drill in the u.s.a.

Help Support Steer Planet:

aj

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
6,420
Location
western kansas
Is there a club or organization that is pushing for drilling in the U.S. Shouldn't there be a bumper sticker for sale that says"Drill oil in the U.S.A.-just do it. I am so sick of the tree hugging...morally superior...Al Gore type running this country into economic chaos. I just pray that the touchy feely...idiots who have no idea of economic workings get the hell voted out as soon as possible. Build some refineries...and let the country explore for oil. We are headed for a economic disaster. Is there a organization somewhere of non political people who just want to drill for oil?
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,640
Location
Hollister, CA
tree hugging...morally superior...Al Gore type

the reason they are in control, especially california, is they earn it by action.  start your own club, write letters to the editor, call your representatives, get people who don't vote, to vote, get others to call, write letters, run for office yourself.  in the end, it will come down to a position on abortion, so you can't win over the tree hugging...morally superior...Al Gore types.  solve abortion by leading by example by adopting, donating time, resources money anything to help keep mothers from having abortions rather than legislating it.  this is why conservatives lose in the cities.  conservatives preach freedom, but to liberals, freedom is abortion.  laws are generated by social norms.  50 million abortions have happened since 1973.  they and their children would be a lot of votes.  we aren't getting them back.  the only way to get some of them is to devote resources to save the mothers and their children.  convert them by helping them rather than criminalizing them. 

make a business card with all of your representatives phone numbers on it and hand it out to people along with a copy of the constitution.  go to board of supervisor meetings.  go to meetings where your state and federal representatives come back to town.  volunteer to help a candidate, make contacts, get involved, find ways to convert people rather than call them names.  ask them to rationalize their position and how they are going to generate jobs rather than subsidies.  ask them to rationalize any product without a subsidy.  find out what strawman argument means.  ad hominem arguments.  read about the founding fathers and give books about them to people.  be a giver rather than a pointer.  improve.  write. communicate.  use websites to hone your skills.  report back your progress.  go to lectures about collectivism and engage them in friendly dialogue.  talk to people who are against the "occumpation" in iraq and ask them why are they occupying indian and mexican land and why don't they give it back to them.  ask them all kinds of questions and listen.  inform them about the originator of the canadian health care system and why would he change his mind.  read atlas shrugged.  read the fountainhead.  read read read.
 

CPL

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
608
Just a little bit of information about Al Gore. He's profited well over 100 million dollars off of all his speeches and movies about Global Warming. Plus, his HUGE home uses 20% more energy than the average American family uses per year. Al Gore is a joke, Global Warming is a joke. If we want to be safe we need to start drilling in America. We need to start drilling off our shores--- just like China can. We need to use nuclear power (Obama says no), we need to use wind energy ( again Obama says no). And we need to start it now. The main Democrat spin on this is that if we start today it will take atleast 10 years before we see relief. (Well actually there's information that it could be done sooner) But we need to start anyway. Ten years from now will be much worse. What did I hear today Lybia is thinking about decreasing oil production? Start drilling now to save our future.
 

JbarL

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
1,677
Location
30deg 17' 11.73 N 81deg 35'59.94&q
there are alot of lease compannies buying resources leases now...they seem a bit more iterested in the nat gas than the oil................as i stated before....wva, ky, virgina...are the saudia arabia of oil , gas and coal.......in the world...its down there....just got to move a few "huggers" out of the way to get to it....a lot of leases are being bought up now on short term ( 3/5 yr) in southern ohio.( not sure about the rest of the state....)...if anyone is interested...pm me and i will give them one of the local companies that is buying leases in my area....jbarl
 

GRsimm

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
61
I had heard awhile back that there was a scientist that was considering suing Al Gore because he has proof that Al Gore was making up some of the statistics that he put in his speeches and Videos. I wish he would get this done and keep that joker out of hear. If he thinks we have global warming then where was the heatwave this winter with the ice storm and I heard that not to long ago they were still getting snow in CO. Well maybe one day we can get back to drilling our own resources like we started when we came to this country.
 

chambero

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
3,207
Location
Texas
Every drilling rig in the country busy right now.  There is a huge backlog of oil and gas wells waiting to be drilled.  Oil drilling slowed down in this country for 20 some odd years because oil was too cheap.  That isn't the case now.  This country will eventually develop all of its oil and gas resources.

The fact of the matter is that practically all scientists from many, many different disciplines don't disagree with the bulk of what Gore says.  I think he would have made a terrible president, but he's not way off base on the issues he is pushing related to the environment.  Just aimlessly bashing him is actually fine, but his message isn't wrong. 

The world is getting warmer - regardless of the cause - but we are a big part of it.  It's as close to being "fact" as such a big picture issue can be.  So be it.  Doesn't mean the sky is falling, but for our own benefit we need to be planning for it.  Most of your big cities in this country - ones run by Republicans - are actively planning for the potential long-term impacts of global warning.  There isn't nearly as much disagreement between the political parties as they'd like you to believe.  That's why there hasn't ever been that much difficulty in getting environmental laws passed and regulations adopted - regardless of who is in office.

Farmers and ranchers should plan for long-term change in the weather.  Your not going to get by with continued overgrazing, wasting of water and other resources, etc.  Breeding for cattle and other animals that don't need as much feed is a very good idea (see a lot of you on here are closet "tree-huggers").  But the main point is that its just good business anyway.  The farmers and ranchers that have always done the best and know what they are doing have nothing to worry about.
 

Dusty

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,097
There is a supervolcano beneath yellowstone that will possibly kill us all when it erupts... Are we freaking out about that?  A giant asteroid will hit earth again and possibly wipe us out.  What are we doing about that????  The earth has been around for billions of years.  The fact that we think 100 years of industrial society is going to kill it is absurd.  We won't even be a blip on the radar of the history of earth. 
Earth has went through cooling and warming periods over the years.  It's just how it works. 
Did the global warming wackos ever think that warming temperatures will cause more evaporation of ocean water, causing more rain, which in turn would cause more vegatation to grow, which would naturally sequester more carbon from the atmosphere. It's a cycle.

Global warming activists and scientists are generally people who have really nothing else to do and it makes them feel good to think that they are helping to save the planet. 
Thats one of the things about America, we have it so good that we worry about stupid crap like global warming, polar bears, endangered sparrows, etc...
Those people should all get a real job and be productive and useful instead of just being a burden to those who are.
If the modern liberal was around 150 years ago the midwest would still be just praire, bison and indians....

America can pass all the enviromental laws we want.  Companies will just go to countries that don't have the laws and set up shop there.  Thats what I would do if I had a factory that was going to be burdened by stupid carbon emissions laws.  I guarantee there would be a country that would welcome job creation and economic stimulus(Mexico).

Why do you think American developed so rapidly after the civil war and into the first part of the 20'th century?  It was because Carnegie, Rockefeller, the Vanderbilts, Gould, and the other industrialist were not hindered by stupid laws and taxes.  They simply applied themselves to their businesses and made America great and brought up the standard of living as a result.  It's ironic that most of theses people are remembered as villians and they did more good for America than anyone else in their time.  Yet we passed laws to hinder people like this because it wasn't fair.  What a crock. 

On a side note I'm reading a book now about the history the oil business.  During the first oil craze of the late 19th century one oil wildcatter cut a deal with a chuch to put an oil well right in the middle of the church cemetary.  The church was happy as it financed them for years.  Do you think that would be possible now????

The modern democrat is closer to Karl Marx than George Washington.  There used to be a time when America killed communists, now we are electing them....
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,640
Location
Hollister, CA
chambero said:
The fact of the matter is that practically all scientists from many, many different disciplines don't disagree with the bulk of what Gore says.  I think he would have made a terrible president, but he's not way off base on the issues he is pushing related to the environment.  Just aimlessly bashing him is actually fine, but his message isn't wrong. 

adding 1 million legal immigrants every year is the problem.  business has converted to profit from growth in population rather than profit from improvement and turnover and improvement of existing infrastructure.  cement is underestimated as a cause of temperature readings for global warming.  the heat island effect from a city the size of 10,000 people is worth about 5-9 degrees F down wind for about 30-60 miles.

this is one scientist from a different discipline that no longer believes rachel carson, and al gore.  gore's message is wrong, that we can conserve our way into global temp stasis.  admiral sheng hui mapped the circumference of greenland in the 1420's.  C4 plants dominated the earth in the age of the dinasours when C02 was 2- 3 times what it is now.  plants and animals evolved.  perhaps this cycle of global temperature redistribution is happening too fast to compare with past changes in global climate.  we measure ages in millenia, yet compare it to 10 year time frames without context. 

al gore's message is to redistribute wealth.  that's his message, and it's wrong.  it's wrong in school to declare "the debate" is over.  i thought that was what school was about.  why won't al gore the total chicken frass debate ANYONE on global warming?  he's a coward, a fraud, and a multi level marketer. he's getting fatter, buring more energy, just like arnold shriver, telling us we need to drive less, but he FLIES HOME EVERY NIGHT, rather than walking to work like he wants to force everyone to do.  this is the message of al gore.  a caste, two tiered society.  thomas jefferson, my least favorite president, yes even below wilson, and fdr, warned us about the government trying to over help us.  but of course if one just sounds good with their voice and play on our fears.

the best environmentalist is a dead one.  i don't see any doing that, they are too busy consuming and polluting and reproducing.
 

angusboy1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
254
Location
Crossett
i know we got tanks there just tapped and bush is to cheap to open em up and build some refinereys wich makes me mad
 

chambero

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
3,207
Location
Texas
[[/quote]

this is one scientist from a different discipline that no longer believes rachel carson, and al gore.  gore's message is wrong, that we can conserve our way into global temp stasis.  admiral sheng hui mapped the circumference of greenland in the 1420's.  C4 plants dominated the earth in the age of the dinasours when C02 was 2- 3 times what it is now.  plants and animals evolved.  perhaps this cycle of global temperature redistribution is happening too fast to compare with past changes in global climate.  we measure ages in millenia, yet compare it to 10 year time frames without context. 

al gore's message is to redistribute wealth.  that's his message, and it's wrong.  it's wrong in school to declare "the debate" is over.  i thought that was what school was about.  why won't al gore the total chicken frass debate ANYONE on global warming?  he's a coward, a fraud, and a multi level marketer. he's getting fatter, buring more energy, just like arnold shriver, telling us we need to drive less, but he FLIES HOME EVERY NIGHT, rather than walking to work like he wants to force everyone to do.  this is the message of al gore.  a caste, two tiered society.  thomas jefferson, my least favorite president, yes even below wilson, and fdr, warned us about the government trying to over help us.  but of course if one just sounds good with their voice and play on our fears.

the best environmentalist is a dead one.  i don't see any doing that, they are too busy consuming and polluting and reproducing.
[/quote]

The parts of the various legitimate studies and reports that the media skips right over is that the real issue is the apparent speed of change in climate.  And nobody really thinks we can change what is going on.  That's where Gore jumps the track.  Local government agencies are now actively working to just deal with the predictions.  It doesn't make much sense to not plan for change.  Conservation of things like water and fuel makes sense for many, many reasons independent of this issue.  Personally, I think continuous watering yards is ridiculous - at least in my part of the world.  Our cows and pastures sure don't waste that much water. 
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,640
Location
Hollister, CA
chambero said:
The parts of the various legitimate studies and reports that the media skips right over is that the real issue is the apparent speed of change in climate.  And nobody really thinks we can change what is going on.  That's where Gore jumps the track.  Local government agencies are now actively working to just deal with the predictions.  It doesn't make much sense to not plan for change.  Conservation of things like water and fuel makes sense for many, many reasons independent of this issue.  Personally, I think continuous watering yards is ridiculous - at least in my part of the world.  Our cows and pastures sure don't waste that much water. 
[/quote]

I agree with all of this.  we transferred lawn expectations from england and 300 years later we still can't break that habit, not even in scottsdale AZ.

the part i have a problem with is the artificial rise of energy pricing due to policy inflexibility.  we want flex fuels, but no flexible policy.

back in the late 80's in grad school, we did temperature studies on plants and moisture content of the air.  what was intriguing was the modeled rapid change in temperature due to moisture, or lack of it in the air.  we then put plants in a cement environment, and things immediately got worse by a factor of 2-3x.  we didn't get to the point of measuring the halo around the cement environment.  it was then that i knew that things wouldn't get hotter or colder, but that the change between the two would be more rapid.

 

AAOK

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
5,264
Location
Rogers, Ar
aj said:
Is there a club or organization that is pushing for drilling in the U.S. Shouldn't there be a bumper sticker for sale that says"Drill oil in the U.S.A.-just do it. I am so sick of the tree hugging...morally superior...Al Gore type running this country into economic chaos. I just pray that the touchy feely...idiots who have no idea of economic workings get the hell voted out as soon as possible. Build some refineries...and let the country explore for oil. We are headed for a economic disaster. Is there a organization somewhere of non political people who just want to drill for oil?

aj,
Here is a link to the club.  http://www.ipaa.org/
 

oakview

Well-known member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,346
When I was in upper elementary and junior high school, in the mid to late '60s, we learned about the upcoming ice age.  The information we were given was prepared by the nation's foremost authorities on the subject and presented as indisputable fact.  The ice age was coming and there was nothing we could do about it.  You can find articles on this inevitable ice age from that time period in the same magazines that are now bemoaning global warming.  I don't believe I have been in a coma for the past 40 years, but somehow I missed the ice age.  I didn't doubt the scientists in the 60s.  I assumed they were using the best information they had at the time and just reached the wrong conclusions.  Today, I listen to renowned experts on the subject of global warming from our finest universities argue both ways.  Most of them foretell an irreversible course to disaster while others say it is only a 10 year trend, a naturally ocurring cycle.  I have to assume that they are all using the best information they have available.  Perhaps some are just reaching the wrong conclusion.  The scientific community always presents their findings as fact.  The same scientific community that at one time preached the earth was the center of the universe, the earth is flat, and that blood letting was a good cure for disease.  100 years from now someone will think we were all silly, too.  I just don't know if they'll wonder why we didn't do anything about global warming while we had the chance or if were just stupid to worry about it.
 

Dusty

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,097
oakview said:
When I was in upper elementary and junior high school, in the mid to late '60s, we learned about the upcoming ice age.  The information we were given was prepared by the nation's foremost authorities on the subject and presented as indisputable fact.  The ice age was coming and there was nothing we could do about it.  You can find articles on this inevitable ice age from that time period in the same magazines that are now bemoaning global warming.  I don't believe I have been in a coma for the past 40 years, but somehow I missed the ice age.  I didn't doubt the scientists in the 60s.  I assumed they were using the best information they had at the time and just reached the wrong conclusions.  Today, I listen to renowned experts on the subject of global warming from our finest universities argue both ways.  Most of them foretell an irreversible course to disaster while others say it is only a 10 year trend, a naturally ocurring cycle.  I have to assume that they are all using the best information they have available.  Perhaps some are just reaching the wrong conclusion.  The scientific community always presents their findings as fact.  The same scientific community that at one time preached the earth was the center of the universe, the earth is flat, and that blood letting was a good cure for disease.  100 years from now someone will think we were all silly, too.  I just don't know if they'll wonder why we didn't do anything about global warming while we had the chance or if were just stupid to worry about it.

This is a prime example of what Nassim Taleb calls the Ludic Fallacy. 
Basically it says that it is impossible to account for all the information.  And, that even the smallest variation in one variable can have a large impact on the outcome. 

The global warming predictions are extremely susecptible to this in that scientists are using incomplete data as it is impossible to have all the information and variables that they don't take into account can have a huge effect on climate over the long term. 
 

chambero

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
3,207
Location
Texas
That would be the same scientific community that has increased human lifespan from around 30-40 to whatever the official version is now.  The same "tree-hugging" engineers that figured out how to give us clean water to drink and figured out places for us to put our and somewhere besides out the window and in the street.  It's easy to take for granted how much more often "scientists" are right than wrong.  The same ones that figured out how to make our lives easiers and everything we do infinitely more efficient than 100 years ago.

Don't make the mistake of trying to twist things or use memories from something you think someone said 40 years ago (that somebody was probably someone in the media "translating" what they think they heard) just so you can be on the polar opposite side as the liberals.  

I bet a lot of you would be surprised to know that a lot of the "treehugger scientists" that work on a lot of these climate and weather-related studies are actually in the agriculture departments of schools like Texas A&M, Purdue, OSU, and on and on.  They aren't the professors and activitists involved in various crusades to save endangered species.  They are ag folks - mostly from backgrounds originally not that different than the readers on this board.  

The funding for these studies isn't coming from eco groups - its coming from organizations with real money.  The money comes from corporate ag, water resource agencies, and citiies that don't give a darned about republican v democrat - its from people that want to know what they have to do to stay in business 20-30 years from now growing food or to make sure they can keep their citizens supplied with water and food.  

Folks listen way to much to the media's interpretation of this.  It isn't about saving bunnies or trees - its about trying to make sure we can keep on improving our standard of living - so some of us can spend more money showing calves.
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,640
Location
Hollister, CA
chambero said:
That would be the same scientific community that has increased human lifespan from around 30-40 to whatever the official version is now.  The same "tree-hugging" engineers that figured out how to give us clean water to drink and figured out places for us to put our and somewhere besides out the window and in the street.  It's easy to take for granted how much more often "scientists" are right than wrong.  The same ones that figured out how to make our lives easiers and everything we do infinitely more efficient than 100 years ago.

scientists don't publish results when they are wrong.


Don't make the mistake of trying to twist things or use memories from something you think someone said 40 years ago (that somebody was probably someone in the media "translating" what they think they heard) just so you can be on the polar opposite side as the liberals. 

two scientists supposedly spread the word on global cooling and the democratic party, oops, the media and schools picked it up and ran with it.


I bet a lot of you would be surprised to know that a lot of the "treehugger scientists" that work on a lot of these climate and weather-related studies are actually in the agriculture departments of schools like Texas A&M, Purdue, OSU, and on and on.  They aren't the professors and activitists involved in various crusades to save endangered species.  They are ag folks - mostly from backgrounds originally not that different than the readers on this board. 

more and more are changing their minds about the human component.


The funding for these studies isn't coming from eco groups - its coming from organizations with real money.  The money comes from corporate ag, water resource agencies, and citiies that don't give a darned about republican v democrat - its from people that want to know what they have to do to stay in business 20-30 years from now growing food or to make sure they can keep their citizens supplied with water and food. 

the funding comes from tax dollars.  james hansen is a perfect example at nasa, and he gets massive speaking engagement fees to perpetuate his point of view and say how his voice is being suppressed and the democratic party and the press run with it.  the funding is coming from eco groups like the sierra club, the nature conservancy and a lot of other land grab tax exempt institutions.  they brag how much money they are spending to keep you and cows off the land, though lately, they are putting cows and people back on some.  the overall message is pretty clear, man bad.  i'm continually reminded that the progenator of social biology journal was eugenics journal.


Folks listen way to much to the media's interpretation of this.  It isn't about saving bunnies or trees - its about trying to make sure we can keep on improving our standard of living - so some of us can spend more money showing calves.

the problem is that the press is 90% democratic as indicated very clearly by their contribution dollars.  will the "fairness" doctrine make sure alternative viewpoints are on NPR?  of course not.  never did when it was in force, and they won't do it in the future.  walter cronkite was the democratic party's mouthpiece.  the democratic party has stated repeatedly they want to reduce our standard of living.  i won't be suprised if all "public" roads are carbon taxed in the very near future. our standard of living has already gone down in 1 year due to scare tactics, yet nothing from the democrats.  the price of oil just didn't go up slow enough for them.  awwwwwwwww
 

oakview

Well-known member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,346
We were shown scientific data in the 60s in support of an upcoming ice age, not an article in the National Enquirer.  The point is even today there is much argument in the scientific community.  Some will cite 'fact' that global warming will be the end of us all and others will cite 'fact' that there is nothing to worry about.  I've listened to people with no apparent stake in the battle, no book to sell, and more letters behind their last name than in it argue persuasively on both sides of the issue.  I might not be smart enough to take one side or the other and know for sure yet.  Maybe we can all take care of our own little corner of the world and hope everybody else does the same until we know all the answers.
 

Jill

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
3,551
Location
Gardner, KS
Dusty said:
America can pass all the enviromental laws we want.  Companies will just go to countries that don't have the laws and set up shop there.  Thats what I would do if I had a factory that was going to be burdened by stupid carbon emissions laws.  I guarantee there would be a country that would welcome job creation and economic stimulus(Mexico).

Too late, that is what happened and no one can figure out why.

If you want to make changes, forget the clubs, start with the school system they have more influence than any club or the media ever will.  The crap my kids come home with is just incredible and they believe ever word of it because the teacher said it was so.  A couple of months ago my son informed me that all this driving was causing pollution and killing the animals, I politely told him he was more than willing to get out and walk any time he would like!
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,640
Location
Hollister, CA
    The manager of the Bureau of Land Management's environmental impact study, Linda Resseguie, said that many factors must be considered when deciding whether to allow solar projects on the scale being proposed, among them the impact of construction and transmission lines on native vegetation and wildlife. In California, for example, solar developers often hire environmental experts to assess the effects of construction on the desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel. [....]

    "Reclamation is another big issue," Ms. Resseguie said. "These plants potentially have a 20- to 30-year life span. How to restore that land is a big question for us."

um, no one even thinks twice about building homes anywhere, especially with density, which will then require open space to be used up to generate energy.

population growth is the most unenvironmentally sound policy.  we should convert to no water (biocomposting) toilets before it's too late.  course someone will have a problem with that at some point too.  simply dying is toxic too. 
 
Top