
(and please believe me, these recoverable oil estimates have always been, to put it mildly, on the optimistic side..)

I'd like to hear where you're getting the "aging pipeline" information from. I haven't found anything supporting the claim that TAPS would be so old it could not be used for further field developments.

As for the hydrogen issue.. it's regrettable that those idiots won't listen to facts and/or science. Don't waste your time on them.. it's not worth it. :o

[quote=cg487;1866164]Hi all! I've been banned from treehugger forums because I challenged someone who said I want to muck up the environment just so I can drive a german diesel! The argument was about biodiesel and I posted videos about sustainability and the truth behind the extremem liberal left, BUT that didn't get me banned!

Wow...It only took a couple of days....WTF?.....maybe they would have been more tolerant if you had owned a hybrid Japanese diesel?

Good'un!

If we remove every pool of oil that is less than 500 days of total US consumption from the market, how much fuel, how much recoverable oil would we have?

B

The tolerant left strikes again.

I don't like the environment, it itches.

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.

And then there's the issue of flow rates. As someone said, "it's not the size of the barrel, it's the size of the tap, stupid!".
There's a estimated of 1,700 billion barrels of oil in the Athabasca oil sands but they're only producing ~1,1Mbbl/day. Why? Because it's not possible economically to produce more than that, the capital expenditures of increasing production are just off the charts. This is true for every oil field around the world.

It is not the liberals fault or nor anyone else, it's the earths fault and if you believe in God as a creator of earth, blame him for not putting more oil underneath the US.

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.

Is that you W?

Tom W

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.

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

Your post reminds me of the "Onceler".:D:D

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/b...frontcover.jpg

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

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

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.

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

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

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.

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

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

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."

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