Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Obama’s Keystone Kops

March 20, 2013 by  

Obama’s Keystone Kops
OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE PHOTO BY CHUCK KENNEDY
President Barack Obama touted his energy plan at Argonne National Laboratory.

“The only way to break this cycle of spiking gas prices — the only way to break that cycle for good — is to shift our cars entirely, our cars and trucks, off oil.” — President Barack Obama, speaking at the Argonne National Laboratory on March 15

President Barack Obama has finally brought Congress together with one common goal: to oppose his ruinous energy policies. Perhaps he can unite grass-roots Americans the way no one has since King George III.

On Thursday, a bipartisan bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate that would give Congress the sole power to approve TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL pipeline project. It is essential to America’s national security in that it channels Canada’s vast oil sands to refineries and ports in Texas.

Senators John Hoeven (R-N.D.) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.) introduced the measure, which proposes to ensure the construction of the 800,000-barrels-per-day pipeline.

It is no surprise that the President is fighting back. White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters last week that since the pipeline will cross international borders, the decision for its approval belongs with the State Department. This is the latest example of how the President usurps the democratic process and seizes extraordinary powers, all for the good of the environmental movement.

The $5.3 billion Keystone pipeline has become the battleground for Canada’s oil sands. The combatants are the Greens and the realists. The latter understand that for the foreseeable future America needs secure supplies of petroleum and not the fantasy of windmills and electric cars.

The Greens continue to resist and insist the pipeline will expand the oil sands projects in Western Canada, leaving a dangerous carbon footprint upon the world.

The Problem with Pelosi

Not only would the Keystone pipeline greatly decrease America’s dependency on Mideast oil, but it would also create tens of thousands of new jobs at a time when unemployment lingers close to 8 percent.

Not so, said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat and environmental activist who continues to argue that the Keystone pipeline will not deliver many jobs.

“It just is amazing to me that they can say [Keystone would create] ‘tens of thousands of jobs and reduce our dependence on foreign oil,’” said Pelosi at a press briefing on Capitol Hill last week to oppose the bipartisanship in the Senate. “The oil is for export and the jobs are nowhere near that.”

The Keystone pipeline may not employ as many people as Pelosi does for her hairdos, clothes and facelifts; but at least it is a start. Contradictions from Pelosi abound. If she visited Saudi Arabia as opposed to any Western democracy like Canada (America’s most reliable ally and energy source), the women’s rights advocate would have to cover her face with a scarf and she couldn’t drive around in her gas-guzzling Chevy Suburban.*

Pelosi, Obama and green advocates continue to recklessly tie the Nation’s future to Islamic oil producers like Saudi Arabia, home to most of the 9/11 hijackers.

The chart below gives you an indication of Canada’s oil wealth. It doesn’t even include Canada’s oil sands reserves. If those figures are included, Canada has oil reserves five times larger than Saudi Arabia.

 
Incompetency Or Conspiracy?

In November, columnist Ezra Levant summed up Obama’s energy strategy in the Toronto Sun:

Barack Hussein Obama announced America’s new energy policy: He prefers Saudi conflict oil shipped in on tankers over Canadian ethical oil in a pipeline.

It’s a bizarre decision for the president of a country with 9% unemployment, that could use the thousands of well-paying jobs that will be created building the state-of-the-art pipeline.

It’s not just jobs and the property taxes that the pipeline will pay in perpetuity. It’s the energy security. There’s no risk of a Gadhafi-style revolution in Canada.

There’s no need to spend $1 billion on a Pentagon mission to secure Libyan conflict oil, with friendly Canada to the north.

But in some ways, Obama’s decision isn’t surprising. He has adamantly opposed drilling in northeast Alaska, though his own administration estimates that would provide an additional 800,000 barrels a day, almost as much as America imports from Saudi Arabia or Venezuela.

Obama doesn’t much like drilling in the Gulf of Mexico either ­­— his moratorium there caused many deep-water rigs to move to other countries, costing more than 100,000 lost jobs in states like Louisiana, jobs that won’t come back for years.

I cannot fathom how the President is so ignorant of America’s energy and job needs. He continues to ignore the best interests of the Nation he swore to protect. Could it be there is something nefarious afoot in the Obama White House?

The party line was repeated Friday by Obama spokesman Josh Earnest, who declared that supporting projects such as the Argonne National Laboratory, where Obama was touring, is more important to America than petroleum.

The Argonne lab is just outside Obama’s home base of Chicago. Researchers there are working on advancing batteries for electric vehicles. It is part of Obama’s pledge to wean cars and trucks from oil.

The President has as much engineering expertise as I do, and I would wager that he has a lot less understanding of energy. Despite this, he has brazenly urged the establishment of a $2 billion clean energy fund over the next 10 years. How? Obama will redirect royalties the Federal government receives from offshore drilling along the Outer Continental Shelf toward research for electric vehicles, the very cars that I have derided.

Against all reason, the President continues to embrace Green energy while marginalizing Texas tea. He is robbing Peter to pay Judas.

So around and around we go with Obama, our vaulted leader who is in Jerusalem today kicking off his Mideast tour. He proposes to jump-start Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations and ease tensions in a region that sits atop two-thirds of the world’s conventional oil reserves and is on the brink of anarchy.

What Obama either doesn’t understand or understands all too well is that America’s national security needs are tied to petroleum. Without a lifeline from the Canadian oil sands, the inevitable will happen: the Mideast will explode while the U.S. economy, under the yoke of $10 per gallon gasoline, will implode.

In the end, the greatest threat to America may reside inside our borders at the very head of our government.

Yours in good times and bad,

–John Myers
Editor, Myers’ Energy & Gold Report

*Editor’s Note: Carma Globale reported in 2009 that then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi was driven around Washington in a Chevy Suburban. The website was unable to find out what vehicle she drove.

John Myers

is editor of Myers’ Energy and Gold Report. The son of C.V. Myers, the original publisher of Oilweek Magazine, John has worked with two of the world’s largest investment publishers, Phillips and Agora. He was the original editor for Outstanding Investments and has more than 20 years experience as an investment writer. John is a graduate of the University of Calgary. He has worked for Prudential Securities in Spokane, Wash., as a registered investment advisor. His office location in Calgary, Alberta, is just minutes away from the headquarters of some of the biggest players in today’s energy markets. This gives him personal access to everyone from oil CEOs to roughnecks, where he learns secrets from oil insiders he passes on to his subscribers. Plus, during his years in Spokane he cultivated a network of relationships with mining insiders in Idaho, Oregon and Washington.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Obama’s Keystone Kops”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Harold Olsen

    Those idiots in the two houses of Congress are worthless. They allow Obama of usurp their authority and be a virtual dictator. They, apparently, have no self-respect because they seem to be more than willing to allow Obama to make them irrelevant. If he wants something, he just bypasses them and they let him get away with it. Even the Supreme Court has allowed him to overrule them by EO. Yet, Obama has the audacity to claim he is no dictator. [comment has been edited]

    • Mark C.

      Sorry Harold, but the pres. is not a [comment has been edited]

      • Right Brain Thinker

        PS Please notice that I did NOT succumb to the temptation to make a typical mindless PLD retort like “Takes one to know one” or “Look in the mirror”. It WAS tempting, though.

  • Harper

    it’s not that obama is ignorant, it’s he will not approve anything that will reduce our dependence on opec oil…HIS muslum brothers..plus the pipeline would tie into the Bakken Shale,which currently is being transported by warren buffett’s railroad,,which costs about $15 per barrel to move as apposed to $7 per barrel through a pipeline

  • Warrior

    American Jobs? Are we talking “private sector” American Jobs? What’s that? If it isn’t provided by gubmint, could it be good? Hey, I realize it may be risky but possibly he and nan could “try” it.

    • Nan

      Warrior, I hope you werent talking about this ‘nan’ in your post about ‘gubmint’ jobs. Dunno how you would’ve gotten the impression that I’m one of those pitifully ignorant libs who think life depends on the ‘gubmint’, ’cause I sure ain’t! I value independence passionately & only wish the 47% would do likewise…

  • allritejack

    Is it not yet obvious to the US that Obama is a closet Muslim? Everything he does strengthens their cause and weakens the US. Just look at his actions in the Middle East. He is the main protagonist in removing the relatively benign leaders, so far as the US is concerned, and replacing them with the Muslim Brotherhood, sworn enemies of the US. Why do you think he is so well loved in the Middle East? Is it because he smiles at them a lot? Never mind his obvious plan to weaken the $ and eventually remove it as the world currency.

  • Patric Henry

    Where does Obama think his electric cars will get the electricity to refill those batteries? His Islamophilia would have one think that this energy is in the wind or solar panels. But it takes petroleum and natural gas to make all that electricity needed for his expensive and inefficient clunkers that no one wants.

    It probably would be better if solar energy was used to electricute the imposter sitting in the White House. Have you seen any evidence that Obama’s mentor, Ossama Ben Laden really died or was quickly dumped overboard a ship? Conspiracy upon conspiracy adds up to facts.

    • http://yahoo.com Maynard

      Patrick, electricity can be generated using wind turbines, electrovoltaic cells, hydroelectric turbines, and burning clean pure hydrogen. We do not have to use oil or coal or natural gas. Some of our uses of electricity can be side-stepped entirely. Heating and cooling can be accomplished with heat pumps taking advantage of the heat that is in the earth. Why heat or cool with electricity if it is not necessary? In areas like Iceland, there is an availability of steam from the highly heated water in the ground.
      The monopolization of filthy fossil fuels is restricting the freedom of consumers because it can be manipulated to extract as much exorbitant profits.
      Give me Freedom from Filthy Fossil Fuels or Give Me Death!

      • Louie

        Your’re dead Maynard…

      • Capitalist at Birth

        You have chosen death, and so you shall have it. Fool.

      • Nan

        Aww, Maynard, you lost me there, buddy, when you praised the heat pump. Mine costs me a fortune to run, along with the long-johns, sweaters, robes, sox, etc., that I need to stay somewhat warm. Not long ago, I remembered a childhood home with radiators & wished to high heaven I had ‘em, too. The heat pump is a joke if it gets very cold & the jokes on the homeowner when he gets the electric bill! As for our Marxist president, the EPA (Evil People Assoc), the idiotic ‘greens’, & the dumb dem voters, may they ALL have to live in green-certified huts in Antarctica, serviced by wind & solar power, with guest rooms for the polar bears…

      • WILDFIRE

        Patrick, electricity can be generated using wind turbines, electrovoltaic cells, hydroelectric turbines, and burning clean pure hydrogen. We do not have to use oil or coal or natural gas. Some of our uses of electricity can be side-stepped entirely. Heating and cooling can be accomplished with heat pumps taking advantage of the heat that is in the earth. Why heat or cool with electricity if it is not necessary? In areas like Iceland, there is an availability of steam from the highly heated water in the ground.
        The monopolization of filthy fossil fuels is restricting the freedom of consumers because it can be manipulated to extract as much exorbitant profits.
        Give me Freedom from Filthy Fossil Fuels or Give Me Death!

        @Maynard – And how do you propose paying for all those wind turbines and solar panels and the expensive process of producing hydrogen. Furthermore, the land usage it will require for enough wind turbines and solar panels to support the demands of 350 million + people here that we will have here within the next decade or so. Along with those expensive heat pumps you speak of and the steam from the highly heated water in the ground which will require drilling and the cost of casing. All your ideas are expensive to build and uses a huge amounts of land and will take at least a decade or two before we would be in a position to be completely weened off of oil, coal and nuclear.

        [personal attack has been removed]

      • Hedgehog

        Actually Maynard, if your wish is granted; “or give me death.” then your other wish of; “freedom from filthy fossil fuels.” is also granted. Two wishes for the price of one! However, I don’t think that’s quite what you had in mind.

      • RAND PAUL & BEN CARSON IN 2016

        Obummer & the DEMs are all phonies on real energy reform, witness them doing NOTHING about the most crucial legislation to start weaning us off fossil fuels, a bi-partisan bill called the Open Fuel Standard ACT, OFS, giving us a choice of Ethanol, Methanol or regular gas, cheap retro fitting of cars to burn these & production of new cars able to burn them….They have been running AMERICAN-MADE cars in Brazil on alcohol for over 2 decades now, but yet Obummer goes to Brazil & buys oil from his socialist buddy, Da Silva……….INSANE!!!!!

      • Patric Henry

        Maynard…. Apparently you don’t understand that alternative energy sources are decades away from the drawing board to actually replacing fossil fuels. Unfortunately the USA cannot wait for America will be destroyed by its enemies when the great Obama depression strikes down the economy and the country. Why isn’t Obama proud as punch to prove that he is a Constitutional America born citizen? Obama cannot be impeached for he is not the President of the USA and therefore if impeached his insane laws would remain in place. He must be thrown out of office as stated in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. Something of which neither you nor Obama has the faintest concept.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Patric Henry says, ” You don’t understand that alternative energy sources are decades away from the drawing board to actually replacing fossil fuels”. Patric H perhaps doesn’t understand that we are in a race to cut back on the effects of AGW by reducing fossil fuel use and we need to work harder at doing so quickly rather than putting our heads in the sand. We may have passed some tipping points already. All the jokesters talking about “give me death” may not see it, but the long-term outlook is grim—-we, or rather our descendants, are ALL likely to die,and we will take most living things on the planet with us.

        And I’m not sure what the rest of the rant that begins with “Unfortunately the USA cannot wait….” means, because it’s all loony tune politics.

  • http://yahoo.com Maynard

    The Keystone Pipeline will pass over our nation’s largest aquifer. Some day soon, clean fresh water will be more valuable than oil. That day will come sooner if we ruin what we have as Canada is doing where it is extracting filthy tar sands and oil shale oil which uses a lot of clean fresh water. Clean water is ruined also as we are doing when we frac for natural gas. To make the Keystone pipeline even more dangerous, one path it may take will pass right over the New Madrid Fault which rerouted the Mississippin River 150 years ago.
    We CAN get rid of our dependence on petroleum for vehicles to a large extent QUICKLY.
    How? There is a new process called ARTIFICIAL PHOTOSYNTHESIS that scientists have developed that splits water into its two components, hydrogen and oxygen. When hydrogen is burned, the unused parts reforms as water vapor and therefore there is no substantial loss in water as it returns eventually as clean rain. This is in contrast to the poisonous and non-poisonous byproducts of burning gasoline which produces CO2, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide which can become sulfuric acid and return as acid rain, etc.
    There is no danger of leaks, evaporation, global warming etc. using hydrogen. In fact it is the hydrogen that gives hydrocarbons their energy that we use. But pure hydrogen has no filth involved unlike filthy fossil fuels.
    Four major auto manufacturers already have hydrogen burning autos ready for mass production: Fiat , GM, Toyota and Volkswagen. But isn’t hydrogen more dangerous. NO! The Hindenberg caught fire from static electricity being attracted to the metallic pain on its skin. Furthermore, when hydrogen catches fire in an accident, unlike gasoline which is heavier than air, it quickly moves high up above the victims. It is the lightest element of all.
    We have also made great strides in being able to store it without taking up so much space or requiring it to be cooled.
    The filthy fossil fuel folks are going to fight hydrogen with fake propaganda.

    • FreedomFighter

      Even if something terrible happens the Water can be filtered and the process paid for with oil money.

      I am not a big oil fan, but the oil needs to be pumped in tandam with rollout of electric cars. Not the weak offerings of today either, cars that get 400 miles on a charge.

      Laus Deo
      Semper FI

      • FreedomFighter

        oops forgot, wouldnt it be more effective for a solar/hydrogen system to recharge batterys onboard the electric than a pure hydrogen car, panel splits the H off, a tiny motor charges the battery.

        Laus Deo
        Semper FI

    • Steph

      Ok. So as you point out hydrogen is clean to burn. How exactly are you getting this hydrogen. Surely not from water, because it takes enormous amounts of power to break the hydrogen-oxygen bond in water. Where is that power coming from? Hmm burning tons of coal, natural gas, and oil to run generating plants to get the electricity needed. Wow major benefit there, NOT. And before you spout use solar to get the electricity where are we putting this huge solar plant. I suspose if we take all of say Texas kick the people out and turn the whole state into a solar electric generator we may have enough to create hydrogen for maybe 1/2 the cars today. But that would be a big if. Oh wait we could build lots more nuclear power plants, ah but the tree huggers don’t like them just as they don’t like hug wind farms and sprawling solar power plants.
      So if we are going to say fudge the tree huggers then why not build the pipeline to start with while they continue to work on alternate energy.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Steph says, “And before you spout use solar to get the electricity where are we putting this huge solar plant. I suspose if we take all of say Texas kick the people out and turn the whole state into a solar electric generator we may have enough to create hydrogen for maybe 1/2 the cars today. But that would be a big if”.

        Actually, Steph, a solar panel farm about 200 miles by 200 miles in NM or AZ can supply the electrical generation needs of the ENTIRE PLANET, never mind “hydrogen for 1/2 the cars”—-no “big if” there at all. I mentioned that on another thread when someone was saying that we’d need to cover the entire state of Illinois to generate enough power for Chicago. Of course, that is a lot of land—-40,000 square miles, and the arrays need to be spread around the world and close to where the electricity is needed, and it would be too expensive at current costs, but it COULD be done and would be if we ran out of fossil fuels quickly. I also mentioned that Germany was a leader in solar energy, which was surprising how bad the weather is in Germany and how unsuitable for solar power. Things ARE good enough there that solar odes work, and the Germans are smart enough to include solar in their energy package.

      • http://yahoo.com Maynard

        Steph. You are right that electrolysis is expensive and difficult. The process I mentioned avoids that by using free sunlight. MIT has a device pictured under artificial photosynthesis (I didn’t write down the link, sorry) which looks about the size of a large TV). The topic is highly technical and advances are being made but as in any new technology, need lots of help.
        A new process using hematite (Iron oxide) gas is doubling the photocurrent when coupled with phycocyanin, a protein from blue-green algae.
        Hyundai, I just learned, has assembly line produced hydrogen cars NOW. Mercedes-Benz has jumped into hydrogen fueled motor production. In Europe, the needed refueling infrastructure is being built.
        Contrast that with one of Obama’s energy czar’s first moves – to defund hydrogen autos. Stupidity or intentional to help the fossil fuel lobby? I do not know, but it was reported Susan Rice, Ambassador to the UN has invested a million dollars into the Keystone project.

    • Toxick1

      [personal attack has been removed] About as bright as obama declaring that CO2 is a poison. Without it, life could not exist on the planet. Take pity on the plant life that feeds on it and gives us our O2.

      • http://yahoo.com Maynard

        WWith a monicher like Toxick1 you really must know a lot about poisons. Carbon monoxide is a poison but CO2 is a problem only when it gets into our atmosphere as it allows sun’s rays to pass through the Earth’s atmosphere, but when some of them try to bounce back out as they would normally do, they are prevented from doing so. This is called the greenhouse effect because like a greenhouse, it will heat up and needs to be vented. There are ways to vent a greenhouse, but not the Earth. The Earth’s average temperature has risen each decade for the past three decades and is now at record highs. Ice is melting and this raises the ocean’s level. Some Pacific islanders are being forced to move and even some Chesepeake Bay islands have disappeared according to old timers who live there. Many of our largest cities are on the coasts at near sea level. Like New Orleans, they are threatened by higher tides and with heat come more tropical storms and hurricanes resulting in more frequent and severe tidal surges. The fresh water they use for drinking will also be contaminated by the influx of salty sea water.
        Although CO2 is not a poison per se, we could not survive in an atmosphere entirely composed of it.
        I do not know Obama’s scientific background. I do know the only truly knowledgeable President we have had in the field of science in the last century is Jimmy Carter. If we had followed his lead we would be far ahead in our energy use. Of course, OPEC was put up to raising the price of oil and claiming shortages by Oil Polititians like Bush. This along with the Hostage crisis which miraculously evaporated when Bush was elected Vice President under Reagan. When they got in office, we were sent down the filthy fossil fuel path which could well be the major cause of our decline.
        I cannot resist pointing out Reagan knew who called the shots after Bush’s tycoon friend and campaign contributor’s son almost killed him. Bush showed his involvement when he lied and claimed he did not know the family. Why shucks, how could he know his fellow oil tycoon and neighbor. The Sheeple swallowed that lie among the countless others he told.

    • Brad in TX

      you are full of crap. there have been many studies and new routes agreed upon that do not cross over these aquafiers

      • Right Brain Thinker

        WRONG! The various aquifers are so extensive that it’s hard to go around them, especially since the Oglala underlies nearly every bit of Nebraska. Give us a source that says we have now managed to avoid the Oglala. By the way, are you familiar with what the agricultural users are doing to the Oglala in TX?—sad story.

    • John

      Maynard, there are already more than 20 oil pipelines crossing the Ogalalla (named after the Oglalla Indians yet mispelled) aquifer in the the state of Nebraska. The protection of the aquifer is a ruse for the real agenda, which is to get that oil to China via a pipeline being built to Vancouver. You can pontificate about this versus that in regard to alternatives to oil, but in the end it means nothing. Your world is coming down regardless of what you do. Peak oil is real and hard times are right around the corner.

    • john811c

      As you point out we should use hydrogen there are some pitfalls to that in using in our cars to efficiently use it it must be liquified that makes it very volatile and the cryogenic tanks on the cars are not 100% leak proof the seals and fittings leak so over time you loose part of that fuel. In an accident cryogenic hydrogen is very dangerous as anything it comes in contact with will become instantly frozen and very fragile and shatter like glass . The infrastructure for using Hydrogen as a fuel does not exist. The process to make it from photosynthesis exists, but to make it on a large scale as needed by our industry and cars does not. An electric car is the answer but running them on batteries does not solve the fossil fuel problem from a manufacturing point of view or from an energy point of view. You need generating plants to recharge them. A short term solution is natural gas which can be readily used in our engines with slight modifications, has a proven track record and the infrastructure to deliver it is there. The distribution companies exist for natural gas already, no need to build a completely new infrastructure from scratch.
      The country needs a comprehensive energy plan not Half baked Ideas that are not practical yet or have limitations that just shift the pollution

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Maynard makes some good points about KXL but is a bit premature to say that artificial photosynthesis can solve our problems QUICKLY—-many problems need to be overcome before AS makes a significant contribution.

      And “nitrous oxide which can become sulfuric acid and return as acid rain” is not correct and should be clarified.

      It’s correct to say, “The filthy fossil fuel folks are going to fight hydrogen with fake propaganda”, except that NO propaganda is “fake”, it’s all “real”, and he only thing “filthy” is the lies that the filthy fossil fuels folks will tell so that they can get rich.

      (And FreedomFighter should think a bit more before he says things like, “Even if something terrible happens the Water can be filtered and the process paid for with oil money”)

      • http://yahoo.com Maynard

        You make a valid point that propaganda is real even if it is using false information. I am no expert on anything but there are many experts out there who are working hard on turning our economy into one based on hydrogen energy rather than filthy fossil fuel derived energy. It is true that it will not happen overnight. I am 67 and probably will not see it accomplished. That does not deemphasize the critical need. Fossil fuels are expensive, getting scarcer and have many negative externalities. The externalities are costs that are not included in their price. The cost of a gallon of gas, for example, does not include the clean-up of air, land and water that is caused by drilling, spilling and evaporation into air, and poisons it produces which lead to the green house effect, acid rain and metals such as mercury and lead. The fossil fuel companies, understandably, are happy to leave that expensive task off of their to-do list. They would like to enjoy a free market when it comes to producing and selling their product but a socialist one when it comes to cleaning up after themselves. The poisons associated can cause lung problems, cancers, limiting of resources like clean water and the denigration of formerly healthy natural ecosystems. Their bottom line is profit and they will leave the harms their product causes to people, plants and animals to the rest of us.
        As far as the production of hydrogen goes. New processes and techniques, of a highly technical nature are constantly being developed. This is, of course, expensive and it is not likely the fossil fuel folk will encourage government to do it. Quite the contrary. There was a recent widely broadcast rehashing of the Hindenberg crash by a research group whose functions include exploration for gas and oil. They want the general public to think hydrogen is too dangerous. The fact is that it is safer than gasoline because in an accident its light weight carries it high above the victims. Gas is heavier than air and keeps the fire down around the victims
        Fossil fuel folk do not want to invest in a competitor, so that leaves it largely up to private capital, which they have a great deal of but would rather use to discourage rather than create the hydrogen Since hydrogen is so widely available, in water, it is not possible to corner the market and therefore does not inspire investors. It still MUST be done if we are to have a clean healthy environment for generations to come.
        Not the least of hydrogen’s potential is the fact that there will be no political wrangling and violent conflict for it as with filthy fossil fuels.
        Mankind has accomplished much more than one would have expected but our success will be shortlived if we cannot change and adapt further. Our greatest need is to not be our own worst enemy – through conflict and greed and unwillingness to change and adapt.
        I learned in researching for this response that Hyundai is NOW mass-producing hydrogen cars, Europe is establishing the needed refueling infrastructure, and Mercedes Benz has jumped into the competition. We could be leading the pack but Obama’s energy czar, in 2008, defunded the Bush Administration’s efforts. When you look beneath the surface, once again, you see Obama is not the leading force for the energy revolution he pretends to be. His friend Susan Rice, the UN ambassador has a million dollars from her piggy bank invested in the Keystone Pipeline – which is for Canada’s and our oil refineries’ benefits, not to provide us with more and cheaper fuel or jobs.
        Sheila Davis, I heartily agree with you. If our short-sighted approach carries the day, our future on this planet can be unnecessarily bleak.

        • WILDFIRE

          Do you know what the flash point or the flammability between fuel and hydrogen. In the past, I have been under the impression that pure hydrogen was very unstable, and has a low flashpoint therefore needs to be cooled or kept cooled particularly in the summer months.

  • http://www.facebook.com/michaelt.johnson.58 Michael T Johnson

    Barry wants us to use electric cars… I believe that these cars use a bigger carbon footprint to build then gas autots and then they have to be re charged making an ever bigger footprint.
    Meanwhile we transport oil from halfway across the globe, adding to the footprint, but we cant carry oil from Canada for epa reasons.

    LOL

    • WILDFIRE

      I agree, what LSM media or anyone else talks about, is the increase in electrical energy that will be required to recharge all those batteries in each and every car. Particularly on a electrical grid that is largely outdated in many areas still and can not handle huge increase in demand for power. This will require more power plants whether they be nuclear or coal because his pipe dream of wind and solar power to replace nuclear and coal is still years away from perhaps even decades away from being ready to take the place and phase out coal and nuclear.

      Another thing they fail to mention is the increase in every ones electric bill especially for those who have a household of 3 or 4 drivers that need their cars charged every night.

      That is just to name a few of the problems with electric cars, not getting into the repair costs.

      • john811c

        Not to mention the batteries have a tendency to catch fire when you recharge them what do you think would happen to your home owners Insurance. This has happened to one person already while recharging his car it caught fire and burned his house down

  • WILDFIRE

    “In the end, the greatest threat to America may reside inside our borders at the very head of our government.”

    Without a doubt this statement is blatantly obvious. I have been saying for years now that Obama is a threat to our national security and is in every sense of the word and definition there of a “Domestic Terrorist”, Yet Congress, military and even the supreme court ignore their oaths and turn a blind eye.

  • FreedomFighter

    The midterm elections are coming: VOTE THEM OUT

    The chance to change congress and the senate is coming, the time to stop Obama and the cabal of traitors is coming, the time for action is now:

    Get political, get loud, get motivated – do it in a peacefull manner

    Lets take the senate and dominate the senate with AMERIANS FOR AMERICA, ditch the DEMS and the RHINOS TAKE BACK THE SYSTEM.

    This will stop Obummers agenda cold.

    Laus Deo
    Semper FI

    • Vigilant

      “This will stop Obummers agenda cold.”

      I wish that were true, FF, but Congress abdicated its Constitutional powers some time ago. Obama discovered the power of executive orders to unconstitutionally bypass Congress, and they let him do it. If that fails, fiats by czars and regulatory agencies fill the bill, and at last resort the activist traitors called federal judges will put a seal of approval on his unconstitutional actions.

      It may be too late, and when the “great unwashed” mobs pit his ilk back in office regularly, it may take a real crisis here before the electorate wakes up to his ruinous policies.

      • Chuck S

        They could take it back – imagine if congress was filled with Rand Pauls and Ted Cruzes after the next election.

  • Capitalist at Birth

    The American people have been under informed for over 100 years. It appears as if a majority are either willfully ignorant or totally duped. You know, useful idiots? Sad, sad, sad, I don’t think it will swing back in the other direction in time, before all our liberties have disappeared. I am still making plans to leave this country before the riots start, as soon as my Father leaves this life. The rest of you may stay if you wish. Mark my words, trouble is on the horizon. It is going to get worse before it gets better.

  • Bev

    I’m not a paranoid person, but I do believe this is all about a plan much bigger and more nefarious than can be imagined. He wants to bring this country to its knees, so he can reshape it the way he wants (see communism) He’s still working feverishly on his plan to fundamentally transform America. Welcome to the twilight zone.

  • Barbara A.

    Perhaps voters should be required to demonstrate they have two (2) brain cells to rub together before they’re handed a ballot. It would eliminate at least some of the rampant stupidity at the polls.

  • ToughGuy1

    Somebody, or investigation against Obama on all probable, and find one solid piece of evidence that he can be charged with and broken the law. Please. Need to impeach this jerk. While in his Presidency.

  • Jim B

    Just twenty, hell ten years ago this kind of politics (poli-meaning Many, tics-meaning Tiny Blood Sucking Creatures) would have been unthinkable. America has been hoodwinked by an ideology akin to the dark side of the force as depicted in the Star Wars movies. But truly something quite evil is taking hold in our country. An administration, that releases thousands of criminals, deliberately directs Sequester cuts to inflicts the most harm on the citizens, covers ups its foreign debacles with lies threatening its citizens into silence, kills without discretion and disclosure, sells and/or gives weapons to enemies sworn to kill Americans. This is the tip of the iceberg. It is obvious that this administration has traded the America of yesterday for a state that would be unrecognizable just a few short years ago. Our Constitution was put into place to allow us to protect ourselves from this kind of tyranny if it were ever be tried. I think we are seeing, before us know, the insidious signs of tyranny infiltrating our great country. The question is, who will be left to fight for you once all of your God given liberty and freedoms have been taken from you.

    • john811c

      The very people who want this corrupt Government will be the first to complain when they discover all of their rights and freedoms are gone when the government decides that it will reduce the payments to the free loaders you will have no right to complain when the government tells you where you can live, what you can eat, feeds you propaganda as news, what religion you must belong to, and robs you of your personal property. When it tells you that your home belongs to them and you no longer own it and confiscates your 401K what will you tell them. Remember dissenters will be sent to the “Re-education centers” (Fema Camps) as you will have no 1st amendment rights to protect you and if you speak out you will simply disappear in the middle of the night as the DHS shows up with their jack boots to arrest you. Think it can’t happen here think again, our dictator wants to do the same thing to Americans the Nazi’s did to their dissenters and Jews.

  • dicksi

    I worked in the oil industry for 33 years and was involved in research into alternative energy sources (solar, wind, etc.). If these sources were viable…the company I worked for wanted to be on the ground floor. These alternate sources were NOT economic without massive government subsidies. That was true then and it is still true today. Think of how the balance of global power would shift if America became energy independent. Our energy policy is laughable.

    • alpha-lemming

      Thank you….. actual energy industry input.

      The “greens” do not realize there is no such technology (yet…. maybe hydrogen in the distant future) that will leave a footprint as small as they demand. They’ve got a better chance of harvesting unicorn farts…. water is the only by-product, and the exhaust smells like fresh baked cinnamon buns…….

  • Dagger

    His goal is to reduce America to a third-world nation status and he is right on target to accomplish that feat. If you have read his book: “Dreams FROM My Father” you would understand where, why and how he desires to do this. He is the most dangerous man in the world today and may be the final president America ever has to sit in the White House.

  • http://www.facebook.com/curt.siters Curt Siters

    Lest you all forget… the oil flowing through that pipeline is NOT U.S. oil – it is Canadian. I haven’t been able to find a poll but a large number of Canadians don’t want it – especially the First Nations (as it crosses a good portion of some of their land. Building the KXL without knowing IF Canada is actually going to build their end is nothing but a waste and busy work.
    The company that is to build this is a Canadian company (not U.S.) that has a very poor record on it’s construction and maintenance.
    Why run it to the Gulf? There are refineries much closer. Like in WA sate or even BC.
    Have any of you seen pictures of what the extraction looks like? It isn’t drilling – it is open pit mining.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Yes Curt, you are nibbling around some more of the “edges” of the Keystone that the oil interests want you to ignore. The Canadian First Nations are nearly 100% opposed to the pipeline, even more so than Native Americans down here, but it appears that the Canadian government is no more enlightened than we are about dealing with the people they stole the country from. Trans Canada is not only weak on construction and maintenance, it is very “strong” on “dirty dealings” in terms of influence buying, lobbying, and subverting the law to get its way (read “increase its profits”)—-look up some of the court cases and regulatory actions against them if you want to see evidence of bad behavior on the part of a corporation.

      And yes, the oil IS Canadian, and the Canadians behind the KXL are getting tired of waiting and are pushing to build pipelines to Canadian ports and build refineries there so that they can move the nasty stuff overseas without us. American fossil fuel interests don’t like that because they will lose their “middleman cut” if the “oil” doesn’t come down here (and the Oglala aquifer and all the rest of it be damned).

      And the “pictures” of what tar sands mining looks like? Far worse than open pit mining in terms of the amount of environmental destruction—-land, water, air—-of course it’s out in the middle of nowhere, so who sees it and who cares?

      You say, “Building the KXL without knowing IF Canada is actually going to build their end is nothing but a waste and busy work”. Not totally so—-the pipeline will improve our capabilities re moving the Montana and North Dakota oil to the Gulf refineries and take pressure off other routes, so the fossil fuel interests want it regardless.

  • J. R. Minor

    Warren Buffett bought an interest in a railroad and made a trip to the white house to chat with obama. About that time obama started delaying the pipeline for about the zillionth time. The railroad has many tank cars that move oil. Is there any connection here? Just curious.

    • john811c

      Do you think maybe Obama is taking a kick back sue looks like Chicago Politics and graft to me

  • LIONEL

    Since Obama has been in America (and before), he has been what he always wanted to be ….OUR MOST COMPETENT ENEMY ! Obama now and historically has hated our wonderful country and all else that is civilized and decent, much lest constitutional. The half-man is an @#$% psychopath ( Google: “Malignant Self Love” ) without a conscience and needs to be perminantly disabled!!!!! Is this great nation going to allow, as well, Reid , Pelosi the liberal senate etc.to destroy our way of life these 200+ years? Obama is a grandiose @#$% soul spelled out clearly in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistcal Manual. Google, and see if you recognize the resemblance!Why don’t we get us a commitee of Psychiatrists to peruse his history etc. and take him to court as too incompetent for the office of the President?

  • john811c

    The Pipeline may not create as many jobs as the Republicans project, However if it creates Jobs of any number That is a good thing, If the Oil is for export that is another good thing it helps to reduce our trade deficit. Obama is the “Obsolete Man” he promotes the socialism/communism of a 12th century Muslim backward camel riding person who ls living in the 21st century. We can get ahead by education not indoctrination. Until there is a viable solution to fossil fuels we best make use of what we have the pipeline is a reasonable solution to some of our energy problems. We do not need a Usurper who is hell bent on destroying th US

  • john

    on most issues I do not agree with Obama but on this one there has to be a better way crossing major rivers and Indian reservations with force is not right and if this oil was going here why pipe it to Texas (where there are ports) and build a refinery at the border and distribute the gas and other oils and fuels from there

  • Right Brain Thinker

    This is one of the most biased and factually incorrect pieces to appear on PLD in quite some time. I suspect John Myers is wearing his that says “I am a lobbyist for Canadian Oil interests” (and the Koch brothers). Notice John’s bio—-where he lives and how he earns his bucks.

    To look as some of the more egregious misstatements in John’s piece. “It is essential to America’s national security in that it channels Canada’s vast oil sands to refineries and ports in Texas?”
    Totally untrue—the oil that will be produced is intended for export and will have NO impact on U.S. “national security” except in limited “back door” ways. (And John should stop trying to minimize what a nasty deal the “oil sands” are by glossing over how they are used. The “oil sands” are not “channeled” to TX, the dirty and hard to refine material extracted from the oil sands is, leaving behind in Canada vast quantities of “sand”, dirty water, dirty air, and ruined ecosystem from the processing).

    It is comical that John talks about “usurping the democratic process and seizing extraordinary powers, all for the good of the environmental movement”. Trans Canada, the Koch brothers, and the fossil fuel interests have been trying to “usurp” and “seize” since the Keystone was first thought of, and the “environmental movement” has the good of ALL Americans at heart, not just the greedy rich who want to get richer while destroying the air and water and land that belongs to all of us.

    John again misleads when he talks about “America needs secure supplies of petroleum”. Since the tar sands “oil” will all be exported, it will not be part of our “supply”.

    John tries to insert boogeymen with “The Greens”. The truth of the matter is that all reputable scientists “insist the pipeline will expand the oil sands projects in Western Canada, leaving a dangerous carbon footprint upon the world”, foremost among them being James Hansen, who has even said that the oil sands may be the final nail in the coffin because they are so “dirty” in so many ways. .

    John again parrots the same old lies the fossil fuel interests have been pushing since keystone first came up. Since we will use NO tar sands oil (it will all be exported, remember?), it will not decrease our dependence on anyone’s oil, never mind “greatly”. We depend less and less each year on “Mideast oil”—-it’s down to less than 1/8 (12%) of our usage right now and declining. The jobs number is STILL being inflated—-the true number seems to be in the neighborhood of at most 10,000+ construction jobs and a few thousand operation jobs after completion. Pelosi has her facts right on that question. She may be “politicking” when she says this, but she is not outright lying like the opposition.

    “It just is amazing to me that they can say [Keystone would create] ‘tens of thousands of jobs and reduce our dependence on foreign oil,’” said Pelosi at a press briefing on Capitol Hill last week to oppose the bipartisanship in the Senate. “The oil is for export and the jobs are nowhere near that.”

    John says the Keystone pipeline “is at least a start”, followed by some gratuitous Pelosi bashing and references to “recklessly tying the Nation’s future to Islamic oil producers” and “9/11 hijackers”? Very weak stuff, John—-but I guess one must rely on inflammatory and bombastic oratory when the facts are not on one’s side. . .

    Speaking of facts, John. You have made one of the biggest misstatements of fact I can ever recall seeing on PLD when you say, “The chart below gives you an indication of Canada’s oil wealth. It doesn’t even include Canada’s oil sands reserves. If those figures are included, Canada has oil reserves five times larger than Saudi Arabia”.

    Perhaps John is relying on the fact that many PLD visitors are motivated reasoners and just want to have their beliefs confirmed, and therefore don’t look too closely at things. If one DOES look at the “chart”, (provided of course by a rather biased source, lobbyists for the oil interests), one will discover the following FACTS.

    The chart MOST DEFINITELY DOES include the oil sands—-that’s the “crude bitumen” that makes up 170.2 billion barrels of the Canadian “wealth”. Real “conventional oil” is only 1.5 billion barrels. Doing the math, the TOTAL reserves are actually only about 64% of Saudi Arabia’s not FIVE TIMES as much, and the “real oil” is only 6/10 of 1%, the proverbial “drop in the bucket”. BIG faux pas there, John.

    You need to apologize for spewing such outrageous horsepucky and claiming it as truth, John, if you want to have any credibility at all. Of course, if you’re just a cheerleader for the ignorant and self-deluded, keep it up—-they will not care that you’re feeding them horsepucky, they will love it and ask for more.

    • Chuck S

      How about some evidence/link that the oil is to be exported? Even if it is, in a crisis, we could probably use more of it and export less. Besides, since Obama delayed the pipeline, Canada is building a pipeline to the Pacific to export to China.

      I believe there are already pipelines running over the aquifer. Another poster says 20 pipelines.

      Of course, Obama’s friend Warren Buffet is making billions from the railroad he owns transporting the oil now.

      The pipeline will also transport oil form North Dakota.

      OIl is a world market – shortages anywhere increas the price everywhere. If, say, Libya produces less oil, it will first affect it’s main customer, Europe. But Europe will want that oil, so it will shop everywhere, including our 3 biggest suppliers, Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. That will reduce the supply and increase the price to us (and everyone else in the world). However, our producing more ourselves decreases the price to us to some extent. The last few years West Texas Crude has been several dollars cheaper than Brent (London) oil due to our increases in domestic production.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Chuck says, “How about some evidence/link that the oil is to be exported?” Chuck obvisously hasn’t been folowing the tar sands situation for years as many of us have or he wouldn’t ask that question. It’s all history and self-evident, Chuck—-do a little googling and pick a source. You will find many that speak truth about it and a few that make weak attempts to evade or obfuscate the issue. The tar sands “oil” is intended to go to China—period—anyone who has taken the time to become educated on the topic knows that. Google “will tar sands oil be exported” and look at the NRDC and tarsandsaction sites for a start.

        Chuck also says. “I believe there are already pipelines running over the aquifer. Another poster says 20 pipelines”. There are maybe hundreds of pipelines running over the aquifer—-their size, what runs through them, overall benefit to the USA, and exact location are what we need to look at. Keystone XL is a bad deal for all on all counts.

        Chuck also says, “Of course, Obama’s friend Warren Buffet is making billions from the railroad he owns transporting the oil now”. Yes, trains do move oil and the coal from out west, and trucks transport a lot of both too. A train or truck wreck is a lot easier to deal with than a massive pipeline break, especially when the pipeline break threatens to pollute a water source that is already being seriously depleted and under extreme pressure from agriculture and spreads across many states

        “OIl is a world market – shortages anywhere increas the price everywhere. If, say, Libya produces less oil, it will first affect it’s main customer, Europe. But Europe will want that oil, so it will shop everywhere, including our 3 biggest suppliers, Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. That will reduce the supply and increase the price to us (and everyone else in the world). However, our producing more ourselves decreases the price to us to some extent. The last few years West Texas Crude has been several dollars cheaper than Brent (London) oil due to our increases in domestic production”.

        All pretty much true (you forgot Nigeria, who supplies us with more oil than the entire middle east), but largely irrelevant—-what you say has always been the case, and the picture is muddy on a world-wide basis. China and India (and Japan and smaller nations) are all very much wild cards in the fossil fuels game right now. The Canadian oil interests (and the Koch brothers) just want to cash in RIGHT NOW and don’t care about the long term interests of the US. The Keystone XL plays a very small part in all of it, and is only a “big deal”.because it is being used as a political weapon by the right.

      • phideaux

        “…especially when the pipeline break threatens to pollute a water source that is already being seriously depleted and under extreme pressure from agriculture and spreads across many states”

        Better watch the lies RBT your nose is in danger of knocking your monitor over as it grows. The proposed route for the pipeline was changed months ago to bypass the areas of concern.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Fido should look before he barks and calls people “liars”, or maybe should get better educated on the proposed pipeline routes and the the “areas of concern” that pushed a realignment. If he worked to become less ignorant, he would discover that the major rerouting took place to avoid the Sand Hills, a particularly “special” and environmentally sensitive area. Since the Oglala aquifer of which I spoke underlies NEARLY EVERY BIT OF NEBRASKA, it would be pretty hard to run a pipeline through the state that didn’t threaten it. Since Nebraska is the major recharge area for that aquifer, the fears are even more justified. What I said is 100% correct.

        “…especially when the pipeline break threatens to pollute a water source that is already being seriously depleted and under extreme pressure from agriculture and spreads across many states”

        And, as an aside, that last part is something folks should look into—-the water levels are being drawn down at such a rapid rate in TX and the other states south of NE compared to the slow recharge rate that we face a major crisis there.

    • http://yahoo.com Maynard

      Great Answer! Yes, alternative energy is expensive at first. This is true of ANY startup. Of course our government does not wish to invest in it. They have been giving away oil subsidies and preferential treatment because they know who pays them under the table and through big campaign contributions.
      Once it is set up, the wide availability of wind, sun and water would drive the price way down. That’s why investors don’t see dollar signs like they do on scarce or difficult to acquire products.
      Nan, I am sorry your heat pump was not a panacea. It is useful, however, in bringing the baseline temperature up requiring less energy from other sources.

    • http://yahoo.com Maynard

      Dear R. B. Thinker. What a great blog! Both parties are drunk on oil money and appear to know didly squat about energy. WE NEED CLEAN, ABUNDANT ENERGY SOURCES!
      We do not need filth that is spewed forth from fossil fuels.
      Unfortunately, when profit is the basis for our decision making rather than what is the best in the long run, we end up with disaster -politically, economically and ecologically.
      Governments fight for filthy fossil fuels and the democratic process is undermined by the vast wealth they have acquired. We foolishly spend our financial resources on filthy fossil fuels at the gas pump, in heating and cooling our homes and in power plants.The poisons spewed forth are causing the Earth to heat too high more rapidly and pollute land air and water. Step outside. Take a deep breath. That stench won’t go away until filthy fossil fuels are limited. In fact, it is going to get a lot worse.
      I don’t know about you, but I think a beautiful landscape, with pure unadulterated air, and uncontaminated water is priceless. I also know we need to be in a balance with other species of plants and animals to make our own species prosper.
      That’s why I told Patrick Henry “Give me freedom from filthy fossil fuels or give me death.” If we do not get rid of those sources for energy, death of our species, and destruction of life on our planet will be rampant.

      • WILDFIRE

        Another problem we have is deforestation. These large companies clear out huge areas of land in which takes years to replace the trees if replaced at all. At the rate of growth of population which the increase of fossil fuel use and decrease of forest and rainforsts to clean and convert certainly don’t help. However, the cost to convert and startup on all levels from government to private business to individual will be a pricey process. furthermore, what are individuals going to do with their $40 -$50K oil fueled vehicle they just purchased and can’t get gas for it anymore? They take a loss and are out the 50K? they certainly won’t be able to afford to get another laon for a electric or hydro vehicle.

  • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

    There’s an ulterior motive to Obama wanting to preserve oil. Originally our money consisted of gold and silver coins and and the paper certificates that represented them. Originally every certifcate printed had to be backed with gold and silver. Banks started printing counterfeit certificates and only held enough gold and silver to accommodate the person that wanted to turn in his certificates for real money. This hit a point where the government got in on the scheme with the Federal Reserve. The government stole the people’s gold and silver and colluded with Fed to print FRN’s. They are/were backed with liens on all of America’s wealth, public and private. Once the FRN’s started to use up the wealth of America to back them, the government and Fed had to come up with something else to use as a backer for their FRN’s. They settled on oil, everybodies oil. By government decree all oil transactions must be done in dollars. Remember, the FRN’s are the worlds soverign currency, the recognized currency for any and all transactions, That way oil, everybodies oil, will be used as backer for FRN’s. As oil is depleted, the backer of the dollar is depleted. Oil must go the same route as gold and silver and is going the same route as gold and silver, UP IN PRICE. The solution is stop using oil wherever possible. Obama’s handlers know this. The paper FRN’s are competing with you, the oil consumer. for oil. You want it for the purposes intended and the government and the Federal Reserve wants it as backers for paper. This is what’s driving the world to Armaggedon.

  • Nelson

    What can anyone expect from the present group of misfits who occupy the White House. As long as there are no conservate democrates who oppose the president America and AMERICANS all over the world will be the losers period!

  • FreedomFighter

    The muppet Obama is here to destroy America in all ways:

    Join the liberty movement:

    The Liberty Movement is not some dying vestige of America’s past clinging to an antiquated philosophy. We are the new wave; the messengers of an ideal of freedom that in the grand scheme of history has been around for only a blink of an eye. Constitutional liberty IS the progress that humanity has been waiting for. We have only been led astray by those who would sell us on our own bondage.

    The SPLC and others within the establishment accuse the Liberty Movement of arming for conflict against the government. I am here to tell them that is EXACTLY what we are doing. We are arming because the establishment is arming against us. Yes, we are a threat, but only to political and corporate criminals who use subversion and violence to wrest freedom from the hands of good people. I am not afraid to openly admit it. I and many others will fight against any measure or man that seeks to undermine the rights of the people or destroy the founding principles of this nation.

    We will not allow engineered economic collapse to go unpunished. We will not allow internationalists to subdue American sovereignty. We will not allow national gun registration or confiscation. We will not allow martial law to be instituted. We will not allow American citizens to be imprisoned or assassinated without trial. We will not allow any presidential administration, black or white, Republican or Democrat, to become a De facto dictatorship with no accountability to the public.

    Regardless of what they might say about us in the future, these are the reasons why we will fight, and our pledges to resist are not empty assertions. We will stop the course of tyranny from completing in this country and in this era, one way or another. If this makes us “extremists”, or “terrorists”, then so be it. I, for one, am tired of the long running game of lies and reserved rhetoric. They know a fight is coming, and we know a fight is coming. Let’s just admit it and be done with it. Their greatest weakness is that they have to use deceit, propaganda, media monopoly, and false flag violence in order to convince the public that they are the “right side”. All we have to do is continue telling the truth, and stand fast…

    The Real Reasons Why The Liberty Movement Is Preparing To Fight
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-19/guest-post-real-reasons-why-liberty-movement-preparing-fight

    Fight now for America or kneel to the masters as a slave.

    Laus Deo
    Semper FI

  • ROGE,irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

    What about Trans Canada’s use of “Eminent Domain” to expropriate PRIVATE American land? I oppose it for that reason NOT because I support Obama-WHO I DONT support, by the way. Funny how no-one talks about that!!! Sounds just like MORE divide and rule by neocons like John Meyers. Once again the average American who happens to own land within the ” Keystone XL” route will be the victims of Corporations wanting profit at any cost,as long as the cost is to property owner’s RIGHTS

    • Combat seabee

      Do nyou have any proof that eminent domain has even been proposed? No! The lands are to be leased or purchased!

    • podunk

      Drill HERE!! Be energy independent! The probable has been impossible because the majority of both legislatures are riding the same Global Trojan Horse. Officials use regulatory powers to restrict our abundant energy, mineral, and other God given resources! Restricting crude oil extraction (supply) to 1/3 of usage, unequivocally places global monopolists in control of oil price and supply. National security is absolutely compromised! Monopolist control over key energy prices guarantees citizens will pay double to triple vs. free competitive prices. With $100/bbl for 6 billion barrels as a usage reference point, citizens are cheated out of at least $300 billion. Further, four billion imported barrels means $400 billion of wealth is totally siphoned out of the country, tax free! The $400 billion drained out of the country is akin to consumption – it’s GONE and will not regenerate any further US wealth! Monopolist activity is illegal and traditionally carried treble damages! We need a new legislature!

      Keystone is far better than the current situation from a security basis. Keystone does nothing to the break the back the monopolies. It will generate construction jobs and a minor amount of pipeline maintenance jobs. It will provide wealth for our Canadian ally and stop supporting adversaries!

  • Combat seabee

    Didn’t the State Department announce about 2 weeks ago that they saw, “NO PROBLEM,” with the pipeline, and that oblowhole should have no reason to not pass it? He has reasons, keep Americans unemployed, and unempowered!!
    He’s paying back the tree huggers again, I’m waiting for the new sequal, “Solyndra 2!”

    • Joe H

      Your sequel was in the news TODAY! Another green energy company was in the process of laying off employees after obtaining government money!!!

  • Dave Ross

    Obama is just a darned, clever fool.

  • Uknowho

    First, the oil from that Pipeline does NOT go to the United States. It goes to the highest bidder in the world oil market which is not the United States.

    Second, the reason Obama and the whole NE GOP dominated legislature blocked the pipeline was due to the location it was going through was going to be a threat to 30% of NE drinking and crop water.

    Third, Jobs… Most of the jobs from this pipeline will benefit Canada with about 5K jobs in the United States maintaining the pipeline

    Fourth, Obama looks like he will not stand in the way of the pipeline now its been moved as orignially requested. OK and TX have the pipeline already under construction.

    But please… continue…

    Facts do not matter anyways around here.

  • http://www.davidlerickson.com David Erickson

    Nothing but a bunch of Obama haters here. I think it’s safe to assume you all think Bush was a great president.

    I have to assume you all think Batman Romney and his side kick batty boy would have worked out well for us. So I must assume you’re either in that top 1% or you’ve successfully deluded yourselves into believing that trickle down economics and deregulation will help the middle class, which the last 30 years has shown us, won’t.

    • http://yahoo.com BillT

      I see you write fiction. Seems that’s what the Obama administration is all about. You guys can go hnd in and. Personally, I believe Obama wants to see the downfall of tis great country. But, based on your comments, I think that you believe the United States is just a piece of crap country.

      • Joe H

        BillT,
        Nah, they just don’t want to see their checks and free phones stop!!! don’t you know that’s about 70% of Obambams support!

  • Dave Ross

    By comparison, Bush was a great president — but only by comparison.

    • Uknowho

      LOL… based on what?

      Obama did not fall down on the job and allow 3000 Americans to die on 9/11
      Obama did not use 9/11 to waste trillions of diollars and thousands of lives on Iraq, a BS war
      Obama did not put tax cuts in at the same time to increase our national debt and insure only military families sacrifice during his BS war.
      Obama did not out a CIA operative
      Obama did not bungle Afghanistan badly
      Obama did not have a religious litmus test at DOJ
      Obama did not fail miserably in the response to Katrina
      Obama did not tell people to use the equity in their homes to buy “stuff” to keep the economy going.
      Obama did not send his VP to the CIA to try and get someone to lie on behalf of their desire for war against a country that did not attack us.

      Is almost like none of the conservatives were in this counrty from 2000-2008.

      • Joe H

        uknowho,
        you need to look up the term posse cometas! bush could not have LEGALLY sent in federal assistance without the request of the governor, which he didn’t get till, I believe five days later! Had he went in before that, he would have been crucified by you liberals! I don’t agree with much of anything that Bush did but at least get it right!

  • dan

    I hate to say it,but Nan is correct…and nobody knows more about eminent domain after having sold the Long Beach naval installation to the Chinese and the Presidio in San Francisco to the
    Russians (well,Gorby and his mafiosa) for a tidy little kickback like Nan and her boo….
    the oil companies will still sell the refined product to the highest bidder.

  • http://omanuel.wordpress.com omanuel

    We know, John, that government policies to obscure (hide) new sources of energy have been at the base of programs to enslave and control humans since 1945:

    http://orach24463.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/fear-and-loathing-of-humans-the-pathology-behind-the-climate-change-movement/

    Policies that were intended only to hide the source of energy that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Aug 1945 inadvertently ended up trying to hide the source of energy that

    a.) Made our elements
    b.) Birthed the solar system 5 Gyr ago
    c.) Sustained the origin and evolution of life after 3.5 Gyr ago
    d.) Controls a volume of space larger than ten billion, billion Earth’s

    I.e., post-1945 astronomy, astrophysics, climatology, cosmology, space and solar science became opponents of religions in trying to hide the energy of the Creator, Destroyer and Sustainer of elements, lives and worlds in the solar system: http://tinyurl.com/ahfx8kl

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/03/19/science/space/0319-solar.html?_r=0

    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2013/03/19/papp-lenr-superatoms-fusion/

    Oliver K. Manuel

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Go away, Oliver!

    • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

      “The reality that is revealed by experimental data, measurements and observations on the material world is fully compatible with the reality that is realized by meditation, prayer and contemplation on the spiritual world.”

      Really? Science deals with the physical world. Meta -physics attempts to discern some connection to a non material yet co-existent or pre-existent “spirital world”, for which there are myriad varients.

      You offer a conclusion here which unfortunately:

      1.) Fails to identify which of these metaphysical varients you have chosen as the “consistent one”.

      2.) Fails to show any connection to any of the science, you have been babbling about.

      3.) Fails to demonstrate that any of the scientific controversy you are raising has gained any acceptance, by your peers.

      4.) Fails to offer any consistent hypothesis regarding the “underlying” conspiracy you are suggesting…….since you have failed to deal with the first 3 points…….and your conclusion, requires the unification of physics and metaphysics……..which requires that the latter, fit the observational data of the former……..which is the reason for the “split” in the first place. Meta-physics came first……..and THAT IS THE PROBLEM!!!!

      YOU HAVE NOT RESOLVED THIS PROBLEM!

      The supposed conflict between science and religion – the same propaganda Stalin used to control people in the old USSR before WWII – is being used to control people in the new, tyrannical one-world after WWII !

      Preaching to the choir? The conflict began way before Stalin…..you are a “specialist”………and so far it does not appear that you have any credibility in what you are supposedly qualified for……….having been exposed to the rest of your babbling………your comprehension and ability to sythesize other fields of knowledge is non existant.

      It is called “politically correct thinking” by those who would have objected to Thomas Jefferson’s declaration in 1776 that citizens of the USA “were endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”.

      He didn’t actually write that……and it is false anyway. You have a single unalienable right……..and this is consistent which observable data……….all the rest is metaphyiscal speculation which has no evidence to support it. See 1.) 2.) 3.) and 4.) above.

      Animal Farm described the problem before WWII. Nineteen Eighty-Four (“1984″) describes the world society after WWII – TODAY.

      With deep regrets,
      - Oliver K. Manuel

      No need to have regrets……..while the “commie” touch is nice and reference to Jefferson clearly manipulative…….in terms of scientific understanding, you are clearly in the WRONG PLACE. ( of course, your grasp of “science” at this point is questionable. )

      I realise that in many ways the implications of “science” are essentially contemporary in terms of scope, but we are way beyond the point of understanding that prevailed in Catherine the Great’s Court and you sir are not the modern equivilant of Descarte, although you might be tempted by the “intellectual” prowess of the “liberty movement”, this in NOT a safe haven, for you…….even when you throw in AGW and anti Obama rhetoric. ( and imagined plots and conspiracies )

      As was explained to Brandon Smith, you can try to write general babble if you like……..mindless rhetoric using the appropriate “labels” will always appear to be “brilliant”…….as long as you are never called to actually be specific……..unfortunately for you, once you identify the specific meta-physical philosophy your conclusion suggests, you will be finished. Be a good “specialist”…..and go fight with your “peers”……because until you win there, you have “no science” and it does not appear that you have the “intellect” or “knowledge” to even come close to the “conclusion”, you have “claimed” to have accomplished.

      Still waiting for a response…….

      “He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.”

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Oliver apparently does not “fight” with his peers. The last time I looked, he had NEVER published an article in any reputable journal and/or exposed himself to any sort of peer review. The folks at Nature must have a dedicated “omanuel” shredder, looking at the volume of things he has sent to them. You have seen them cited here by Oliver many times as “proof” of his crackpot science. Apparently, if you send something off to be laughed at and shredded, it somehow becomes “truth” that you will bore people to death with as you seek attention. I’ll say it again, Oliver. GO AWAY! You are causing GALT to waste precious time that he could be devoting to educating others on PLD.

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        No need to be concerned RBT….that took about 30 seconds…..is still
        “educational” for the general public……and the only tactic that works when
        one is faced with the same lie day after day. ( you remember DavidH )

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Who could forget DaveH? He was the stuff of nightmares. I don’t think any of us “educated” him to the point of understanding and enlightenment, though. That’s not why we no longer hear from him. I think it’s more likely that he “did a Dave” and stepped off a curb without looking, thereby being squashed flat by a bus (or more fittingly, a fully loaded garbage truck).

    • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

      You seem to have a “problem” responding to either “english” or questions asked in ” english”………….why is that?

      You have been presented with the “problem of the unification of physics and metaphysics”, and it has been pointed out to you, that you have not “solved” or “resolved” this problem and why…….

      Do you not understand the question or the problem?

      Do you not understand that regardless of how many links you have posted to supposed “scientific claims” you will still have not solved or resolved the problem?

      Do you not understand that whatever the correct science is……….

      The reality revealed by experimental data, measurements and observations on the material world is fully compatible with the reality that is realized by meditation, prayer and contemplation on the spiritual world.

      you can not achieve the results stated by DECLARING THIS TO BE TRUE!

      Or do you NOT understand the difference between a “reality” revealed by “experimental data, measurements and observations” and the “imagined reality” that is and has been the “result” of ” meditation, prayer and contemplation”?

      If the latter were a realiable “source of the TRUTH regarding REALITY” there would be NO CONFLICT between metaphysics and physics, or if you like “science” and “religion”………because “science” would have simply been a “confirmation” of all the “truth” that had already been revealed by “religion”?

      Unless you are a “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate” this is not what science has indicated, and despite what YOU BELIEVE the “science to be”, this is NOT WHAT YOUR SCIENCE has indicated.

      Whatever consistency you imagine exists between your science and your metaphysical belief system, you HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE that consistency, or actually give any indication of what your “metaphysical belief system” is?

      The root of society’s demise is government deception about energy in the cores of heavy atoms (Th, U, Pu), planets (Jupiter, Saturn), ordinary stars (the Sun) and galaxies (Milky Way) that started in 1946 .

      The relationship between energy and matter, E = MC^2 seems to have preceded this conspiracy by a few decades, why is that? Also you have ignored the following questions…….stated predviously:

      Just curious, but if the calculations of the component elements of the sun are wrong, wouldn’t the mass of the sun be miscalculated also?

      And if this were TRUE, wouldn’t all the gravitational calculations within our solar system, between the sun and all orbiting bodies, also be wrong? ( and this gets worse because the “earth”s composition has already been noted as being mostly Fe! ( iron ))

      Why? Fear that humans might misuse nuclear energy to destroy life on Earth, including the lives of world leaders.

      That seems reasonable and still a possible concern, but only if those who have the technological capability yield to the insanity., which seems highly unlikely. Which brings us to this question, asked by many here.

      “What the heck does this have to do with the Patriot Movement?”

      Everything ! We must each search for reality, truth for ourselves to be effective Patriots.

      True Patriots must think for themselves, instead of consuming government propaganda as a pig eating slop.

      This is the typical mindless rheotoric which is “common mushroom feed” for this site……..is this why you think you have a future here?

      Too bad, because “mindless” means mindless……and while I can see the “attraction”……..your mythology had better be “identical” to the “mythology” of those you seek to impress.

      The word “patriot” really has no meaning in this land of rhetorical babble……..simply because there is no understanding of “history” or the real reasons for the “revolution” or the “motivations” of those “patriots” that are often cited as the “enlightened inspiration” for it……..so for most………their understanding of “history” is “propaganda”…..and references to the Declaration and the Constitution, do not alter this fact, for these were “effects” not causes………and given enough TIME, this REALITY will become “obvious”…….

      Regardless of how long this takes, YOU HAVE NO FUTURE HERE. The “willfully ignorant, functional illiterates” are a notorious and cantankerous lot……..but they can not hang because they rely on rhetoric…..and avoid, fact and logical reasoning and are easily EXPOSED!

      You have been EXPOSED by simple questions you can not and will not answer……..how many more times will you have to be asked?

      “He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.”

  • Dave Ross

    Man-made global warming is not an established fact, nor is any significant global temperature rise, for that matter, as an ever increasing number of scientists saying, so possible deleterious effects resulting from the continuing use of carbon generating fuel really shouldn’t be considered in any argument concerning the fuel economy.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      WHAT? Do you reside on Planet Earth, Dave? Are you a member of the human race on said planet? If so, why have you not been paying attention to the reality that surrounds you?

      • Dave Ross

        Last time I looked outside, RBT, it seemed as though I was still on good old planet Earth. You might like to take a look at this article by a Daily Telegraph (U.K.) columnist on the subject, which partly explains why I hold my view http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/9919121/Look-at-the-graph-to-see-the-evidence-of-global-warming.html
        His comment is but one amongst an ever-growing number of informed articles by well-informed and well-qualified authors, which blow the GW myth right out of the water.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Dave Ross says, “You might like to take a look at this article by a Daily Telegraph (U.K.) columnist on the subject, which partly explains why I hold my views”

        I did look at it, Dave, and am sorry to say that it is NOT an “informed article” by a “well informed and well-qualified author”, and it certainly does NOT come close to “blowing the AGW myth out of the water”. Where do you find the nerve to make such bald assertions?

        This author studied HISTORY in college and is well known as an anti-science “contrarian” who makes a living pandering to the “anti’s” of the world about a number of subjects. He is certainly not someone that you should place any confidence in as an expert commentator on climate science. I suspect that if you think this article is so great, that you also have been hoodwinked into believing the same about all these other authors that you say are so “”well-informed” and “well-qualified”.

        Give us some more links to this wonderful “truth” you claim to have discovered and I will explore them with you. In the meantime, please stop making such ignorant assertions about AGW—-your “views” have been gathered only from the deniers, who are fewer in number each year (in spite of being bought and paid for by the fossil fuel interests—-apparently only a few scientists are willing to sell their integrity and shill for the Koch brothers)

        The article itself focuses on a very narrow interpretation of a very narrow set of data—cherry picked for propaganda purposes rather than reporting real science. Go look at the data on ice cover in the arctic, the Greenland ice sheet, the melting of permafrost across the subarctic, and the rapid increase in temperature over the arctic if you want to see some truth. Throw in the increase in ocean temperatures and sea level rise as well. If you have the science background to understand what you read AND you can overcome what appears to be a serious case of confirmation bias, you will learn much.

        Have you visited the skeptical science website yet? A great source that leads on into all corners of the AGW problem through links.

        • WILDFIRE

          Right Brain Thinker says – “The article itself focuses on a very narrow interpretation of a very narrow set of data—cherry picked for propaganda purposes rather than reporting real science. Go look at the data on ice cover in the arctic, the Greenland ice sheet, the melting of permafrost across the subarctic, and the rapid increase in temperature over the arctic if you want to see some truth. Throw in the increase in ocean temperatures and sea level rise as well. If you have the science background to understand what you read AND you can overcome what appears to be a serious case of confirmation bias, you will learn much.”

          RBT – I have not explored or researched in debt the topic of global warming, just catching various blogs and articles here and there. but in reference to your various points of interest in regards to melting of various ice masses and warming temps of land masses and seas. I have a question you might be able to answer since you appear or give the appearance that you have thoroughly research the data and facts and have come to a certain conclusion that GW is mostly man-made.

          My question is: Do you know or have knowledge of the cycle of the universe in regards to the sun cycle and the relevance of the earth to the sun? I have read in multiple places that like every some 5000 yrs or so the earth is the closest to the sun and we are or have been entering this cycle which should peak around 2018 – 2025. If the rotation of the earth around the sun moves in such a cycle it makes sense that the earth surface would be hotter as the earth is moving closer before it begins to move away again. I have also read that some billions of years ago or maybe it was millions of years ago, but scientist have purported determined that the surface of the earth was hotter than it is now by a degree or so.

          I’m not suggesting that there is no man made GW with all the pollutants we put into the environment, But I am skeptical about the assumptions that all GW is man made and nothing to do with the natural cycle of the universe. I Know every time I spend a few hours in NJ traveling through, I can feel a film on my skin certainly of pollution. Working in and vacationing in Countries like Taiwan, Japan, S. Korea, China, Thailand and Malaysia and the Philippines (Manilla and Cebu) to name a few, The pollution in the big cities which usually host industrious areas has so much pollution that people wear surgical masks while traveling by bike or motor scooter through the city and by the time they get to the office they have a black film on the face. So I have lived in and seen many areas around the world most of which have very saturated air filled with pollution. To get away from it, I travel to country sides or mountains when not working, such as on weekends. I have worked and lived in more than 36 Countries on 6 different continents and have seen areas in each and every Country where the pollution is so thick it makes your lungs hurt just to breathe for a period of time. They have little to no regulations on smog control for industry standards or for automobiles and buses and so on.

          We have over 7 billion people on the planet with a mere 311 million people in the US. Our government through the EPA is making so many regulations against automobile operation and industrial standards to reduce our “carbon footprint” to that of which is lower than the early 1900′s when we hardly had any form of coal burning manufacturers such as power companies and very few automobiles in comparison to todays American population.

          Witnessing the above described and my thought of how stringent America is on these regulations and in panic mode of GW as if the earth will cease to exist if we don’t stop operating all oil burning automobiles in the next 24 months in America, this planet is doomed. All the while all these other Countries continue to operate and produce pollutants into the environment by which due to wind currents carries their dirty air over to us. All the while, with all of our regulations that are ultimately choking business right out of this Country and losing American jobs to foreign Countries because it cost to much to operate and stay within the constant and ever increasing regulations for a company to operate in this Country by which ends up costing companies millions even billions to upgrade their systems. They are now and have been for the better part of the last 20 yrs pulling up stakes and heading out of the Country largely due to these regulations as well as the unions.

          Sorry, I’m running on – my point is with all the stringent regulations we are coming up with in the name of GW in my opinion is choking or cutting our own throats by way of forcing companies to leave this Country taking jobs. Yes America is and will continue to lower our “Carbon Footprint” by way of chasing all business out of our Country and we will have a nation filled with a constant growing number of unemployed and welfare recips because of the obsessed liberal tree huggers that in the end does nothing for the earths pollution because the comapnies that once was in this Country producing jobs along with pollution is now producing the same if not more pollution in another Country by which the winds will end up circulating around the globe anyway. Why should we lose jobs and weaken our economy and hurt our people in the name of GW while all or most of the other Countries are operating in which ever way is best for their people and nation to grow and become stronger and more competitive.

          Im not saying we shouldn’t have some regulations but over regulating and thinking that 300 – 400 million people sacrifices are going to make a huge difference and save the planet on our sacrifices alone with a world population of 7 billion seems a bit ridiculous to me. Other Countries such as the UK and Canada are participating in clean air acts as we are, but it is a process that needs to be dealt with in slower progression so as to not force our companies out of business with penalties or force them over seas.

          Particularly with Obama’s obsession with his green energy agendas and expects drastic changes or every ones lifestyles by which they have been doing a certain way of life for 30 -40 -50 years to change their absolute life style and process in a few short years cannot be expected. Especially to change to a system by which is by no means financially efficient. When you have hybrids that yes might get 40 -60 miles or more to a gallon but cost $40K as compared to their gasoline counter or equivalent part of $18K. yes money will be saved in gasoline, but your energy bill is going to increase considerably due to the recharging and the maintenance of the electric cars are expensive and will need thousands of dollars in maintenance every few years for new batteries and then the inconvenience of vacation travel where the car gets some 400 miles of travel and then you are done for several hours, versus fueling up and continuing on. A trip of 1000 miles would take some 12 + hrs in a fuel burning car versus likely a 2 – 3 day venture to get to the destination due to recharge times of at least 2 full recharges. Furthermore, our electric grid in many areas are outdated and running at max capacity as it is. The influx of power usage with all the chargers will certainly cause power outages all over. America will end up like some place like Ghana where power has to be rationed in ways such as certain areas get power on Mon and Tues and another area gets the power on wed Thurs and fri.

          We have a long way to go first to get the price of hybrids down to a level that affordable for everyone, along with making them last longer without outrageous maintenance cost every few years (its like having to change a motor every 2-3 yrs) and get them to operate a longer distance or recharged in a shorter amount of timesimilar to what it takes to fill up a fuel tank to make them practical and worthwhile to convert over from oil. At the same time, we need to upgrade our electrical grid to handle some 400 million poeple as our population is likely to be there within the next 10 years by the way we are accepting anyone and everyone into this Country if they can make it to our shores or borders.

          In short, we are decades away and billions of dollars away from being ready for our society to convert over to electric energy completely or be weened of oil and nuclear.

          Obama wants to run everyone in debt as he has run this country into debt by way of making it so electricity is so outrageously high and gas in so high that people will be damned either way they choose and ultimately will not have the money for fuel or electricity and be getting their power shut off for lack of payment. Obama has made it clear that his policy will in fact make our energy bills “Skyrocket” as he put it and he and his Chinese buddy said they would like to see gas at some 8 -10 dollars a gallon as it is in europe. If they can drive the price of gas up to 8-10 a gal, it would make their electric cars look more appealing and economical and then they can force their cars on the population. Make no mistake, Obama to achieve his goal, he will put the American people through such financial struggles just to achieve his goals. by intention inflation on oil. As of now, there is little benefit to convert to electric until gas increases by double maybe even triple. It is the same theory they use for such things as cigarettes, drive up the price so high that people can no longer afford to smoke and they will quit without the government having to ban it all together, rather give the illusion that you quit based on your own decision. Another example is the proposals dealing with guns by imposing huge taxes and registration fees and even million dollar insurance with a premium equal to a few thousand dollars a year just to own a gun. These measures of making it so expensive will force people to stop doing or using or owning these things, thereby avoiding any kind of an uprising that would likely come if the government completely banned the use or ownership of such things as smokes, guns or oil burning engines.

          I kinda ran on sorry, but what is your take on the “Sun cycle” in relation the the history of warming and cooling cycles of the earth’s surface.

          And what is your opinion of is it worth driving our Country into the ground in the name of GW and Obama’s “leading from behind” stance as he forces jobs and bussiness out of the Country in the name of GW and clean air acts versus making gradual and realistic conversion thats people can financially adjust with little stress in their day to day life and business?

      • Dave Ross

        RBT, thanks for your reply. However, when I posted my comment, I did realise that the Daily Telegraph columnist is himself not a qualified authority on the subject, but that he merely represents the thoughts of those whom he rightly considers to be authoritative.
        I really don’t share your view that he writes merely to be provocative, but that he, as I, believes that what he says is worthy of consideration. I appreciate Wildfire’s comment also.
        Both of you might be interested to read the following articles by writers who most certainly are authoritative, using the following links –

        http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/11/29/open-climate-letter-to-un-secretary-general-current-scientific-knowledge-does-not-substantiate-ban-ki-moon-assertions-on-weather-and-climate-say-125-scientists/
        http://www.climatedepot.com/
        http://lasersparkpluginc.com/uploads/CO2_Absorption_Data.pdf

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Wildfire says “I kinda ran on sorry”, to which I will reply “you most certainly did”. Wildfire HAS made much sense, though. If we take out the obvious (and unwarranted) politically motivated bias in his comments, he asks good questions and raises good points. I will address only a few because I have to spend some time on “real life” today..

        Most important. I have spoken many times about the need to get our terminology right so that we can discuss the issue of AGW properly. To do so again:
        “Climate Change” has been occurring on earth for billions of years—-ever since the earth developed an atmosphere and oceans.
        “Global Warming” and “Global Cooling” are the two ends of the climate change see-saw and have alternated throughout Earth’s history. This has been most obvious in the alternating ice ages and interglacial periods in the recent past. The last ice age ended only some 12,000 years ago and human civilization only began to flourish when it did.
        There are many “cycles” that affect warming/cooling, the sun cycle being just one. Others have to do with the angle of the Earth’s axis and fluctuations in its orbit.
        These cycles range in duration from just a few years (sun) on up into cycles that repeat roughly every 10,000, 50,000,100,000 years, with some going up into the millions.
        We have only begun to study and understand Climate Change in the past few decades, but have accumulated a vast weight of evidence that shows what has gone on during Earth’s past history.

        This vast weight of evidence has made it clear that a phenomenon called AGW—Anthropogenic (man caused) Global Warming IS occurring, and is piling ON TOP of the “normal” long term climate change that has always been with us. We are now in a “warming” trend when the evidence suggests that we should be entering a cooling phase, and the warming seems to be directly due to man’s increasing use of fossil fuels since the beginning of the industrial era. The trend lines are clear—burn more fossil fuels, which release more CO2, then suffer increased greenhouse effects, global temperature increases (much more rapidly in the northern hemisphere), ice melts, ocean warms, extreme weather events increase in frequency—–the list is overwhelming. And the sun cycle is only a minor part of it at this time.

        It is mere politics to talk about “driving our Country into the ground” and “forcing jobs and business out of the Country in the name of GW and clean air acts”. That is NOT happening except in the fevered minds of the right wing propagandists. AGW is a global problem and is only going to get worse as the undeveloped world tries to industrialize and achieve the same standard of living as the U.S. and Europe. The carbon footprint of the average American is something like 16 to 20 times that of the average citizen in the undeveloped world, and is noticeably higher than the already high footprint of the Europeans. That means 300+ million Americans contribute more to AGW than the poorest 4 or 5 billion people. We need to deal with our contribution to AGW if we want to have any hope of convincing the rest of the world to fight the problem. O’Bama has actually been rather weak on dealing with AGW—the fossil fuel interests only paint him the way they do so that the O’Bama haters will swallow the horsepucky and allow them to keep getting rich off fossil fuels.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Dave Ross needs to first decide whether he is a motivated reasoner who believes only what he wants to believe and seeks out only information from those who say what he wants to believe. Or the alternative—-seeking out facts and analyzing them with an open mind in the search for truth.

        The Daily Telegraph columnist cannot “rightly consider someone to be authoritative” because he is in fact not a credible judge—-he IS lacking the science background to do and he DOES make his living pandering to the “nay-sayers” minority on many topics.

        Dave again posts some links and says “the following articles by writers who most certainly are authoritative”. Wrong again! Don’t be fooled by a list of only 134 names, many of whom are really not qualified climate scientists and several of whom are known deniers who are in the employ of the fossil fuel interests. I have read a number of things written by a number of the signatories, and some, like Monckton and the two Idso’s, are laughable—-check out “55 reasons CO2 is good for you” by the Idso’s—a laugh riot for anyone who understands the NON science they peddle there. And did you notice that PLD’s resident science crackpot, oliver manuel, signed the letter? That alone destroys its credibility. I have signed such letters myself, including one against nuclear power in the 1970′s that was also made into a full page ad in the Washington Post. This particular letter has been strongly attacked by many THOUSANDS of real climate scientists because of its inaccuracies. Climate depot is a denier site of the worst stripe—-go there if you want your wrong beliefs to be reinforced. And the last link is to a “scientist” who doesn’t know what he is talking about regarding CO2 and the greenhouse effect.

        I’ll say it again, the preponderance of the evidence says that AGW is occurring. The vast majority of climate scientists all agree that it is happening. The very small group of deniers are mainly charlatans or in the employ of the fossil fuel interests. Believe what you want to believe but pleas don’t come on PLD and assert that BELIEFS trump scientific FACT.

      • Dave Ross

        My word, RBT, you seem to have bought into the Warmists’ theories or, as I would put it, mythology, big-time!

        Have you not considered that the Warmists may have an agenda of their own? After all, many of them are making big bucks out of their theory which, as I have tried to point out, doesn’t have much proof, if any, in reality.

        Here’s another article, one giving a hundred reasons why we should not think that GW is an established fact or indeed that it could be and, even if it were, be caused by human-generated or other carbon emissions
        http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/146138/100-reasons-why-climate-change-is-natural

        Most people are reasonably bright and can and do think for themselves. When a growing number of them, including leading scientists in the field, say they think the Wamists / GW alarmists may have got it badly wrong, it doesn’t do any harm to consider what they say and give valid arguments to counter it, if you disagree.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Dave Ross proves my point that he is a motivated reasoner when he talks about “the Warmists’ theories” and refers to AGW as “mythology, big-time!”. He says “Most people are reasonably bright and can and do think for themselves”. He sounds “reasonably bright” himself but does NOT think for himself or he would NOT be pursuing this path. The alternative is that he knows full well that he is spouting horsepucky and is deliberately misleading you all. That makes him dishonest, a charlatan, and perhaps a paid denier. .

        Dave trots out some tired old talking points. Who is making “big bucks” out of AGW? The big bucks are being made by the folks who would deny AGW—-they are the ones spending money to support the deniers—their “agenda” is to continue to rape the planet for private profit. They are the fossil fuel interests.

        Dave says, “I have tried to point out, (AGW) doesn’t have much proof, if any, in reality” NO, Dave, you have “pointed out” nothing—-you have offered your unsupported OPINIONS, and tried to support them with some pretty sorry stuff—-you must be new at this denier business, Dave, because the horsepucky you have thrown at us is inferior. In reality, AGW has more “proof” every day.

        This latest article Dave offers up is perhaps the worst of the lot—it’s not from a scientific journal but from a muck-raking newspaper, and it quotes a “report” from the European Foundation, which is a European political campaign organization with absolutely NO scientific credibility—-it is well known as a “denier” organization. Since it came out several years ago the “report” has been chopped to pieces by the real world of science—it is full of outright lies and distortions and little sound science, and most of the 100 “reasons” are political and have no science in them at all. Did Dave even read it? I doubt it—-since he seems “reasonably bright” he would never try to peddle such garbage. Perhaps he is deliberately and knowingly doing it, as I suggested earlier—that makes him a charlatan of the worst degree..

        This statement is a complete pile of horsepucky—-”When a growing number of them, including leading scientists in the field, say they think the Wamists / GW alarmists may have got it badly wrong, it doesn’t do any harm to consider what they say and give valid arguments to counter it, if you disagree”

        There is a shrinking number of scientists who are deniers, almost none of them are “leaders in the field”, and there is no need to give “valid arguments” to counter them. The time for “disagreement” is long past—-we need to solve the problem, and wasting time on arguing with those few who deny the real science is not the way to get it done.

  • Anthony

    “In the end, the greatest threat to America may reside inside our borders at the very head of our government.”

    You’re just now figuring that out?

  • Ray

    Here’s a new concept of reducing the Watt-hours used by 50%, by doubling the electricity frequency, using a variable frequency drive in series with a diode, to power various devices.

    If an electric clock is powered at twice its frequency, then it will run twice as fast. If the power is half-wave rectified, then it will run on time using half of the Watt-hours.

    This works! It electronically quickly turns the power ON and OFF. The power is switched OFF 50% of the time. The Watt-hours used are reduced by 50%. The frequency must be doubled to make the ON and OFF cycle quick enough. For example: 60 Hertz power has 120 ON pulses (or half-cycles) per second. Therefore 120 Hertz, half-wave rectified, is needed to have 120 ON pulses and 120 OFF pulses per second. This results in a 50% reduction of the Watt-hours used. Please try it using an incandescent light bulb.

    It can be easily empirically tested by obtaining an appropriate variable frequency drive and diodes.

    The ON and OFF cycle won’t be visually perceived in lighting for the same reason that flicker isn’t perceived in animation.

    It won’t be cheap, but it can be done slowly, over time, by the utility.

    Double the electricity frequency after the neighborhood’s step-down transformer and then half-wave rectify it in the drop wires to the consumer. You will be using 50% less Watt-hours of electricity, much less fossil fuels and pollution. It’s a win/win solution for everyone!

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Now that IS funny! Best joke I’ve seen today. Thank you.

    • JUKEBOX

      There is only one problem I see with your theory. If we are using half the watt/hours, then the utilities will only have half the income, and since most utilities are on a cost plus basis for their rates, they will have to charge double their present rates. Consumers will not see any decrease in their costs.

      • Ray

        Unfortunately you are probably right. It will still let the fossil fuel last twice as long as it will without doing it.

  • Terry Bateman

    The Keystone Pipeline is supported by the governors of some western states through
    which it will pass because some connections will also be made in their states to improve
    oil pipeline infrastructure for the transport of crude oil produced in their respective states.
    The Keystone Pipeline will improve oilpipeline infrastructure in Texas for the transportation
    of west texas intermediate crude oil that is currently bottled up for insufficient transportation pipelines that now exist.
    The Keystone Pipeline will enable Canada to extract and transport huge reserves of
    oil through the United States to export terminals in the Gulf region. They will also be
    able to deliver their crude to U.S. refineries that can handle sour crude if we need it.
    The Keystone Pipeline is privately financed, will provide a lot of jobs during and
    after construction, will improve American oil pipeline infrastructure and prevent an
    alternative oil pipeline being built sole to export oil to China.
    What’s wrong with that?

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Terry Bateman asks, “What’s wrong with that?”

      Not much, except that Canada doesn’t have “huge reserves of oil” that need exporting—see chart—-and it’s not a good idea to “prevent an alternative oil pipeline being built solely to export “oil” (read “tar sands extract”) to China”. Let Canada bear the environmental and societal costs of building that “alternative pipeline”—-the benefits to the US of Keystone XL are just not there (unless you own stock in the right oil companies)

      • Terry Bateman

        Right Brain Thinker:

        Oilsands included, Canada has five times the oil reserves that Saudi Arabia has.
        There are no environmental concerns from building oil pipelines. There are environmental
        concerns from shipping oil from Saudia Arabia to the United States in diesel guzzling
        oil tankers which contribute to global warming and pollution. Only a stupid president
        would turn down a five billion dollar oil pipeline costing his country nothing and providing
        lots of construction jobs temporarily and some other jobs permanently to operate and
        maintain. Only a stupid president would turn down a pipeline improving oil transportation
        and supply in his own country and allowing Canada to export oil to western countries
        instead of China.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Terry, why do you insist on repeating such a whopper as “Canada has five times the oil reserves that Saudi Arabia has”?

        Did you not look at tjhe chart and read my other comments? Canada has only 64% (SIXTY-FOUR PERCENT) of the oil reserves that Saudi Arabia has, NOT “five times” as much. The rest of what you say is just parroting of the oil interest talking points

        There are SERIOUS environmental concerns from building oil pipelines. The environmental concerns from shipping oil from Saudia Arabia will continue to contribute to global warming and pollution whether it comes to the USA or goes to other places—the Saudis will continue to sell their oils somewhere. The world needs to stop using SAudi oil to solve that problem. A smart president knows that this oil pipeline WILL cost his country much and the few jobs it produces are not worth it. Only a mindless person suffering from confirmation bias would spout this stuff like you. (and the oil will not go to “western countries”—another fact that seems to have gotten by you just like the numbers on the chart)

  • Richard K

    Reading one of the trucking sites http://www.thedieselpage.com/dieselprices.htm I found http://www.ultracleanfuels.com
    I think this is very interesting subject since fuel price is driving cost of every think (except our salaries) skyward.
    And because coal fired power plants are being closed down or retrofitted to natural gas, it might save many jobs in mining industry
    Best regards-Richard

    • JUKEBOX

      The uninformed voters, who religiously support the imposter Obama, are too stupid to realize that even the welfare benefits they receive are not buying the same amount of food or goods they are consuming. ALL increases in fuel, taxes, etc. are passed on to the end consumer, regardless of their financial status.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Interesting articles, Richard However, the problem remains that coal is a fossil fuel (perhaps the dirtiest), and has a huge footprint in terms of carbon dioxide, dirty air, dirty water, and damage to the landscape. Jobs in the coal mining industry are down to around 10% of what they were at their peak 60 or 70 years ago—there is little left to “save” there. Coal in any form needs to be phased out in favor of cleaner fossil fuels and ultimately renewables or AGW is going to get us. All these “liquid coal” ideas are just the dying gasps of a dying industry.

      • Bob666

        To Rbt,
        just think what would happen if we cut consumption in half?

      • Joe H

        There is still no less pollution from coal as China is using just as much as we were if not more. the only benefit is to them as they can produce at a lower price than us therefore killing us in the market. So I guess we save the environment yet starve?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Joe H talks about the Chinese “killing us in the market”, and implies that we need to use more coal because they are doing so. He then asks, “So I guess we save the environment yet starve?”

        The coming food shortages are really another issue, Joe, although since they are related to AGW, you can say that we will both destroy the environment AND starve at the same time..

      • Matrix

        Slob666 quotes;

        “To Rbt,
        just think what would happen if we cut consumption in half?”

        Just think what will happen when we cut the liberal population in half?

        America the Beautiful again!

      • Right Brain Thinker

        No, Bob.

        Since Matrix is probably under court order to attend them, he doesn’t have that option. It’s more likely that he just got lost and couldn’t find the building where they’re held. Too much meth will mess up your sense of direction that way.

  • Dad

    So, if we eliminate oil, then we can forget plastics… which make up just about everything we use… pens, water bottles, phones casings, household goods, packaging, etc. I guess we will go back to making everything out of wood and steel, like we did in the mid 20th century. How far do you think those battery-operated cars will go hauling a 2 ton vehicle?
    What we need is the government to control mother nature for us… and the weather too!
    Wow, no one can be this stupid!!!

    • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

      Dear Dad,

      What is being sought is the “elimination” of those uses for “oil” which
      are “harmful”………namely burning it and other things.

      That would increase the “supply” of it for those things that “are” both benign
      and useful……..

      Do you UNDERSTAND???????

    • WILDFIRE

      @Dad says- “What we need is the government to control mother nature for us… and the weather too!”

      Stay tuned, by the sounds of it, it seems to be something they are working on doing through various controls such as Chemtrails and HAARP

      • Right Brain Thinker

        (and don’t turn on your lawn sprinkler!—–ever!)

  • JUKEBOX

    It is so obvious to me that the duplicitous hypocrite that occupies the oval office is being controlled by the Chinese government that he loves to criticize so much. They are the ones who will benefit most from him blocking the Keystone Pipeline, that would produce billions of revenue for the US, and help us pay off some of the trillion dollar debt that we owe to China. I believe that they are ultimately the ones who are pulling the strings of our marionette, alleged leader.

    • mark

      No, he’s being controlled by Muslims in the Middle East (see Lois above) – not the Chinese. Can’t you paranoid delusionists keep your stories straight?

      • JUKEBOX

        Don’t you realize that the muslims,Chinese and Russians are all in bed together?

  • LoisK

    Our great leader knows exactly what he is doing. He is a smart but very evil man.
    He will do anything to help HIS people in the middle east not America. We will become a communist country (we are almost there now) and Obama will be our first dictator.

    • mark

      [personal attack has been removed]

    • http://personalliberty Alondra

      Lois, you are right that the Kenyan is an EVIL man. But he is NOT smart. He is STUPID, IGNORANT, ARROGANT, LAZY, EGO-CENTRIC PSYCHOPATH, Mentally PERVERT and brainwashed ideologist, SEXUALLY DEBAUCHED and SLAVE of Saudis and radical Leftists.

    • http://personalliberty Alondra

      Lois, just look at this sickeningly disgusting first “lady” of America (!)

      We were told that The Kenyan improved the image of America in the World.
      http://theblacksphere.net/2013/03/first-lady-pole-dancing/

      What a “wonderful” example for the young girls.
      Total lock of ethical manners and values.

      BTW, this is on the Black man blog. The majority readers are Blacks. Read their comments.

      Lois, feel free to pass it on. Spread the TRUTH about scumbags.

      Yesterday mark accused me being racist. Imagine if that would be Laura Bush.

      I think that Chimps’ rules of decency and ethical standards are much higher than of the current occupants of the White House.

      • Joe H

        Thanks a lot!!! I had to look at your link and now I can’t get that bizzarre scene out of my minds eye!!!!!! ugh!!!!

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Joe, In case if you missed. Here is her the Kenyan Jungle Dance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq-URl9F17Y

        • WILDFIRE

          [racial comments have been removed]

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Oh, Joe, here is one more. This is her “husband” dances his O’Homo dance. Learn it.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk6JVUM2lEM

      • WILDFIRE

        I’ll just rewrite and change a few words, I used short and small words for people like you to be able to understand the comment but apparently you don’t know the terms.

        So I’ll offer you the meaning of the terms and you can look them up your self.:
        Hoochie Mama!
        A woman who dresses very loud and provocative (often low class- does not take care of herself very well) She is also associated with being promiscuous. – This sums the first lady up to the tee, though she is likely not promiscuous, she certainly promotes it when she is on shows such as Ellen

        Which word offends you specifically? me pointing out the fact of the size of her back side as described as using the word “fat”, would it be better if I reworded it to say “large bloaded ” or “obese” backside? I didn’t realize that you libs have reclassified “fat” discribing the size of something to be politically incorrect or the word “a$$” which is coded and simply describes which part of the body I’m referring and is not a profanity considering even your very own party affiliation animal icon contains the word.

        Or could it be this comment “It is a common mindset for blacks and Mexicans that this country OWES them.” because I pointed out specific races? Just because a certain race is depicted don’t make it racist when they them self make the statement and I can point you to the videos you can see for their self where the Mexicans (illegals) are demanding free healthcare and videos where auntie Obama states the US owes her and other videos where Blacks state that America owes them because they were Slaves decades ago.

        The only other thing you can claim to be in violation is the Ghetto comment and the meaning of Boon: Definition – something to be thankful for; blessing; benefit.

        So would it make you happy if I rewrote the expression you can take the blessing out of the ghetto, but you can’t take the ghetto out of the blessing?

        Did Barry as well as Moshel come from parents that were poor and poor people often live in areas known as Ghetto. So their is no false statement there.

        I think what really bothers you about the comment is that you hate the fact that someone speaks out against your messiah which he was referred as by Jamie foxx or your daddy as Chris rocks says Barry and moshel are all of our Mama and daddy of the US and facts are pointed out all of which can be proven in what I wrote and is not slander and if you think their is profanity or racism, then you need to understand the definition of the words.

        So tell me in your opinion what is in violation and I’ll be more than happy to offer you various sites to direct you to anything you find to be against policy up to and including the constitution.

  • Hedgehog

    I haven’t read all the comments yet, but I will. However it seems to me that many of you are for the pipeline because it will reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil. How so? I’m going to break it to you gently, we Canadians are foreigners. If you doubt me ask those eminent authorities Eddie47d and Right Brain Thinker. More proof of this is that I have to have a PASSPORT or an enhanced drivers licence to visit the US. Thus it would appear that on top of all the other arguments against the pipeline, you’ll still e dependent on FOREIGN oil. On the positive side, the oil is there, it will be sold to someone, if not you, well the Chinese are sniffing around. I’m not trying to be nasty, I’m just pointing out some flaws in your arguments. One final point, EMINENT DOMAIN is no different than a mugging in a dark alley or a gang rape!

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Hedgehog come into the conversation without having read all the comments—-when he does, he will see that the tar sands oil is NOT going to be sold in the US—it is intended for China and other places in the world that are so desperate that they will pay higher prices than we will. That’s the “free market” at work—sell a dirty product for dirty money to people who will soil the atmosphere with it—privatize profit, socialize risk.

      If and when there is a total world breakdown regarding “oil”, we will be making Canada the 51st. state anyway and taking whatever serves the “national interests”, and Hog won’t need a passport except to go overseas. Of course, all his intemperate terrorist comments will have us grabbing his butt and sending him to Gitmo as soon as we can find him—-no passport required for that “overseas” trip. I’ll even volunteer to be his “tour guide”.

      (Maybe Hog should think about speeding up that reincarnation process and coming back as a toad ASAP? Good cover, that—-nobody wants warts)

      • Hedgehog

        Gee Right Brain Thinker, only the 51st state, what’s going to happen to the missing 7 states of Obama’s 57? Do you speak for your government? Are you declaring war on us? What you are saying sure doesn’t sound like peaceful assimilation to me. It sounds more like a terrorist threat. War with the US will be nothing new to us, we’ve been down that road before, not recently though. With weapons of mass destruction you just might win. But, I recommend that you deal with the civil unrest that will shortly break out in your own country first, when the “other peoples money” runs out and the dolists riot in the streets.

      • ROGER, Irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

        “Right Brain Thinker” The poorly attempted attack on”Hedgehogs character is a perfect example of immaturity and inferiority, what Ayn Rand would call “”Argument of Intimidation” rather than staying with his point. Character assassination, like violence over an issue, is the last refuge of the unintelligent and uninformed. I suggest you read his comment again as NOWHERE does he say that the U.S. is buying the oil, although THAT may have been his intent .What he did say is that: “On the positive side, the oil is there, it will be sold to someone, if not you, well the Chinese are sniffing around.”. Actually I also suspect a wee bit of that anti-canadian sneaking into your inferiority and fear that maybe,just maybe a Canadian is more aware- Nice try though, R B T

      • Don 2

        Gee…..here I am an American…..and I find myself rooting for the Canadians.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        I had just replied to Roger but it didn’t “take” and disappeared—annoying. I will try again—if both messages somehow appear, read either one—-they differ little.

        Roger attacks me for some reason—-perhaps that Canadian “inferiority complex” that makes him want to support Hog against a “bullying American”? I did not attack hog’s character—I merely reminded him of the remarks he made the other day about “frying Americans like Spam in their APC’s”. Did you see those comments , Roger? Do you concur? If so, I will be glad to escort you to Gitmo with Hog if and when we take over your country and grab both your butts.

        “immaturity and inferiority is the last refuge of the unintelligent and uninformed”, you say? That makes no sense. Who seeks refuge in inferiority? And an Ayn Rand allusion? (No Alinsky today?) Do all Canadians love to hear themselves talk so much and make so little sense?

        I suggest you read both our comments again as NOWHERE did I say that Hog said that the U.S. is buying the oil. His intent was clear with “On the positive side, the oil is there, it will be sold to someone, if not you, well the Chinese are sniffing around.” The “oil” will go to the Chinese, which is exactly what I said. I fail to see what point you’re trying to make. Nice try though, I guess Hog will feel good that you took a swing for the home team, even though you struck out.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Don, I thought you never read my comments?
        And you say you’re an American? I don’t believe it—show us your birth certificate!
        (You have said too many UN-American things for me to take your word for it, and I’m sure Donald Trump and Orly will be on my side once they hear what you’re supporting)

        You find yourself “rooting for the Canadians”? Does that mean that you think it’s a good idea for Hog to be spouting such craziness on PLD as his advice that we can “fry the government agents in their APC’s just like Spam”? Is that any different than al Awaki broadcasting from Yemen?

        Should I reserve a seat for you on the Gitmo shuttle with Hog and Roger? You know what we call those who forsake their country and throw in with the enemy, don’t you? Ask Benedict Arnold’s ghost if you don’t. He’ll be easy to find—the ghosts of Chesty and Smedley and a lot of dead Marines will be sticking bayonets in him.

      • rendarsmith

        That doesn’t make sense! If the US is going to buy it then sell it at a higher price, why wouldn’t Canada just sell it at that higher price?

      • Don 2

        Right Brain Thinker,

        Actually, I was reading Hedgehog’s post when your nonsensical post came up after his. I was simply rooting for the Canadian because I do not root for boring idiots.

        I’ll be happy to show you my birth certificate after Obama shows us his.

        You ask if you should reserve me a seat on the Gitmo shuttle? Exactly who is it that you fancy yourself to be Mr. Bigstuff, that you think that you are going to incarcarate me at Gitmo, or anywhere else?

        I don’t forsake my country, but I sure in hell do know who the enemy of this country is.

      • Joe H

        Don,
        not trying to put words in your mouth but don’t you mean when he shows his REAL, LONG FORM birth cirtificate????

      • Don 2

        Joe H,

        Exactly…..you got it!

        Thanks

      • Right Brain Thinker

        As usual, Don 2 evades the issue, doesn’t understand the issue, or isn’t smart enough to make a good retort, (or all of the above) so he says mindless things that he thinks show him to be more than a fool.

        FOCUS, Don! All your BS does NOT address the question I raised. Hog made statements that could be taken as those of an “enemy combatant” or a “terrorist”, one who wishes particularly nasty deaths to good Americans. Hog COULD just apologize and say he was foolishly running his mouth but he hasn’t done that, so we must assume he was serious. You have come out in support of Hog’s comments, as well as Roger’s. I interpret that as “offering aid and comfort” to enemies of the country and suggest that it borders on treason. Did you not understand all that?

        You call me Mr. Bigstuff and ask me who I fancy myself to be? I AM a patriotic American who objects to foreigners like Hog and Roger minding our business and threatening Americans. I object even more strongly to your foolishness because YOU are an American and they allow you to vote (unfortunately). I will continue to take you all to task for that if you keep it up. Will I personally incarcerate you? Of course not, but you and your Canadian buddies should know that it’s not all paranoia—”they” ARE watching and ARE making lists—-if you are not terrorists or supporters thereof, you probably ought to stop running your mouths so casually.

        You say “I don’t forsake my country, but I sure in hell do know who the enemy of this country is”. Fooled me—-I think you are wrong at both ends of that statement—you do “forsake” with your rhetoric and you don’t know who the “enemy” is. .

      • Bob666

        Yo RBT,
        We have seen many on the edge here, But I have to admit that none have threatened to “kick my ass”. He is a very broken boy and I would agree that his “work” should stay for all the world to appreciate.

        • Bob666

          Yo RBT
          It would appear that Matrix has disipeared back into the Martix as well as out comments to him.

          • Right Brain Thinker

            No great loss—-good riddance!

  • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

    Why is Myers shilling for the Koch brothers and a pipeline which will
    export this oil?

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/02/koch-brothers-driving-keystone-xl-pipeline-from-canada-to-cut-out-venezuelan-oil.html

    “Ignorance is Strength”

  • J.

    “barry the liar” is just doing what nazi george and the rest of his muslim handlers are telling him to do.

  • http://yahoo don

    owebunhole doesn’t want the keystone pipelline because his buddy and key contributer to his reelection owns the sante fe and nothern pacific railway which hauls most of the oil out of the baken oil field and warren buffet is making billions off of it. the keystone would cut into the profit buffet makes off of it. why would obunhole rob someone he owes?

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Don again shoots his mouth off without knowing the facts. I’m sure the stockholders of the BNSF (Burlington Northern Santa Fe) will be most upset that their railroad has been replaced by Don’s imaginary “sante fe and nothern pacific railway”.

      • huapakechi

        Those who can, do. Those who cannot, teach. Those who are capable of neither engage in ridicule of their betters.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        If someone who refers to the duly elected (twice) POTUS as “obumhole” or other such childish names is my “better”, hoopyK, then I plead 100% guilty to the charge.

  • Ernest Miller

    I consider myself usually pretty much in favor of Obama’s policies and am a registered
    Democrat. But I must say on this issue I favor those who want to utilize the pipeline. You
    can only argue environmental issues up to a point. Here, I believe lets get this oil and
    obtain jobs for our unemployed!

    • http://yahoo.com Maynard

      The temporary jobs from the Keystone would be like selling one’s soul to the devil in a Faustian deal. There are plenty of good ways to provide jobs, such as improving our infrastructure – something the capitalists won’t invest in, or clean alternative energy. You can yell Solyndra all you want. I do not know the business aspects of their demise, but such things happen all the time in private industry at taxpayers’ expense =THEY WRITE IT OFF AS A LOSS FROM THEIR TAXES AND WE PAY for their dry wells, spills, and other disappointments. But Solyndra becomes the smoke screen rallying cry for those who yell socialism when it is not benefiting themselves. Furthermore, those oily, sooty benefactors of the government dole will howl to high heaven if the renewable energy providers get a tiny suck at the government teat which they are used to considering their exclusive right.

      Anyway, the Kansan – Keynan Kross Alondra incorrectly calls Kriminal, could Kill Keystone betraying the fossilized fuel fools. I hope he does .We must wean ourselves from our filthy addiction ASAP.

      Why should our country put up with the price controllers, Gulf despoilers, air and land polluters. election manipulators. war profiteers when we have clean, renewable energy sources: the sun, the wind, the subsoil heat, and hydrogen from every drop of water.

      Hydrogen as its only cojbustion product produces water vapor as does gasolene, kerosene, propane and the other hydrocarbons when burned. But hydrogen does not produce any other byproduct unlike the hydrocarbons. Furthermore, water vapor returns to earth as healthy, clean, life giving and sustaining rain within two weeks.

  • mark

    Good to hear from the oil lobby, Mr Meyers. I hope they continue to pay you well. You look like you haven’t missed too many meals. Keep stuffing yourself with their profits.

    • http://personalliberty Alondra

      mark, WHY do NOT you worry HOW MUCH Saudis are paying to the Kenyan BASTARD for his treachery of the USofAmerica?

      mark, “You look like you haven’t missed too many meals” by working for the Korrupt Kenyan Kriminal. “Keep stuffing yourself with” his dirty treacherous money.

      “A fool has no delight in understanding, but in EXPRESSING HIS OWN pointless IDIOCY.” – King Solomon

      P.S. Answer the questions in my post above. But do not come with the DEMONcratic nonsensical label “paranoia”. Just answer questions.

    • hipshotpercusion

      Get real, mark! O-Homo is apposed to the pipeline because his good friend Warren Buffet holds control of the railroads that would transport that oil. This from an old Railroader.

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        He controls “one of four”………be useful……tell us more RR MAN?

        For example, the location on the “buffet line” where the refineries capable of
        processing this type of oil are?

        How many of these types of refineries exist?

        Why aren’t the owners of this oil, building refineries and pipelines to
        enjoy the value added profits of same?

  • http://personalliberty Alondra

    Saudis are receiving a SPECIAL Status to SKIP Custom Controls, which is not available for our allies as UK, France and Israel. WHY?

    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/america-live/index.html#http://video.foxnews.com/v/2240392056001/special-status-saudis-to-skip-normal-customs-controls/?playlist_id=87651

    Oh, IT JUST HAPPENED that the HIJACKERS in the September 11 attacks were 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda, and 15 (FIFTEEN !!!) of the 19 were CITIZENS of Saudi Arabia.

    WHY the Kenyan Criminal wants American dependence on the Saudi’s Oil?

    WHY the Kenyan FRAUD kissing the Saudi’s prince’s hand?

    WHY his DHS purchased 1.6 BILLION rounds of ammunition and 2717 New Armored Vehicles?.

    What the Kenyan FRAUD is planning?

    • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

      Posting more….enjoying it less?

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        “As a dog returns to his own vomit, so a FOOL LIBTARDS, includig GALT, REPEAT THEIR MAD FOLLY.” – King Solomon

        Enough said.

        • Bob666

          Yo Piggy,
          And spewing chunks every day is your best ability?

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        “As a dog returns to his own vomit, so a FOOL LIBTARDS, includig LACKEY bobby, REPEAT THEIR MAD FOLLY.” – King Solomon

        Enough said. YAWN

    • http://yahoo.com Maynard

      Like a dog that returns to its own vomit, I have come back to ask for some clarification and to disagree with some of your analysis. First, did I read you right to write that Obama has had a dozen offed to hide his sexacapades with the hairier gender? I had only heard of two. I would like to find your source to read in greater depth. Both of the Bush presidents are tarred with those left wing likings (If you don’t include the Log Cabin Republicans who are proud that honest Abe shared a bed with a strapping lad for four years straight – using the word straight as a manner of speaking..). Have you heard of the Boys Town scandal or the male whore friend of G.W.?
      As to being pals with the sweaty Saudis, no comparison between Old Alabama and the Bushmasters. Papa was in a Carlyle Group meeting with Osama’s brother on 9/11. The Bushes were oft photographed walking hand in hand with towel-headed Princes of the desert sand.
      As to 9/11. Bob Livingstone has very astutely pointed out the flaws of thinking it was not planned, executed and covered up by our trusty (NOT) higher ups.
      There’s oil in them thar dunes and plenty of pretty poppies grew in the Afghan fields. Opium abounded before them Tight-a**ed Taliban tried to tamp it out. Never fear, now that the CIA is back, the spymasters side-income is once again in the black. Under our fair governance, the Afghan crops reaches roughly 90% of the entire world’s harvest.
      Their poppy crops are tops!.

      • Bob666

        Yo Maynard,
        I understand the trick to putting Alonda’s (AKA Ms. Piggy) comments and information into a form that one can understand requires a hallucinogenic drug like LSD. Try if you wish, personally I just see her like one of those poor street people who babble incoherently into thin air to people that you and I can’t see.

    • http://yahoo.com Maynard

      Actually, this is for Mr. Huakapechi. I cannot solve the problems of energy density, etc. That is what the experts have been doing. Without using cooling techniques, they have been able to get hydrogen to store in much greater density without having to cool it. It involves chicken feathers, believe it or not which is something we have in abundance. It also can be produced on site through hydrogen fuel cells.
      We never thought we would be able to drill down and then horizontally either but the Kuwaitis used it to steal Iraqi oil which is the real cause of the Gulf War not the Lie about Incubator Babies being brutally ripped from their cocoons and tossed upon the cold, cold hospital floors – like Papa Bush choked out through his alligator tears.
      We never thought we could split water into H2 and O without electrolysis but now we can. My Point Haka Peechi, ye of little faith, miracles abound when we put our minds and resources to use and discard the lies of the filthy fossil fuel folk who foolishly feel they can forever fool us. Will it be a big money maker for private industry? NO! But economically it will be a Godsend for the public. We can then invest our money in more worthwhile pursuits than trying to appease our gas guzzlers.(A never-ending battle that constantly fills the filthy foster fuel foisters coffers to overflowing.
      We will breathe cleaner air and may again be able to swim in lakes and rivers that are off limits now and EVEN eat some of the fish we catch.
      Did you hear Galt or Right Brain Thinker tell us the tar sands water runoff shows up in the moose’s meaty muscles messed up with arsenic? Without dependence on filthy fossil fuels, we will be able to noose a moose or a wild goose and cook and eat ‘em in their own juice.

  • ireAmerica

    John:
    Thanks for writing on the energy issue, especially you closing remarks on “… the greatest threat to America… “.

    Obama’s green agenda is purposely destructive – in his own words – to force hardship on America. The green agenda is also a wealth redistribution scheme – in the words of Obama, and Anthony “Van” Jones.

    The engineering part really is not so complicated;
    Petrochemical energy density is HIGH (meaning high energy and high portability),
    alternative energy density is DIFFUSE or LOW (meaning low energy and low portability).
    Plus petro-energy requires FEW processing steps (meaning inexpensive), and
    alt-energy requires MANY (meaning expensive).

    • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

      so you really had nothing to say…..gee thanks…….

      BTW what do you think the market is for “exported” renewables?

      That question is probably way beyond your intelligence level, huh?

      • huapakechi

        Do you call yourself “Galt” because you cannot spell “Buffoon”?

      • Michelle Kienlen

        galt…I am fairly new to this site but it seem’s to me that you are amazing! Your arrogance,superiority complex and your “fabulous” put downs are similar to someone,let me think hhhhmmmmm,now it comes to mind You are exactly like our dear leader obama.Please enlighten us with some more of your “superior” intellect.Yes I am being sarcastic!

        • huapakechi

          It’s almost like he has a team of writers preparing a script for his performance. Come to think of it, that would explain some of the disjointed commentary and leaps of logic that fall short.

    • http://yahoo.com Maynard

      Ire America; Filthy fossil fuels will be the downfall of life on earth if not abandoned ASAP. Why? Not only do they produce greenhouse gases which have led to each of the last three decades in turn being the warmest on record, but also they emit tons of particulates, poisons like carbon monoxide, lead and mercury. When inhaled, they contribute to lung problems like asthma, bronchitis, and emphesema. Stand by a busy city street or highway and take a good deep breath. Do you think that foulness just disappears? It is cumulative. That means it gets accumulates more and more with time.
      As to the number of steps to process, you are totally WRONG. Sun, wind, geothermal and hydrogen are much simpler to process. Take hydrogen for example. From plain water in a process called artificial photosynthis, pure clean sunlight can produce hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen can be collected and new techniques for storing it do not require its liquifaction. It can also be produced from water through hydrogen fuel cells. Hyundai is producing autos using hydrogen in So. Korea as we breathe. Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, GM, Fiat, Volkswagen all are ready to go. All we need is for the production and infra-structure to get the needed support. Saudi Arabia, tho oil rich, is anxious to get started producing hydrogen with Germany’s technical help. Europe is busy setting up refueling infrastructure. With mass-production thehydrogen auto prices will be lowered. Obama’s energy czar killed Bush Administration in the hydrogen aut showing his obeissance to the filthy rich fossil fuel lobby. The only byproduct from combustion of hydrogen is PURE Clean Water Vapor. You will see the filthy fossil fuel fools trying to fool us by saying hydrogen is too dangerous. No more so than hydrocarbons (the hydro part refers to the usable energy in it which is HYDROGEN!). In fact, hydrogen is lighter than air and will fly high above the victims in an accident. Gasoline and other hydrocarbons are alll heavier than air and INCINERATE the victims.
      The stages of processing Oil: exploration, drilling, collection, transportation, refining, storage, transportation to refueling. All take lots of energy and in each step theire is pollution of land, air and water from spillage and evaporation even when in storage. Fracking natural gas and tar and shale oil extraction require huge amounts of water and they leave that water polluted and soaking into soils and ground water.
      However, alternative energy can be applied directly where consumers need it because its sources, sun, wind, water and ground heat are everywhere. Solar roof panels can go on land or housing. Wind turbines may not be beautiful to some, but they are no worse than oil wells and pipelines, refineries, storage tanks and pumps or fracking installations. Coal is now being extracted by mountain top removal and water leached is contaminating water in lower lying areas. Burning coal emits particulates, sulfur, lead, mercury, etc. and leads to acid rain which destroys forests and lakes in pristine areas far from the coal burning and extraction sites.
      We go to tremendous lengths to get filthy fossil fuels because the companies have us over the barrel. They have a monopoly and can charge us whatever is politically viable. They do not want the competition from clean energy so they will BRAINWASH the ignorant through propaganda and buying elections. (The Koch Brothers, for example, are filthy fossil fuel rich and fund politicians who will do their bidding).

      • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.melton.353 Huapakechi

        When you have solved the problems of energy density, storage, distribution, pollution (water vapor is a greenhouse gas), and economic feasability, get back to us.
        Electric motors and generators produce ozone! OMG! A pollutant!
        Hydrogen as a fuel is almost perfect, if you can keep it from leaking.
        The remainder of your screed rates all the attention due an algore movie.

        Do your bit to save the world. Turn off your electricity and heat. Refuse to eat or wear anything that has been produced or transported by means of petroleum powered engines.

  • ROGER,Irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

    “Right Brain Thinker”. Thank you as you have now added DENIAL to your inferiority. Don’t feel too badly though as you have millions giving you company. They are all around the world-American and NATO ( including Canadian) soldiers, who seem to be incapable of doing research to find out they are fighting wars for the Establishment by murdering and destroying what they have been indoctrinnate to beleive are “evil” Muslims/Terrorists further believing like you in THREATS and VIOLENCE and CHARACTER assassination, to bring American style “Democracy”/knowledge to the “inferiors” ( as defined by Americans) as the answer. Fortunately your type has a VERY limited life span now. The establishment will take care of that when they no longer need you UNLESS you grow up.. I could go on but your type, who like to argue for the sake of trying to be RIGHT rather than look for TRUTH, BORES me, so I am finished with this discussion. Take care and I give you the last word which I am sure you will provide. You can’t give the appearance of being right unless you compulsively “volunteer” the last word.;-)

    • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

      You are funny! You realize that being a canadian libertarian, makes you a
      capitalist socialist progressive commie idiot?

      You are your own last word.

      • ROGER,irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

        More childish name calling incorrect assumptions and poor judgement, and from someone whom I thought knew better but then you are probably American or British so I forgive as I know most Americans and British are incapable of better. Fortunately for America there are the intelligent ones such as Bob Livingston. capable of REASON and Empiricism……..I just couldn’t resist, BUT I promise I shall resist your next bafflegab/blathering!!!!

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        I do know better…..I thought you knew better.

        The “labeling” ( assumptions ) is typical of PLD….

        Canadian = ” progressive, socialist, commie idiot ” ( irish = redundant ? )

        Libertarian = ” capitalist ”

        I found the juxtaposition FUNNY, and translated it,,,,,

        I only use one label……as all my “fans” know……and it’s not present.

        I have no clue what the subject is or was between you and RBT and
        I still don’t…..the post being ( yours ) disconnected from what ever discussion
        it was responding to…….

        Nice to see you have developed the fine reactive edge, also typical of PLD.

    • http://omanuel.wordpress.com omanuel

      I agree, Roger.

      There are some here who will not, or cannot, take the time to study history:

      a.) George Orwell started writing his warning about a new tyrannical government, “1984″, in 1946, and

      b.) In 1946 Fred Hoyle started publishing misinformation on the Sun – the source of energy that made our elements, birthed the solar system, and sustains our lives:

      http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-2204

      That was the beginning of government policies to deprive citizens of their right to self-governance.

      http://orach24463.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/fear-and-loathing-of-humans-the-pathology-behind-the-climate-change-movement/

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        Still Waiting for a response…..Oliver K. Manuel: Third Time and 5 days have passed? Can you read?

        “The reality that is revealed by experimental data, measurements and observations on the material world is fully compatible with the reality that is realized by meditation, prayer and contemplation on the spiritual world.”

        Really? Science deals with the physical world. Meta -physics attempts to discern some connection to a non material yet co-existent or pre-existent “spirital world”, for which there are myriad varients.

        You offer a conclusion here which unfortunately:

        1.) Fails to identify which of these metaphysical varients you have chosen as the “consistent one”.

        2.) Fails to show any connection to any of the science, you have been babbling about.

        3.) Fails to demonstrate that any of the scientific controversy you are raising has gained any acceptance, by your peers.

        4.) Fails to offer any consistent hypothesis regarding the “underlying” conspiracy you are suggesting…….since you have failed to deal with the first 3 points…….and your conclusion, requires the unification of physics and metaphysics……..which requires that the latter, fit the observational data of the former……..which is the reason for the “split” in the first place. Meta-physics came first……..and THAT IS THE PROBLEM!!!!

        YOU HAVE NOT RESOLVED THIS PROBLEM!

        The supposed conflict between science and religion – the same propaganda Stalin used to control people in the old USSR before WWII – is being used to control people in the new, tyrannical one-world after WWII !

        Preaching to the choir? The conflict began way before Stalin…..you are a “specialist”………and so far it does not appear that you have any credibility in what you are supposedly qualified for……….having been exposed to the rest of your babbling………your comprehension and ability to sythesize other fields of knowledge is non existant.

        It is called “politically correct thinking” by those who would have objected to Thomas Jefferson’s declaration in 1776 that citizens of the USA “were endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”.

        He didn’t actually write that……and it is false anyway. You have a single unalienable right……..and this is consistent which observable data……….all the rest is metaphyiscal speculation which has no evidence to support it. See 1.) 2.) 3.) and 4.) above.

        Animal Farm described the problem before WWII. Nineteen Eighty-Four (“1984″) describes the world society after WWII – TODAY.

        With deep regrets,
        - Oliver K. Manuel

        No need to have regrets……..while the “commie” touch is nice and reference to Jefferson clearly manipulative…….in terms of scientific understanding, you are clearly in the WRONG PLACE. ( of course, your grasp of “science” at this point is questionable. )

        I realise that in many ways the implications of “science” are essentially contemporary in terms of scope, but we are way beyond the point of understanding that prevailed in Catherine the Great’s Court and you sir are not the modern equivilant of Descarte, although you might be tempted by the “intellectual” prowess of the “liberty movement”, this in NOT a safe haven, for you…….even when you throw in AGW and anti Obama rhetoric. ( and imagined plots and conspiracies )

        As was explained to Brandon Smith, you can try to write general babble if you like……..mindless rhetoric using the appropriate “labels” will always appear to be “brilliant”…….as long as you are never called to actually be specific……..unfortunately for you, once you identify the specific meta-physical philosophy your conclusion suggests, you will be finished. Be a good “specialist”…..and go fight with your “peers”……because until you win there, you have “no science” and it does not appear that you have the “intellect” or “knowledge” to even come close to the “conclusion”, you have “claimed” to have accomplished.

        “He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.”

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        Third time in four days.

        You seem to have a “problem” responding to either “english” or questions asked in ” english”………….why is that?

        You have been presented with the “problem of the unification of physics and metaphysics”, and it has been pointed out to you, that you have not “solved” or “resolved” this problem and why…….

        Do you not understand the question or the problem?

        Do you not understand that regardless of how many links you have posted to supposed “scientific claims” you will still have not solved or resolved the problem?

        Do you not understand that whatever the correct science is……….

        The reality revealed by experimental data, measurements and observations on the material world is fully compatible with the reality that is realized by meditation, prayer and contemplation on the spiritual world.

        you can not achieve the results stated by DECLARING THIS TO BE TRUE!

        Or do you NOT understand the difference between a “reality” revealed by “experimental data, measurements and observations” and the “imagined reality” that is and has been the “result” of ” meditation, prayer and contemplation”?

        If the latter were a realiable “source of the TRUTH regarding REALITY” there would be NO CONFLICT between metaphysics and physics, or if you like “science” and “religion”………because “science” would have simply been a “confirmation” of all the “truth” that had already been revealed by “religion”?

        Unless you are a “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate” this is not what science has indicated, and despite what YOU BELIEVE the “science to be”, this is NOT WHAT YOUR SCIENCE has indicated.

        Whatever consistency you imagine exists between your science and your metaphysical belief system, you HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE that consistency, or actually give any indication of what your “metaphysical belief system” is?

        The root of society’s demise is government deception about energy in the cores of heavy atoms (Th, U, Pu), planets (Jupiter, Saturn), ordinary stars (the Sun) and galaxies (Milky Way) that started in 1946 .

        The relationship between energy and matter, E = MC^2 seems to have preceded this conspiracy by a few decades, why is that? Also you have ignored the following questions…….stated predviously:

        Just curious, but if the calculations of the component elements of the sun are wrong, wouldn’t the mass of the sun be miscalculated also?

        And if this were TRUE, wouldn’t all the gravitational calculations within our solar system, between the sun and all orbiting bodies, also be wrong? ( and this gets worse because the “earth”s composition has already been noted as being mostly Fe! ( iron ))

        Why? Fear that humans might misuse nuclear energy to destroy life on Earth, including the lives of world leaders.

        That seems reasonable and still a possible concern, but only if those who have the technological capability yield to the insanity., which seems highly unlikely. Which brings us to this question, asked by many here.

        “What the heck does this have to do with the Patriot Movement?”

        Everything ! We must each search for reality, truth for ourselves to be effective Patriots.

        True Patriots must think for themselves, instead of consuming government propaganda as a pig eating slop.

        This is the typical mindless rheotoric which is “common mushroom feed” for this site……..is this why you think you have a future here?

        Too bad, because “mindless” means mindless……and while I can see the “attraction”……..your mythology had better be “identical” to the “mythology” of those you seek to impress.

        The word “patriot” really has no meaning in this land of rhetorical babble……..simply because there is no understanding of “history” or the real reasons for the “revolution” or the “motivations” of those “patriots” that are often cited as the “enlightened inspiration” for it……..so for most………their understanding of “history” is “propaganda”…..and references to the Declaration and the Constitution, do not alter this fact, for these were “effects” not causes………and given enough TIME, this REALITY will become “obvious”…….

        Regardless of how long this takes, YOU HAVE NO FUTURE HERE. The “willfully ignorant, functional illiterates” are a notorious and cantankerous lot……..but they can not hang because they rely on rhetoric…..and avoid, fact and logical reasoning and are easily EXPOSED!

        You have been EXPOSED by simple questions you can not and will not answer……..how many more times will you have to be asked?

        “He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.”

    • Right Brain Thinker

      GALT says, “I have no clue what the subject is or was between you and RBT and
      I still don’t…..the post being ( yours ) disconnected from what ever discussion
      it was responding to…….” and “Nice to see you have developed the fine reactive edge, also typical of PLD”

      I don’t quite understand what Roger is addressing either, but I too have noticed his “fine reactive edge”, and must humor him by helping him to hone it to razor sharpness.. I have obviously upset Roger and he needs my help in “honing”.

      ROGER,Irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN even spouts Anti-Canadian BS now as he attacks good Canadian soldiers who are serving their country. He is begging to be “noticed”, although not yet as strongly as Hog . I wonder if “they” are watching in Canada?

      Let’s see—what has Roger said in his anger? Blah-blah-blah-DENIAL-inferiority.-blah-blah- murdering and destroying-indoctrinate-CHARACTER assassination-blah-blah. Nothing much there, just angry ranting.

      Roger says, “I could go on but your type BORES me, so I am finished with this discussion”. Roger is yet another one of those who abandons the discussion when he is losing. Why are there so many like that on PLD? Why do they run their mouths foolishly, quickly run out of steam and arguments, and then just go hide?

      Roger condescendingly says “Take care and I give you the last word which I am sure you will provide. You can’t give the appearance of being right unless you compulsively “volunteer” the last word.” and he appends a smiley face? Take your hypocritical “care” and smiley face and do you know what with them, Roger.

      You’re partially right though, Roger. I WILL have the last word, because I TOOK it from you, not because you “gave” it to me. I need not “appear” to be right because I AM RIGHT when I take Hog to task for his terroristic comments and you for supporting him, and my code as a US Marine DOES make me a bit “compulsive” about “volunteering” to deal with the likes of both of you. Semper Fidelis

    • Charles W

      Roger, you are the one in denial. The islamists have been bred to hatred for centuries. Their “holy” book demands that they kill “non-believers.” Their murderous violence existed long before they came into contact with Europe or the United States. They ARE evil.

      • Bob666

        Yo Charles,
        “Their “holy” book demands that they kill “non-believers”

        One curious question, have you ever read the Koran?

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Charles, even if you did not read the Kenyan FRAUD’s “holy” book, here are just a few Satanic verses (suras) of the “prophet” muhammed (Satan’s apostle) for his followers:

        “Slay the UNBELIEVERS wherever you find them.” Koran, Sura 2:191

        “Make war on the INFIDELS living in your neighborhood.” Sura 9:123

        “When opportunity arises, KILL the INFIDELS WHEREVER YOU CATCH THEM.” Sura 9:5

        “Any religion other than Islam is NOT ACCEPTABLE.” Sura 3:85

        “Maim [Dismember, Disfigure, Harm, Mutilate] and CRUCIFY the INFIDELS IF THEY CRITICIZE ISLAM” Sura 5:33

        “The Jews and the Christians are PERVERTS; FIGHT THEM.” Sura 9:30

        “Punish THE UNBELIEVERS with garments of FIRE, HOOKED IRON RODS, BOILING WATER; MELT THEIR SKIN AND BELLIES.” Sura 22:19

        “The UNBELIEVERS are stupid; URGE the Muslims to FIGHT THEM.” Sura 8:65

        “Muslims must not take the INFIDELS as friends.” Sura 3:28

        “TERRORIZE and BEHEAD those WHO BELIEVE IN SCRIPTURES OTHER THAN the Qur’an.” Sura 8:12

        “Muslims must muster all weapons to TERRORIZE the INFIDELS.” Sura 8:60

        “Those that deny Our’an revelations We will BURN IN FIRE. No sooner will their skins be consumed than We shall give them other skins, so that they may truly taste the scourge. Allah is mighty and wise.” Sura 4:56

        “I [muhammed] shall cast TERROR into the hearts of the INFIDELS. STRIKE OFF THEIR HEADS, STRIKE OFF THE VERY TIPS OF THEIR FINGERS.” Sura 8:12

        “MEN have authority over WOMEN because Allah has made the one SUPERIOR to the other, and because they spend their wealth to MAINTAIN THEM. Good WOMEN are OBEDIENT. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and FORSAKE THEM IN BEDS APART, and BEAT THEM.” Sura 4:34

        The Doctrine of the religion of “peace” drives violence. The historical FACTS show the TRUE nature of Islam.

        Islam was the enemy of ALL civilizations.

        Islam does not preach universal “brotherhood”, but Islamic domination thru violence and hatred; open contempt and intolerance for ANY other believe and values. Islamists response to criticism is violence.

        Islam NEVER was the religion of “peace”. Read Koran even thru your nausea.

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Charles, here is some information/FACTS about the Kenyan Kriminal’s religion of “peace”:

        According to the Center for the Study of Political Islam: Islam fought 548 battles against the world (based on the ancient historic documents; Archeology beneath the Mediterranean; Archeology on land) and 19,000 jihad attacks since September 11th, 2001.

        People, Do you know How many people were murdered during 1400 years in the name of the religion of “peace”?

        Christians – 60 Million (including ~ 1.5 Million Turkish Armenian Christian)
        Buddhists – 10 Millions
        Hindus – 80 Millions
        Africans – 120 Million
        Total: 270 Million

        Chaeles, fell free to pass the FACTS about religion of “peace” on.

        “Great is TRUTH, and mighty above all things.” (2Ezdra 4:41)

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Charles, listen Pat Condell. He Dismantles Islam In 6 Minutes :
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJoxVkGHzI0

    • http://omanuel.wordpress.com omanuel

      Remember, Roger, Obama is a master propaganda artist.

      He almost certainly has agents here pretending to be patriots, whose real purpose is to drive away real patriots who have recognized Obama as another Joseph Stalin.

      I believe you have met a couple of those agents of Obama.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        A comment from omanuel in which he does not push his crackpot science but professes expertise in interpreting history and talking about propaganda, with a dusting of conspiracy and paranoia. GO AWAY, you screwball!.

  • gunner

    Great article John. Keep the pressure on.

  • http://www.dhamilton Haskell Dale Hamilton

    He needs to be Impeached. That simple.

  • http://pandoralost.wordpress.com misterunity

    Impeach the nefarious scum.

  • Charles W

    BO has proven time after time that his ultimate goal is to destroy this country. He has hated the United States all of his life. He lies to cover up his hatred, but his actions clearly show his intent.

  • http://personalliberty Alondra

    Must listen this:
    Expert Predicts Prison Time for Those Who’ve Helped Obama
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/markgillar/2013/03/16/expert-predicts-prison-time-for-those-whove-helped-obama

    At least 12 people were murdered to keep the Kenyan Criminal’s QUEER pass hidden.
    People in Kenya were killed as well.
    And you will find WHY NBC is in bad with the Kenyan Kriminal.
    You also will find about Obama Sr.’s lies to Harvard.

    “For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.” – Jesus Christ (Mathew 10:26; Luke 8:17)

  • Fire The Congress

    This pipeline is not for an energy dependence America.It has be proven to be a sale of oil to other countries, giving big oil more humongous profits. The fact a bill was introduced in the Senate giving Congress carte blanche on a decision, only they can make, is another attempt to run the country and give everything to the rich. It will be interesting to see the outcome.

    • WILDFIRE

      Well, yes the oil will be sold to South American Countries, but I would imagine the US would have some agreement or treaty by which we could tap into that oil in a case if the middle east placed a embargo on the oil. Furthermore, a pipeline through thousands of miles of the US will bring lots of jobs initially to build and assemble the pipeline and clear lands and dig and level areas and fabricate above ground platforms in areas bringing jobs to construction workers, welders assemblers, planners and so on to the project and then permanent jobs as it will require constant monitoring and on site inspections on weekly basis and so on.

      As far as Congress making the decisions for the American people… I personally would feel better a few hundred members of congress voting and making the decisions for the American people than having one man making the decision for 311 million people by which that one man never listens to nor cares what the American people want rather he cares only what he wants and since he no longer has to depend on voters, he is even more likely to promote more unpopular policy upon all of use with little to no oversight as he has made clear multiple times that he feels the constitution is a outdated and irrelevant document and he through Carney has said that the WH no longer has to deal with congress and he has proven his opinion of that with his use of the EO’s.

      • Michelle Kienlen

        I for one would trust Congress a whole lot more than I would obama which I don’t trust him no further than I could throw him.Obama has consistently proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that he is the most anti-American president in the history of America and also the most criminally corrupt president America has ever had the misfortune of being sadled with.I have never seen a more petulant,spiteful,self-centered narcissist than obama

        • WILDFIRE

          Completely agree with your description of Obama. However, regardless to what President from any party shouldn’t have the sole power to make decissions for over 300 million people. Most are losing faith in Congress as well, everything and everyone has got a price tag on it now in Washington with a few exceptions who still stick to Constitution and the rule of law to govern.

        • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.melton.353 Huapakechi

          criminally corrupt, petulant,spiteful,self-centered narcissist, and those are his good points…..

    • Bob666

      Yo Fire,
      it is amazing how little people really know about the details of the Keystone Pipeline.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Yes, particularly those who think the tar sands “oil” will be sold in South America rather than to China, India, and other fossil fuel poor Asian countries. You know, South America, that continent that has VENEZUELA producing lots of clean REAL oil, and BRAZIL planning to tap the newly discovered and huge deposits offshore.

      • huapakechi

        I can only attribute this lack of knowledge to the failure of the ‘publik eddykashun sistum’ to properly enlighten the younger generations about economics. If you have paid to drill a well, the only well in the area, you can charge whatever the market will bear for your product, be it water, gas, or oil. When there is competition, the price must come down to a level that covers cost of production and a profit for investors. The more competition there is, the narrower the profit margin.

        Company level officers talk about skirmishes. Field grade officers discuss battles. Generals reminisce about campaigns. Politicians pontificate about wars. Sergeants talk about logistics.

        • Bob666

          Yo Huap,
          And monoplies set the price.

          • huapakechi

            And monopolies thrive under an umbrella of regulatory agencies clandestinely working for the established oligopolies that stifle innovation and competition.
            How did Henry Ford get rich? He paid his employees double and more what his competitors were offering and he sold his product for the least price at which he could turn a profit. In today’s protectionist “too big to fail” economic farce he would be attacked by hordes of lawyers and never allowed to compete.

          • Bob666

            Yo Huap
            and OPEC?

          • huapakechi

            And what is opec but a (now) failing monopoly that has economic power at the government level? The Bakken discoveries and Canadian tar sands have shattered the foundations of that cartel. Panic has ensued, with “o”boy’s government colluding to restrict energy development throughout the areas under government control in an attempt to mitigate that particular disaster for their price structure.

            Come to think of it, aren’t they some of the primary sources for funding for the global warming mob? As long as they controll a large percentage of production, it is to their advantage to panic the ignorant and fund willing dupes into blocking expoitation of our national resources.

            Referring back to one of your other posts, I am not so pretentious as to claim to be an intellectual. It has been my observation that those who utilize that appellation are merely seeking to invent a social elevation they can claim.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Yo, Bob
        Is hoopykoochy speaking to us? if, so, what is he talking about?

    • huapakechi

      Any increase in production coming from a capitalist economic system will result in a supply that will not be subject to attacks from ‘insurgents’, ‘freedom fighters’, or statist/religious fanatic agitation, thus stabilize the global price.

      Additionally, opec members will either have to reduce production to keep the price high or they will have to bring their prices down to a reasonable and tolerable level. Reduce prices and they will admit defeat. Decrease production and they admit defeat.

      Both of these possibilities are unacceptable to the cartel leadership, thus we see the diatribes from the minions of liberalism.

      • Rob

        What I do not understand is who says we the US needs to import oil. There is so many oil well capped off in this country it makes my brain hurt to think about it.There is enough oil in this country to last for at least a hundred years. It’s all about the money. Wake up people. First rule of government make sure the people stay at odds with each other.Then the government can do what it want to.

        • huapakechi

          The original importation of oil from the middle Eastern countries was due to the fact the price was laughably low. That has changed. We are now faced with paying extortion prices that fund “protesters” within our own population to keep us from drilling for our own oil. With horizontal drilling, many old wells can be re-drilled and put back into production. We also have tremendous discoveries of new oil. This scares the powers that be, because they are losing the stranglehold economic control they’ve enjoyed for many decades.

          Fractionalization and strife is how governments retain control of their populations. As long as people are fighting, it doesn’t matter who they fight, as long as they wear themselves out and leave the government to run things as they wish.

  • Sheila Davis

    It looks like someone’s not vetting these comments if you honour your comment policy. That being said, I hold the exact opposite view to most of the above. It’s time to wean ourselves off all fossil fuels, both domestic and foreign, including Canadian tar sands, one of the dirtiest of all. In fact it takes so much energy to process and there’s so much waste and pollution in processing, that it’s hardly worth the effort. President Obama is doing the right thing by encouraging us to research and use alternative forms of energy – the costs of fossil fuels, not only in dollars, but also in the health of our atmosphere and our environment are way too high. The decision to kill the KXL will be the historical turning point for a healthy future for not only America, but the whole world.

    • WILDFIRE

      the KXL will not be killed, it will still exist, it will just not go through the US if rejected by Congress.

      Secondly, offer some comparison’s of the costs in fossil fuels versus alternative energies and the cost of all the devices in which will be required to sustain the functionality of the alternative energies. In theory it sounds good, especially if you are getting your information exclusively from Obama and the MSM. What they do not talk about is the status of our power grids and the costs associated to upgrade and install all the devices needed to handle the increased electric usage plus the maintenance costs and furthermore the cost of everyones electric bills to skyrocket

      • Peter

        Wildfire, you couldn’t be more wrong if you tried. The ONLY reason energy companies don’t want to enter into renewable sources is because there is ZERO fuel load, therefore they can’t charge for fuel consumption, which equals less profits, therefore no annual bonuses, therefore they won’t support it. Plain as the nose on your face.

      • WILDFIRE

        Peter says – “Wildfire, you couldn’t be more wrong if you tried. The ONLY reason energy companies don’t want to enter into renewable sources is because there is ZERO fuel load, therefore they can’t charge for fuel consumption, which equals less profits, therefore no annual bonuses, therefore they won’t support it. Plain as the nose on your face.”

        So Peter are you suggesting that all our energy grids are updated and in a condition where they can handle the increased demands of chargers for thousands of cars?

        Furthermore your babble about “ZERO fuel load” and therefore their can’t be a charge for fuel consumption statement, care to explain which or what type of renewables sources you are referring too.

        I could wait for a response to see which renewables you might be referring, but if I was to assume you are referring to renewables such as solar or wind, I suspect various charges could absolutely be applied, particularly if there was a region that sustained extended periods of rain for days with thick cloud coverage and/ or areas which sustained prolonged periods of time for sufficient winds there by causing a shortage of stored energy as the reserves would be used up and drive the prices of energy up as the Supply and demand effect would kick in. The same as with any other industry or product, when there is a shortage whether it be shortage of oil, or a frost that damages crops causing a shortage of certain fruits and vegetables, or a large corporation moves into a city or town and people more people are moving to that location than are houses on the market to accommodate all the relocations always drive the price up. Another example we are currently seeing right now is ammo, due to the shortages, the price of ammo has shot up, as would renewable energies in the event of a prolonged lack of sufficient sun exposure or wind in certain areas. The rate of power loss with a shift of stored power from one region to another would also be great especially if it was a long distant.

        I might have misunderstood your meaning of “”ZERO fuel load” and therefore their can’t be a charge for fuel consumption statement”, if so then, set me straight.

        Actually I don’t know how you come up with fuel loads and charges for fuel consumptions being all but non existent. when none of your comment went with or answered the questions I was exploring. being the cost to upgrade outdated power grids, cost to maintain such things as electric cars by which cost thousands of dollars for new batteries every few years, cost of chargers installed in homes and business and the additional energy used for the daily charging. The best I can tell, you are suggesting that with renewable energies we wouldn’t have electric bills since their is no fuel load. If that was true, then I suppose the people whos power is currently being supplied by the few hydro power plants are getting their electric for free since it is renewable and ZERO fuel load right, according to your analogy.

      • Peter

        Wildfire, please don’t display such abject ignorance! When coal is burned to power turbines which produce electrical energy, that is called a fuel load.
        Simple really, even you should be able to understand it.
        With solar, wind, geo-thermal, wave and hydro generated energy, there is nothing consumed to produce that energy.
        Nothing! That equals zero I believe.
        Coal is consumed by fire, therefore companies can charge for that consumption as fuel load.
        Sunlight, wind, wave, geo-thermal and hydro are all in situ, free and are not consumed by the process of production of electrical energy.
        Now the only way companies could possibly charge for anything other than distribution, would be to falsely manufacture something out of thin air, such as a ‘sunlight charge’ or something equally as preposterous.
        Other than that, there are only distribution costs which, once the main distribution networks have been built, which they have been, there is only maintenance and upgrades to charge for.

        • Bob666

          Yo Peter,
          Let me add some support to your point.

          When an investor puts together a business model to support the investment in a power plant any kind, fossil fuel plants have an unknown variable called fuel cost. If you look all over the country-wind and solar farms are being built by private capital firms because the wind and sun are free and do not require a return on investment other than the equipment itself.

          Moreover, they would be free of carbon taxes and offer a safer ROI. While the weather can be unpredictable-it tends to be more predictable that an unknown variable like the unit cost of any fossil fuel.

          A final plus on the investment side, once the solar or wind farm is decommissioned, the real estate is worth more since no fossil fuels were stored or consumed and does not required the very expensive remediation that is required at coal or oil generation facilities.

          The free market does not have a bias-just a reasonable expectation on the return on equity and investment.

    • Peter

      Sheila, you are absolutely 100% correct, and anyone who says differently on here is an abject idiot, 100% first class fool. Period.

      • WILDFIRE

        Peter says – “Sheila, you are absolutely 100% correct, and anyone who says differently on here is an abject idiot, 100% first class fool. Period.”

        Peter, Would you care to share your credentials of knowledge and/or experience and degreed education in the fields of renewable energies in which proclaims you as absolute know all, be all when it comes to renewable energies in which empowers you to declares you know more than anyone else on the site which further empowers you to feel the urge to resort to referring to anyone that dare challenge your opinion as a 100% idiot and first class fool. added with the word “Period”, I suppose that is to confirm your superiority of knowledge above all others. What kind or renewable energy have you invented or had extensive research or lab work with? Or are you getting your absolute certainty that you are right and everyone else who questions your opinion or statement is wrong complex from idols like bill Maher or Piers Morgan?

        I’ve found that usually people who have to add belittling comments at the end of their main comment in such a manner as you have are typically used by people who feel or have a “inferior complex” and say such things so as to deter anyone from challenging your opinion. Just an observation, I may be wrong and may be the only one that observes behavior as such. I have been wrong before, but seldom when it comes to liberal behaviors and character.

      • huapakechi

        [comment has been removed]

      • Peter

        Wildfire, I will willingly show you my credentials, as soon as you bring both hands out from under the table.

    • huapakechi

      Do you know anything about economics? All that oil remaining in the ground is worthless. With the cartel price of oil artificially high, it becomes economically feasable to extract and refine this resource. Wave your magic wand and invent a “clean” fuel that rivals oil for energy density and you can hire Bill Gates to mow your lawn.

      Unfortunately, there is no such source presently under development or even imagined. Your “tree hugger” brethren think to eliminate the cleanest, cheapest, and most practical source of energy that is commonly available. Even “electric” vehicles are ultimately dependent on (mostly) fossil fuels for their production and battery charge, and none of the alternative methods of producing electricity is practical, with the exception of nuclear, and from what I’ve seen, you liberals loose bladder control at the thought of nuclear power generation.

      If you want to eliminate the use of oil, stop using it yourself. A large percentage of your computer and monitor are oil based products. Much of your clothing is too. Pull your electric meter to stop more evil CO2. Stop driving entirely, not even electrics, because the tires are made from petroleum. Same for bicycles, never mind the energy that went into producing those items. Stop heating and cooling your house. Shyt down your refrigerator and freezer.

      Now look at yourself. You are naked, cold, hungry or suffering from the effects of spoiled food, you’ll walk barefoot anywhere you go, and you won’t be bothering people with your maunderings..

      • Bob666

        Yo Huap,
        let me turn that around on you and say the economics have yet to drive the development those energy sources. In the free market, we tend to pick the low hanging fruit.

        • huapakechi

          Get government money and mandates out of energy technology development and it won’t cost near so much

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        Hello again, “ostrich”……see if you can keep up.

        excerpt from the book Econned.

        “In 1776, Adam Smith published The Wealth fof Nations. In it he argued that the uncoordinated actions of large numbers of individuals, each acting out of self interest, sometimes produced , as if by “an invisible hand,”results that were beneficial to broader society. Smith also pointed out that self interested actions frequently led to injustice or even ruin. He fiercely criticized both how employers colluded with each other to keep wages low, as well as the ” savage injustice ” that European mercantilist interests had “commited with impunity” in colonies in Asia and the Americas.

        Smith’s ideas were cherry picked and turned into a simplistic ideology that now dominates university economics departments. This theory proclaims that the “invisible hand” ensures that economic interest will always lead to the best outcomes imaginable. It follows that any restrictions on the profit seeking activities of individuals and corporations interfer with this invisible hand, and therefor are “inefficient” and nonsensical.

        According to this line of thinking, individuals have perfect knowledge both of what they want and everything happening in the world at large,and so they pass there lives making intelligent decisions. Prices may change in ways that appear random, but this randomness follows predictable and unchanging rules and is never violently chaotic. It is therefore possible for corporations to use clever techniques to reduce and even eliminate the risks associated with their business. The result is a stable productive economy that represents the apex of civilization.

        This heartwarming picture airbrushes out nearly all of the real business world.”

        Comprehension of this excerpt does require some minimal intelligence as
        there are subtle inferences which may require some thought and a proper
        foundation is usually lacking for w.i.f.i.’s is most areas…..

        i.e. Smith used the term “invisible hand” once,,,,,as quoted above.
        Actual Keynsian economic theory which was published in 1936, is
        NOT taught in universities.

        To understand ‘economics’ and it’s history the following books are
        critical……

        Debt The First 5000 Years
        E CONned
        Economics Unmasked
        Extreme Money
        Power, Inc.
        Lords of Finance

        and for the economic future of energy

        Clean Tech Nation

        The best advice to “w.i.f.i…s” is……..( and this is true for any subject )
        you probably shouldn’t be talking about it……

        • huapakechi

          If I wanted to follow your theory of economics, I would deaden my mind with the books you have listed. Most of them are reference material on how not to manage an economic system. If the authors were competent, most would have been successful in business.

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        Which means that you haven’t read them……a FACT which was already quite
        obvious…….and is true for most people here who pretend to understand economics.

        Too bad you didn’t at least try to check on who the author’s were, but
        then you didn’t comprehend the single “excerpt” even after being warned.

        Ultimately, the only thing that needs to be understood, regarding economics
        is that there is NOTHING to understand…..it is neither science nor discipline,
        but merely another means by which immoral and amoral humans exercise
        power over others…….success as measured by monetary gain is meaningless.

        It does not confer merit, it does not indicate value, it does not insure the result
        is productive…….for money and wealth are an illusion…….it’s power relies on
        perception and its persistence……….once the illusion is shattered, one comes
        face to face with reality…..and magical thinking is of no use.

        Just as your pretense to being intelligent has been shattered…..the only
        question is……how long will the reality take to sink in?

        “He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past,
        controls the future.”

        • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.melton.353 Huapakechi

          What makes you think I have not read at least some of those dreadful tomes? But I did recover.

          You seek to overpower with bombast rather than logic. Not a winning strategy unless you have a captive audience depending on the grade you deign to award them for reciting their catechism correctly..

        • huapakechi

          Bombast rather than logic is not a winning strategy, unless your targets are captive………………………………

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        Actually since you have offered no “argument” there is nothing to overcome.

        Whatever your opinion or characterization of my posts that “continue” to
        point out the FACT that you have made no relevant response or offered any
        substantive argument……is simply more irrelevance.

        You certainly not captive to “anything”…….including “logically reasoned response”,
        and you are certainly free to continue……..

        This is to be expected from the “willfully ignorant, functional illiterates”…….

        Which eventually ends in the inevitable silence……

        The only uncertainty is the time required.

        Was it good for you?

        • huapakechi

          I decline to practice intellectual masturbation such as that you appear to enjoy..

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        Then why do you keep saying nothing?

        • huapakechi

          Just my innate sadism. I’m curious as to how long you’ll argue before you start spewing invectives.

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        wait for it…….

    • http://yahoo.com Maynard

      Sheila. Thank you for standing with Galt and a few others against the near-sighted believers that filthy fossil fuels can be safely continued without changing to clean, widely available renewable energy sources. These alternatives cannot be monopolized, which is the real reason for all the foolish attacks on them. Our own houses can be retrofitted to get all the passive and active heat and cooling and electricity we need with proper insulation, masonry, underground heat pumps to raise base temperatures or lower them in hot weather or water tanks for heat and hot water, photovoltaics, wind and/or hydrogen combustion for heat or electric generation. They would not destroy pristine or human ecologies and would give us clean air to breathe, water to drink and farmland for food production.
      Man has adapted and can and must adapt more to keep spaceship earth alive and well.

  • Peter

    These tar sands are the filthiest, most heavily polluting option for sourcing oil there is. They are already killing and maiming thousands of people who have been living in close proximity for years before it became economically viable to extract oil from these areas. It is unconscionable to suggest that your car’s gas needs outweigh the rights of local Canadians to enjoy good health regardless of where they live, and most of them have lived there long before the oil companies showed an interest. Keep your filthy greedy hands off of these areas. You have NO RIGHT to them! Period!

    • Huapakechi

      Do you have anything besides volume and passion to back your assertions?

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        Almost anyone with a brain and a computer could look for themselves, of
        course the “willfully ignorant, functional illiterates” believe that all opinions
        are “equal”…….and that the “ostrich” is the most highly evolved form of
        life with the most intelligent approach to self preservation, head in the
        sand and ass in the air.

        Public health impacts
        Concerns have been raised concerning the negative impacts that the oil sands have on public health, including higher than normal rates of cancer among residents of Fort Chipewyan.[95] In August 2011, the Alberta government initiated a provincial health study of the link between the higher rates of cancer and the oil sands.[96] It has also been suggested that other wildlife has been negatively affected by the oil sands; for instance, moose were found in a 2006 study to have as high as 453 times the acceptable levels of arsenic in their systems, though later studies lowered this to 17 to 33 times the acceptable level (still causing a danger for human consumption).[97]

        Oil sands extraction can affect the land when the bitumen is initially mined, water resources by its requirement for large quantities of water during separation of the oil and sand, and the air due to the release of carbon dioxide and other emissions.[49] Heavy metals such as vanadium, nickel, lead, cobalt, mercury, chromium, cadmium, arsenic, selenium, copper, manganese, iron and zinc are naturally present in oil sands and may be concentrated by the extraction process.[50] The environmental impact caused by oil sand extraction is frequently criticized by environmental groups such as Greenpeace, Climate Reality Project, 350.org, MoveOn.org, League of Conservation Voters, Patagonia, Sierra Club, and Energy Action Coalition.[51][52] The European Union has indicated that it may vote to label oil sands oil as “highly polluting”. Although oil sands exports to Europe are minimal, the issue has caused friction between the EU and Canada.[53]

        Between 2 to 4.5 volume units of water are used to produce each volume unit of synthetic crude oil in an ex-situ mining operation. According to Greenpeace, the Canadian oil sands operations use 349 million cubic metres per annum (12.3 × 109 cu ft/a) of water, twice the amount of water used by the city of Calgary.[65] Despite recycling, almost all of it ends up in tailings ponds. As of 2007, tailing ponds in Canada covered an area of approximately 50 square kilometres (19 sq mi). However, in SAGD operations, 90–95% of the water is recycled and only about 0.2 volume units of water is used per volume unit of bitumen produced.[66]

        For the Athabasca oil sand operations water is supplied from the Athabasca River, the ninth longest river in Canada.[67] The average flow just downstream of Fort McMurray is 633 cubic metres per second (22,400 cu ft/s) with its highest daily average measuring 1,200 cubic metres per second (42,000 cu ft/s).[68][69] Oil sands industries water license allocations totals about 1.8% of the Athabasca river flow. Actual use in 2006 was about 0.4%.[70] In addition, according to the Water Management Framework for the Lower Athabasca River, during periods of low river flow water consumption from the Athabasca River is limited to 1.3% of annual average flow.[71]

        In December 2010, the Oil Sands Advisory Panel, commissioned by former environment minister Jim Prentice, found that the system in place for monitoring water quality in the region, including work by the Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program, the Alberta Water Research Institute, the Cumulative Environmental Management Association and others, was piecemeal and should become more comprehensive and coordinated.[72][73] A major hindrance to the monitoring of oil sands produced waters has been the lack of identification of individual compounds present. By better understanding the nature of the highly complex mixture of compounds, including naphthenic acids, it may be possible to monitor rivers for leachate and also to remove toxic components. Such identification of individual acids has for many years proved to be impossible but a recent breakthrough in analysis has begun to reveal what is in the oil sands-produced waters.[74]

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_sands

        Toxicity

        Petroleum distillates contaminate surface runoff and kill almost all life
        Crude oil is a mixture of many different kinds of organic compounds, many of which are highly toxic and cancer causing (carcinogenic). Oil is “acutely lethal” to fish, that is it kills fish quickly, at a concentration of 4000 parts per million (ppm)[1] (0.4%). Crude oil and petroleum distillates cause birth defects.[2]
        Benzene is present in both crude oil and gasoline and is known to cause leukemia in humans.[3] The compound is also known to lower the white blood cell count in humans, which would leave people exposed to it more susceptible to infections.[3] “Studies have linked benzene exposure in the mere parts per billion (ppb) range to terminal leukemia, Hodgkins lymphoma, and other blood and immune system diseases within 5-15 years of exposure.”[4]

        Petroleum diesel exhaust from a truck
        When oil or petroleum distillates are burned (see combustion), usually the combustion is not complete. This means that incompletely burned compounds are created in addition to just water and carbon dioxide. The other compounds are often toxic to life. Examples are carbon monoxide and methanol. Also, fine particulates of soot blacken humans’ and other animals’ lungs and cause heart problems or death. Soot is cancer causing (carcinogenic).

        Trees killed by acid rain, an unwanted side effect of burning petroleum
        High temperatures created by the combustion of petroleum cause nitrogen gas in the surrounding air to oxidize, creating nitrous oxides. Nitrous oxides, along with sulfur dioxide from the sulfur in the oil, combine with water in the atmosphere to create acid rain. Acid rain causes many problems such as dead trees and acidified lakes with dead fish. Coral reefs in the world’s oceans are killed by acidic water caused by acid rain.
        Acid rain leads to increased corrosion of machinery and structures (large amounts of capital), and to the slow destruction of important archaeological structures like the marble ruins in Rome and Greece.

        Humans burning large amounts of petroleum create large amounts of CO2 (carbon dioxide) gas that traps heat in the earth’s atmosphere. Also some organic compounds, such as methane released from petroleum drilling or from the petroleum itself, trap heat several times more efficiently than CO2. Soot blocks the sun from reaching the earth and could cause cooling of the earth’s atmosphere.

        An oil spill is the release of a liquid petroleum hydrocarbon into the environment, especially marine areas, due to human activity, and is a form of pollution. The term is usually applied to marine oil spills, where oil is released into the ocean or coastal waters, but spills may also occur on land. Oil spills may be due to releases of crude oil from tankers, offshore platforms, drilling rigs and wells, as well as spills of refined petroleum products (such as gasoline, diesel) and their by-products, heavier fuels used by large ships such as bunker fuel, or the spill of any oily refuse or waste oil.
        Major oil spills include the Kuwaiti oil fires, Kuwaiti oil lakes, Lakeview Gusher, Gulf War oil spill, and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Spilt oil penetrates into the structure of the plumage of birds and the fur of mammals, reducing its insulating ability, and making them more vulnerable to temperature fluctuations and much less buoyant in the water. Cleanup and recovery from an oil spill is difficult and depends upon many factors, including the type of oil spilled, the temperature of the water (affecting evaporation and biodegradation), and the types of shorelines and beaches involved.[5] Spills may take weeks, months or even years to clean up.[6]

        Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are gases or vapours emitted by various solids and liquids, many of which have short- and long-term adverse effects on human health and the environment. VOCs from petroleum are toxic and foul the air, and some like benzene are extremely toxic, carcinogenic and cause DNA damage. Benzene often makes up about 1% of crude oil and gasoline. Benzene is present in automobile exhaust. More important for vapors from spills of diesel and crude oil are aliphatic, volatile compounds. Although “less toxic” than compounds like benzene, their overwhelming abundance can still cause health concerns even when benzene levels in the air are relatively low. The compounds are sometimes collectively measured as “Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons” or “TPH.”[7]

        Waste oil in the form of motor oil
        Waste oil is used oil containing breakdown products and impurities from use. Some examples of waste oil are used oils such as hydraulic oil, transmission oil, brake fluids, motor oil, crankcase oil, gear box oil and synthetic oil.[8] Many of the same problems associated with natural petroleum exist with waste oil. When waste oil from vehicles drips out engines over streets and roads, the oil travels into the water table bringing with it such toxins as benzene. This poisons both soil and drinking water. Runoff from storms carries waste oil into rivers and oceans, poisoning them as well.

      • huapakechi

        Hey galt, pick a source besides wiki if you want to have any sort of veracity. I see there is no baseline before analysis to refer to in the contamination study. Could the arsenic be natural? Could the more recent numbers be off as much as the 27 times error of the original “report”?
        Any time the ‘environmental groups’ listed protesting ‘environmental impact’ are given credence I have to discard the entire article or source. They’ve outed themselves.

        “The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature’s proper steward and society’s only hope.”
        David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club
        “We reject the idea of private property.”
        Peter Berle, National Audubon Society
        “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill….All these dangers are caused by human intervention….and thus the real enemy, then, is humanity itself….believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is a real one or one invented for the purpose.”
        Club of Rome
        “We routinely wrote scare stories…Our press reports were more or less true…We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment.”
        Jim Sibbison, enviro-journalist and former PR flak for the EPA
        “It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
        Paul Watson,a founder of Greenpeace

        How do you tolerate being led by liars and socialists?

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        Veracity with YOU? Now why would that be of any concern to me?

        You asked a question of Peter, I have supplied you with a partial answer and a
        link.

        The “source” is not “wiki”. The information is collected there, from 100 SOURCES
        all listed and linked for you and throughout the article. ( with other articles and sources )

        Again, with sources and links…..

        You counter with a foolish statement about arsenic being natural, of course
        the arsenic is natural, so are the tar sands……both are poisonous, and you
        won’t be any less dead.

        Don’t like environmental groups, so what……as I said, there are 100 sources
        …….and many of them are from the Canadian Government.

        Veracity with YOU? Now why would that be of any concern to me?

        • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.melton.353 Daniel Melton

          Since you have no qualms about lying and admitting it, who am I to complain, other than to suggest you preface your posts with that fact.
          Again you ‘stretch the truth’ a bit. Your screed contained ONE (1) link, and that was to wiki. There may be other links through the wiki article, but I choose not to wade through that swamp. As far as ‘government sources’, your government wouldn’t lie to you, unless there was some bureaucrat or political figure with an agenda behind the lies.
          Of course, that never happens, does it? Anthropogenic global warming, agent orange never causes cancer, no chemical weapons in Iraq (trucked ‘em to Syria while we waited), no gulf war syndrome, endangered spotted owls, and that’s just what I can recall about the U.S. government. I’m sure the Canadian eco-socialists now out of power who are still trying to collapse their national economy have their own dirty laundry.

          “He who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and a third time, till at length it becomes habitual…”
          –Thomas Jefferson

          • http://www.facebook.com/curt.siters Curt Siters

            So, Daniel, what you’re saying is that corporations don’t lie and always tell the truth? The same corporations that are making record profits and MUST maintain the status quo to keep making those profits?

          • huapakechi

            You twist my words to achieve your own meanings.
            I would not presume to state that corporate offices don’t lie, but they can be held acountable whereas governments hold themselves immune from consequences for their perfidity. Corporate executives with enough ‘friends’ in high government office can avoid indictment for the most outrageous economic crimes. Corzine is the first to come to mind. There are many more.
            By regulating any and all startup competition through ‘friends’ in government, established corporations stifle competition, thus increasing profit potential.
            Want to make a fast billion or two? Build an oil refinery. The demand is there, but you’ll spend four or five billion in regulatory compliance and lawyers, and it’ll take you twenty years to get to the point where you can break ground. That is if some tree hugger (funded by the competition?) doesn’t ‘discover’ or invent some new endangered species on your proposed site.

          • teatreeblog

            You err in stating I twisted your words, I asked a question for clarification.

            Ummm, those we send to Washington CAN be held accountable – it’s called elections.

            “but you’ll spend four or five billion in regulatory compliance and lawyers” – actually that ALL gets either written off, expensed or amortized as part of the cost of doing business. This turns out to be indirect subsidy by us through the government to the business. So in effect they only front the capital and we reimburse them over time. In the end they really don’t pay for it.

            This is how 1/4 of the businesses either DON’T pay any taxes or even get refunds and most of the rest pay far lower taxes than the average individual (BoA, Exxon, Apple, etc.)

          • huapakechi

            If I misinterpreted your question, you deserve an apology for that.
            As to elected officials being held accountable through elections, you are naive. Those who count the votes decide elections. A short history from 2004 to present:

            http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/yes_vote_fraud_real_B5KsHFqcgUjYJCivnI6IuN

            http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/11/23/maker-of-unskewed-polls-creates-obama-voter-fraud-map-see-which-states-he-thinks-shouldve-been-romneys/

            http://www.truethevote.org/news/how-widespread-is-voter-fraud-2012-facts-figures

            As to ‘recouping the expenses’ through indirect subsidy, please provide your sources for this statement. There is ample evidence that this is a “smoke and mirrors” attack on the energy industry as a whole:
            http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/the_prez_oil_tax_break_lies_Y2Yj6KCU9QIO0BKHs1Be7M

            1/4 of businesses do not pay taxes? Only if those businesses are headed by officers who are good friends and contributors to the administration in power. This is primarily due to our byzantine and voluminous tax code. The irs can’t even interpret it. What’s wrong with this picture?

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        Tar Sands: Dirty Oil and the Future of a Continent

        Andrew Nikiforuk

        Greystone/David Suzuki Fdtn, 2009 – Science – 214 pages
        Winner of the 2009 Rachel Carson Environment Book Award , from the Society of Environmental Journalists

        Canada has one third of the world’s oil source; it comes from the bitumen in the oil sands of Alberta. Advancements in technology and frenzied development have created the world’s largest energy project in Fort McMurray where, rather than shooting up like a fountain in the deserts of Saudi Arabia, the sticky bitumen is extracted from the earth. Providing almost 20 percent of America’s fuel, much of this dirty oil is being processed in refineries in the Midwest. This out-of-control megaproject is polluting the air, poisoning the water, and destroying boreal forest at a rate almost too rapid to be imagined. In this hard-hitting book, journalist Andrew Nikiforuk exposes the disastrous environmental, social, and political costs of the tar sands and argues forcefully for change.

        Declaration of a Political Emergency

        The world’s oil party is coming to a dramatic close, and Canada has adopted a new geodestiny: providing the United States with bitumen, a low-quality, high-cost substitute.
        Northern Alberta’s bituminous sands, a national treasure, are the globe’s last great remaining oil field. This strategic boreal resource has attracted nearly 60 per cent of all global oil investments. Every major multinational and nationally owned oil company has staked a claim in the tar sands.

        Neither Canada nor Alberta has a rational plan for the tar sands other than full-scale liquidation. Although the tar sands could fund Canada’s transition to a low-carbon economy, government has surrendered the fate of the resource to irrational global demands. At forecast rates of production, the richest deposits of bitumen will be exhausted in forty years.

        Nations become what they produce. Bitumen, the new national staple, is redefining the character and destiny of Canada. Rapid development of the tar sands has created a foreign policy that favours the export of bitumen to the United States and lax immigration standards that champion the import of global bitumen workers. Inadequate environmental rules and monitoring have allowed unsustainable mining to accelerate. Feeble fiscal regimes have enriched multinationals and given Canada a petrodollar that hides the inflationary pressures of peak oil. Canada now calls itself an “emerging energy superpower.” In reality, it is nothing more than a Third World energy supermarket.

        Investment in the tar sands, including pipelines and upgraders, now totals approximately $200 billion.* The tar sands boom has become the world’s largest energy project, the world’s largest construction project, and the world’s largest capital project. No comprehensive assessment of the megaproject’s environmental, economic, or social impact has been done.

        Thanks to rapid tar sands development, Canada now produces more oil than Texas or Kuwait. Since 2001, Canada has surpassed Saudi Arabia as the largest single exporter of oil to the United States. Canadian crude now accounts for nearly one-fifth of all U.S. oil imports. If development continues unabated, Canada will soon provide the fading U.S. empire with nearly a third of its oil, while half of Canada’s own citizens remain dependent on insecure supplies from the Middle East.

        Rapid tar sands development has become a central goal of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), an elite plan to create a North American economic union. U.S. energy policy openly advocates for more pipelines and transmission lines to ease growing shortages in energy supply for U.S. citizens, who currently consume 25 per cent of the world’s oil. Representatives from the Mexican government attended meetings in 2006 in Houston, Texas, about rapid tar sands development. Rapid energy integration will inescapably lead to political integration in a North American union dominated by the United States.

        Bitumen is a signature of peak oil and a reminder, as every beer drinker knows, that the glass starts full and ends empty. Half of the world’s cheapest and cleanest oil has been consumed. The reality of depletion now demands the mining of the dirtiest. It takes the excavation of two tons of earth and sand to make one barrel of bitumen.
        Each barrel of bitumen produces three times as much greenhouse gas as a barrel of conventional oil. The tar sands explain why the Canadian government has spent more than $6 billion on climate-change programs for the last fifteen years and met not one target.

        Bitumen is one of the world’s most water-intensive oil products. Each barrel requires the consumption of three barrels of fresh water from the Athabasca River, which is part of the world’s third-largest watershed. Every day, Canada exports one million barrels of bitumen to the United States and three million barrels of virtual water.
        Industry in the tar sands uses as much water every year as a city of two million people. Ninety per cent of this water ends up in the world’s largest impoundments of toxic waste: the tailings ponds. Industrial water monitoring on the Athabasca River is a fraud. Canada has no national water policy and one of the worst records of pollution enforcement of any industrial nation.

        The tailings ponds, located along the Athabasca River, leak or seep into groundwater. For the last decade, the downstream community of Fort Chipewyan has documented rare cancers.

        To mine or steam out bitumen, the tar sands industry burns enough natural gas every day to heat four million homes. At this rate of consumption, the project could severely compromise the nation’s natural gas supplies by 2030.

        The rapid depletion of natural gas in the tar sands is driving Canada’s so-called nuclear renaissance. Canada may well become the first nation to use nuclear energy not to retire fossil fuels but to accelerate their exploitation.
        Bitumen development will never be sustainable. The megaproject will eventually destroy or industrialize a forest the size of Florida and diminish the biological diversity and hydrology of the region forever.

        Oil hinders democracy and corrupts the political process through the absence of transparent reporting and clear fiscal accounting. Alberta, a classic petrostate, has one of the least accountable governments in Canada as well as the lowest voter turnout.
        Without long-term planning and policies, Canada and Alberta will fail to secure reliable energy supplies for Canadians, to develop alternative energy sources for the country, or to create valuable resource funds for the future. Unlike the governments of Norway and Alaska, the government of Canada stands to leave its citizens a singular legacy of exponential neglect and watershed destruction.

        A business-as-usual case for the tar sands will change Canada forever. It will enrich a few powerful companies, hollow out the economy, destroy the world’s third-largest watershed, industrialize nearly one-quarter of Alberta’s landscape, consume the last of the nation’s natural gas supplies, and erode Canadian sovereignty.

        The destructiveness of the tar sands is not inevitable. But Canadians and Albertans have become too tolerant of the politicians who compromise the nation’s energy security as well as the next generation’s future. Instead of liquidating the tar sands for global interests, Canada can use the resource for transition to a lowcarbon economy.
        Every Canadian who drives a car is part of this political emergency. And every Canadian can be part of the solution.

        The real work of transforming Canada’s fossil fuel-dependent economy will not be big and glamorous. It will be humbling, yet rewarding. Our tasks, as social critic Wendell Berry has noted, “will be too many to count, too many to report, too many to be publicly noticed or rewarded, too small to make anyone rich or famous.”

        We must begin today.
        Copyright 2008 D&M Publishers Inc.

        Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/excerpt-tar-sands-by-andrew-nikiforuk-1.335628#ixzz2OHub5E4V

        No doubt any “source” which exposes your “willful ignorance” will not
        be acceptable to you……..although “actually have to think” is no doubt the
        primary cause………of course, if you didn’t exist on “talking”, this would no
        longer be a problem………

  • Terry Bateman

    Right Brain Thinker:

    The article says just before the chart:

    “The chart below gives you an indication of Canada’s oil wealth.
    It doesn’t even include Canada’s oil sands reserves. If those
    figures are included, Canada has oil reserves five times larger
    than Saudi arabia.”

    The chart says Alberta has 168.7 billion barrels of oil reserves,
    64% of Saudi Arabia’s reserves. The chart “doesn’t even include
    Canada’s oil sands reserves. If those figures are included, Canada
    has oil reserves five times larger than Saudi Arabia.”

    Not to mention that Canada has oil in other provinces besides Alberta.

    What are the environmental concerns of thousands of miles of oil
    and gas pipelines safely operating for decades in the U.S. and Canada?
    Zilch. What are the environmental concerns of the TransCanada Keystone
    Pipeline? Zilch.

    Perhaps right brain thinker needs to use his whole brain.

    • huapakechi

      The atrophy has progressed too far to be reversed.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Terry Bateman continues his mindless pursuit of “truth” and keeps repeating the same UNTRUTHS. Terry speaks of me needing to use my whole brain—-his problem is that he needs to get on the yellow brick road and ask the wizard to give him just the tiniest speck of a brain so that he can see his errors.. I have told him several times to look at the chart in the article. Perhaps he failed junior high math and English because the average 7th grader would have no trouble interpreting the graph and seeing what Terry doesn’t see (or doesn’t WANT to see).

      The line on the graph for Alberta is mostly lavender—-there is an asterisk that says that part of the line is “bitumen” (tar sands), and that “real oil” makes up only a tiny part. That tiny part is 40% of the real oil reserves in all of Canada. Canada’s real oil reserves and tar sands all together put Canada somewhere around second or third place in the world. HOW CAN A COUNTRY THAT HAS LESS OIL OF ANY KIND THAN SAUDI ARABIA ALSO HAVE FIVE TIMES AS MUCH AS SAUDIA ARABIA????????????

      Terry says, “The article says just before the chart: “The chart below gives you an indication of Canada’s oil wealth”.
      Terry says, “It doesn’t even include Canada’s oil sands reserves. If those
      figures are included, Canada has oil reserves five times larger than Saudi Arabia.”
      HOW MANY SEVENTH GRADERS WILL HAVE TO TELL TERRY THAT THE ARTICLE IS WRONG BEFORE HE BELIEVES IT?
      HOW MANY SEVENTH GRADERS WILL HAVE TO TELL TERRY THAT THE TAR SANDS ARE INCLUDED IN THE CHART BEFORE HE BELIEVES IT?
      HOW MANY SEVENTH GRADERS WILL HAVE TO TELL TERRY THAT “64% AS MUCH” CANNOT EQUAL “FIVE TIMES AS MUCH” BEFORE HE BELIEVES IT?

      Lord love a duck! The term “confirmation bias” was invented to describe folks like Terry.

      • huapakechi

        If these people wish to risk their money and the money of those who wish to risk by investing, drilling and extracting a resource that isn’t there (according to you), what’s your problem?

        I have a suspicion that your panic is that they might be successful in providing a reasonably cheap source of energy from a politically stable country.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        hookypeachy makes his purpose clear the more he posts on this thread. It is becoming clear that he is either a poorly informed dilettante and self-imagined intellectual that just wants to “pester” folks like GALT and I, OR he is one of those trolls that are employed by the fossil fuels interests to go onto EVERY blog or website that they can find to muddy up the waters on issues of AGW and the dangers of continued over dependence on fossil fuels.

        What he says here makes no sense, actually—–who are “these people” and what resource is it that I say “is not there”. The fact of the matter is that the tar sands that GALT, Peter, and I have described make up 98% (NINETY-EIGHT PERCENT) of all the Canadian reserves. The problem is that those tar sands should NOT be utilized for the myriad of reasons that have been laid out—-they are so bad in so many ways that they may truly be the final nail in the coffin if we should utilize them. Canada is already sending us much conventional oil, natural gas, and hydroelecticity.

        HP says “I have a suspicion that your panic is that they might be successful in providing a reasonably cheap source of energy from a politically stable country”. Typical “say nothing” comment from a “distractor”—–no one is in a “panic”—–those of us who see the danger are dead calm about it. There is no such thing as a “reasonably cheap” source of energy to be had in tar sands—-they are expensive to process and beyond pricing in terms of their environmental impact.

        • huapakechi

          Didn’t I just read a post or two from you about how you were “done with me”? If that were true, you would not mention anything having to do with me or any comments I might make.

          Your deliberate misspelling of my nic is mildly amusing. A rather juvenile tactic inspired by alinsky? As I recall, his strategy included deny, deflect, denigrate, and ridicule. The illusion of aggrieved innocence fits you like a tutu on a bull.
          If I am a “poorly informed dilettante”, how is it that I so easily and consistently bring you to rage? I hold no pretensions or illusions to being an intellectual. I leave that imagined status to you.
          Where can I solicit pay for my efforts? I’ve not sought nor been offered any sort of recompense for my campaign against socialism, but I would welcome contributions..

          We do have some proof of liberal trolls being paid to disrupt conservative forums:
          http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/leftist-trolls-in-ongoing-war-with-wnd/
          Come to think of it, you and galt use much the same turn of phrase….

          I do not have the time or energy to go into every blog or website about global warming, but when I run across a professional prevaricator such as yourself, I make the time.

          Did you even realize that Canada has its’ own environmental laws?
          http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/environmental-law
          If the exploitation of these Canadian tar sands is such an egregious ecological crime, where is your outcry about the wholesale pollution of China? Did you know there are areas where the soil is so contaminated with metal refinery waste it is actually richer than the ores that are shipped in for processing?

          Where do you find the figures that 98% of Canadian oil resources are tar sands and who has determined this to be fact? If Canada is already sending us quantities of conventional oil and gas, the deposits of tar sands must be huge.

          For one who is dead calm about the “dangers” of exploiting a natural resource, you have done a lot of biblical disaster prophecy.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        huapakechi says, “Didn’t I just read a post or two from you about how you were “done with me”? If that were true, you would not mention anything having to do with me or any comments I might make.

        I don’t believe I said that and I won’t waste the time to find out. If anything, what I am “done with” is any attempt to treat you as a serious commenter—-that may require paying MORE attention to some of your more egregious attempts to misinform and distract (and pester).

        I searched a bit and tried to ascertain what your “handle” meant and couldn’t come up with anything—-I do apologize (I’m an old guy with limited patience for dilettantes), but some of the more “exotic” and meaningless handles people choose are annoying. If you want to burden us with it, I will make fun of it. What IS amusing is the obligatory ALINSKY REFERENCE from a mindless troll, and the “aggrieved innocence” bit. LOL

        You flatter yourself by asking, “If I am a “poorly informed dilettante”, how is it that I so easily and consistently bring you to rage?” Your postings do not change my “rage level” in the least bit, they merely gain my attention for a period of time. My “rage” is rather low level and is directed mainly at the mindless and ignorant right wing koolaid drinkers that you seek to influence.

        And look!, HP is talking to us about PROOF! And he cites WND as a source! WND is one of the least reliable sources for anything but endlessly repeated right wing nut talking points. “We do have some proof of liberal trolls being paid to disrupt conservative forums:
        http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/leftist-trolls-in-ongoing-war-with-wnd/

        Come to think of it, HP uses much the same turn of phrase as other right wing nut trolls that seek to misinform, distort science, and politicize everything so that the plutocracy and corporate oligarchy can do their dirty work in the shadows.

        HP says, “I do not have the time or energy to go into every blog or website about global warming, but when I run across a professional prevaricator such as yourself, I make the time”. Sure, HP, whatever you say. I myself visit many blogs and websites but seldom comment—-i spend what little time I have to spare on fighting the massive waves of ignorance and politicization of science that we see on PLD. One can’t tilt at every windmill, but one CAN be “professional” when one does. You’re not—-you’re a lightweight, and you should go away before we beat your brains in..

        HP asks, “Did you even realize that Canada has its’ own environmental laws?
        http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/environmental-law
        If the exploitation of these Canadian tar sands is such an egregious ecological crime, where is your outcry about the wholesale pollution of China? Did you know there are areas where the soil is so contaminated with metal refinery waste it is actually richer than the ores that are shipped in for processing?”

        Yes, HP, Canada does have its own environmental laws and environmental organizations, both of which are far weaker than those in the U.S.. There is growing outrage in Canada at the power of corporations to rape the environment for profit and how much they “own” the government, and the situation resembles what was occurring in the US in the late 60′s and 70′s.

        As HP, thrashes about looking for arguments, he suddenly jumps to China—-my “outrage” at China is just part of my outrage at what the entire human race is doing to the biosphere—-we in the US can influence the rest of the world only by example. Another leap looking for arguments takes HP to “metal refinery waste”—-yes, HP, that is “old news” to those of us who have been studying environmental issues since Earth Day and before. One of my particular “favorites” in that area is the cyanide leaching of gold mine tailings in Colorado. It is a wonderful experience to drive around a bend and find a mountain valley the size of 30 football fields filled in with mine tailings so that cyanide solution can be dribbled through it to extract the gold. Much like mountain top removal coal mining in WV, although the ugliness in CO is so much worse because the scenery is so much more spectacular.

        HP asks, “Where do you find the figures that 98% of Canadian oil resources are tar sands and who has determined this to be fact? If Canada is already sending us quantities of conventional oil and gas, the deposits of tar sands must be huge”.
        The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) website is a good place to start for ANY country you seek more information on. EVERYBODY has looked at fossil fuel reserves all over the planet and there is much disagreement about definitions and whether much of it is able to be physically retrieved at an economical cost, but the PRESENT picture of Canadian resources is nearly all tar sands. There are many sources of information available, and the fact that you seem unaware of them (or want us to think you are) reaffirms my opinion that you are an uninformed dilettante or a deliberate misinformer. And I will AGAIN say that you need to look at the chart in this article and realize that the tar sands ARE HUGE and make up nearly all of the Canadian resources. Google “Canadian fossil fuel resources” and have at it.

        I have not said one word pertaining to “biblical disaster prophecy”. The bible is a piece of literature, nothing more. I look only at the science, and the science says that we are likely headed for a major disaster, at least in terms of the place of the human species on the planet, and that it may arrive within decades. It will not be a “biblical event” but will be gradual and cumulative. Why are you so fearful of truth? Why do you deny?

        • huapakechi

          If you had asked about my nic, I’d have told you. It’s the name of a soldier I served with. He deserves to be remembered. The use of his name is how I choose to do it. Now, don’t you feel stupid for having wasted time searching for some deep and mysterious meaning that does not exist?

          Since you have utilized alinsky tactics, I thought to bring this to your attention. How have I misinformed and distracted from the discussion? The “troll” appellation is a bit egregious. All I have done is ask questions, provided answers, and provided personal observations. If such a tactic causes you discomfort, feel free to ignore anything I post.

          Your rage is directed towards the mindless and ignorant right wing koolaid drinkers that I seek to influence? By your statement, you hold these people in low regard. Why do you demean yourself by attempting to converse with them?

          Proof is where I happen to find it, and as far as WND, the fact that you ridicule that particular source is reason enough to utilize it. I notice that you offer no refutation to the information I gleaned from them.

          When you accuse me of using “much the same turn of phrase as other right wing nut trolls that seek to misinform, distort science, and politicize everything so that the plutocracy and corporate oligarchy can do their dirty work in the shadows.” I am flattered. Being named by you a dilettante, I must be doing something correct. In point of fact, I have picked up my particular “style” countering liberals. No mimicking or tutoring involved.

          quote: *”whatever you say. I myself visit many blogs and websites but seldom comment—-i spend what little time I have to spare on fighting the massive waves of ignorance and politicization of science that we see on PLD. One can’t tilt at every windmill, but one CAN be “professional” when one does. You’re not—-you’re a lightweight, and you should go away before we beat your brains in.”
          Do I detect a threat? What sort of politicization of science have I advocated? I want nothing more nor less than truth and transparency, which seems to be in short supply on the side of those championing AGW.

          quote: *” There is growing outrage in Canada at the power of corporations to rape the environment for profit and how much they “own” the government,”
          Strange, I don’t hear anything about this. Living up here near Canada one would think that I would hear some whisper of outrage or see some report about civil unrest concerning the massive pollution you attest. Perhaps this is occurring in liberal dominated Quebec rather than Manitoba and Saskatchewan?

          I offered China as a contrast to the pollution and environmental stewardship in the United States. You don’t like heap leaching gold deposits. Would you rather the miners use mercury? I’ll tell you something about the beautiful scenery in Colorado. Ya can’t eat it. If you want to stop mining and drilling, dig into your own pocket and BUY the mineral rights to those resources. Then you can sit on your mountain peak and enjoy the view. I can tell you, it’s not so pretty when there are no jobs and Winter’s coming on.

          Might you have an independent source for information on energy, other than EIA. Somehow, I distrust a government agency with “energy” in the title. It’s too much like thinking there is intelligence in the CIA. They’ll tell you exactly what they think you want to hear. Please list some of the “many sources of information” about energy resources.

          Your prophecies APPROACH biblical disaster prophecies. Happier? I don’t mind the truth at all. I appreciate honesty and transparency in science. For some strange reason, these qualities seem to be conspicuous by their absence when the subject of anthropogenic global warming is discussed or researched. Why the concerted efforts to avoid complying with freedom of information requests? Why the panic when the Hadley CRU emails were dumped? Why the concerted efforts to deny what was blatantly obvious?

          So what if I am a “dilettant” or “misinformer”. My specialty is information. Delving into the why and where, not the purity of belief or even the data. When something is being hidden, whether by distraction or denying access, there is an agenda. That is my quarry.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        huapakechi says. “My nic, is the name of a soldier I served with. He deserves to be remembered. The use of his name is how I choose to do it. Now, don’t you feel stupid for having wasted time searching for some deep and mysterious meaning that does not exist?”
        I sought no “deep and mysterious” meaning in your “nic”. A quick google showed that it was not some sort of Aztec god or some such so I decided it was inconsequential. I remember many that I have served with and a close friend that I lost on 9/11 also, but show them a bit more respect than to use them as “handles” on a site like PLD.

        “Since you have utilized alinsky tactics, I thought to bring this to your attention. How have I misinformed and distracted from the discussion? The “troll” appellation is a bit egregious. All I have done is ask questions, provided answers, and provided personal observations. If such a tactic causes you discomfort, feel free to ignore anything I post”
        The ever popular “Alinsky” accusation appears again—-that is one of the signs of a troll or a confirmed right wing Koolaid drinker. You have not asked many serious questions and provided NO relevant answers that I have seen. Your “personal observations” (opinions) have been stated as fact with no substantiation. I feel NO discomfort when viewing them at all, and will certainly NOT ignore them as long as they need to be countered with some truth.

        “Your rage is directed towards the mindless and ignorant right wing koolaid drinkers that I seek to influence? By your statement, you hold these people in low regard. Why do you demean yourself by attempting to converse with them?”
        Do you not read well? I stated that I don’t feel “rage” and don’t hold “these people” in low regard—-many of them are misinformed and misguided and I seek to educate them on the science of AGW. YOU are the one who disrespects them

        “Proof is where I happen to find it, and as far as WND, the fact that you ridicule that particular source is reason enough to utilize it. I notice that you offer no refutation to the information I gleaned from them”
        You show your bias when you say that “proof” is to be found on WND. I will say it yet again—-WND is one of a hundred sites I check regularly and only offers “proof” for the talking points of the circular firing squad—-what it posts is such a parody of truth that It is beyond ridicule—-try Media Matters for a site that speaks truth.

        “When you accuse me of using “much the same turn of phrase as other right wing nut trolls that seek to misinform, distort science, and politicize everything so that the plutocracy and corporate oligarchy can do their dirty work in the shadows.” I am flattered. Being named by you a dilettante, I must be doing something correct. In point of fact, I have picked up my particular “style” countering liberals. No mimicking or tutoring involved”
        Enjoy your smugness and condescension. As I said, you are a “lightweight” at “countering liberals”—-you haven’t yet shown us much on PLD. You are welcome to join the crew of puffed-out-chest strutting roosters on this site that keep telling themselves and each other that they are “winners” in any debates they engage in. Self-delusion is what it is.

        “quote: *”whatever you say. I myself visit many blogs and websites but seldom comment—-i spend what little time I have to spare on fighting the massive waves of ignorance and politicization of science that we see on PLD. One can’t tilt at every windmill, but one CAN be “professional” when one does. You’re not—-you’re a lightweight, and you should go away before we beat your brains in.”
        Do I detect a threat? What sort of politicization of science have I advocated? I want nothing more nor less than truth and transparency, which seems to be in short supply on the side of those championing AGW”
        Yes, there’s a “threat” there—-if you keep posting nonsense, you will find GALT and I and others posting truth and making you look foolish (or have you not noticed that has already happened?). There is no “championing of AGW” going on—-AGW is FACT and needs no “advocates”. All the “truth and transparency” is present in great abundance and is on the side of the 98% of climate scientists that are convinced it is occurring. The lies and obfuscation are the sole property of the “skeptics and deniers”, and the fact that you deny AGW means that you are a “politicizer”, since that is the only basis for denying AGW. Stop trying to sound “reasonable” and “balanced” when it is obvious that you are anything but.

        “quote: *” There is growing outrage in Canada at the power of corporations to rape the environment for profit and how much they “own” the government,”
        Strange, I don’t hear anything about this. Living up here near Canada one would think that I would hear some whisper of outrage or see some report about civil unrest concerning the massive pollution you attest. Perhaps this is occurring in liberal dominated Quebec rather than Manitoba and Saskatchewan?”
        So “living up here near Canada” (as in Ohio?) qualifies you to dismiss what you are too lazy to look up? (and the tar sands are located in Alberta). Did you not read the lengthy comments posted by GALT? Again, you are wasting our time—-you sit back and make lazy swipes—–you are not a serious person.

        “I offered China as a contrast to the pollution and environmental stewardship in the United States. You don’t like heap leaching gold deposits. Would you rather the miners use mercury? I’ll tell you something about the beautiful scenery in Colorado. Ya can’t eat it. If you want to stop mining and drilling, dig into your own pocket and BUY the mineral rights to those resources. Then you can sit on your mountain peak and enjoy the view. I can tell you, it’s not so pretty when there are no jobs and Winter’s coming on”
        You offered China because you are a parrot. And you know nothing about gold mining and science if you think that mercury could be used instead of cyanide. And it’s mere rhetoric to talk about buying mineral rights. One of the problems is that “we the people” own those mining and drilling and timber and water and grazing rights and the “greedy rich” have stolen them from all of us through their lobbying and buying of the political process. Those ARE my mountains they’re despoiling and you once agaoin expose yourself as a tool of the special interests here.

        “Might you have an independent source for information on energy, other than EIA. Somehow, I distrust a government agency with “energy” in the title. It’s too much like thinking there is intelligence in the CIA. They’ll tell you exactly what they think you want to hear. Please list some of the “many sources of information” about energy resources”.
        Aha! The old “give me INDEPENDENT sources for information” ploy. This from someone who finds “truth” in WND and DOESN’T see the irony in “They’ll tell you exactly what they think you want to hear” LOL. Get off your duff and search the web—-you will find MANY sources of information. One thing you can be sure of is that the government sites (including the CIA World Book) will give you far more unbiased info than the “independent sites” you seek (most of which are industry funded, since no one else cares about the data but them and they seek to mislead).

        “Your prophecies APPROACH biblical disaster prophecies. Happier?” No, the bioble is literature and religious belief, and AGW is pure scienc—-you should not mention the bible and AGW together at any time.

        “I don’t mind the truth at all. I appreciate honesty and transparency in science. For some strange reason, these qualities seem to be conspicuous by their absence when the subject of anthropogenic global warming is discussed or researched”
        I’ve addressed this elsewhere, but it bears repeating that there is NO research that disproves AGW is occurring and there is therefore NO “discussion” to be done. The denier’s arguments have been shot down one after the other to the point that they have run out of “arguments” and are actually becoming quiet—-once a lie has been proven several times to be a lie, it is no longer worth repeating.

        “Why the concerted efforts to avoid complying with freedom of information requests?”
        Really? DIDN’T HAPPEN! Give us details about this alleged non-compliance and let me beat you up some more on that.

        “Why the panic when the Hadley CRU emails were dumped? Why the concerted efforts to deny what was blatantly obvious?”
        The only “panic” to be seen was among the deniers when several independent investigations cleared al the scientists involved of any wrongdoing. There have been a couple of similar attempts to smear reputable scientists since and they too have failed. The fact you even bring this up indicates that you are either quite ignorant of the truth or choose to ignore the truth and want to continue to lie to all of us.

        “So what if I am a “dilettant” or “misinformer”. My specialty is information. Delving into the why and where, not the purity of belief or even the data. When something is being hidden, whether by distraction or denying access, there is an agenda. That is my quarry”
        And the best serving of horsepucky is saved for last. Your specialty is DISinformation and distraction. “Why and where” is the stuff of historians, not scientists, and you have a lot of nerve talking about “purity of data” when you are obviously a “believer” (and maybe paid to do it), and have absolutely no interest in scientific truth. Nothing is being hidden about AGW—-the only ones seeking to deny access or distract are the fossil fuel interests and their shills (like you).

        You ask “So what if I am a “dilettante” or “misinformer”?. The short answer is that AGW is too serious a topic and time is too short for the likes of you to get in the way of truth. Go find some other site to play on, because you will not be allowed to spread your lies on PLD.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        huapakechi again says nothing of significance. Life is too short to waste too much time on liars and prevaricators, so I will be brief.

        HP opens and closes with “Deny, deflect, denigrate, and ridicule”, a perfect description of his tactics and his failure to address any science whatsoever in what he says..

        His fallback position in every argument is that “the 98% (NINETY EIGHT PERCENT) of all climate scientists who believe in AGW are lying”. Very safe. He never has to present any evidence or use logic, BUT just keep spouting denier horsepucky in the hope that some fools will believe him.

        Nothing has been “lost”—-it is all there for all to see. He is playing mind games with any who are foolish enough to not see through that tactic. Tell us about what has been “lost”, HP, and I will help you find it.

        He does not understand gold mining or chemistry or he would not talk about mercury in the context of recovering gold from huge fields of mine tailings.

        HP asks,”No FOIA lawsuits?”, and provides a long list of GARBAGE sources, most of which relate back to things that occurred years ago and were settled IN FAVOR of AGW and the scientists who believe in it. Infowars and Alex Jones? The Washington Examiner? The UVA lawsuit in which our VA attorney general (KookyNelly) was laughed out of court? Laughable and pathetic. The only “legitimate” source on the list is desmogblog, and that citation had been misused by HP.

        Yes, HP, these are all “irrevocably contaminated’ sources”, and I will point that out to all that you seek to mislead and disrespect by using them as if they had any legitimacy..

        “Deny, deflect, denigrate, and ridicule”——not much of a tactic, and HP describes himself nicely with, “Everything I say is a lie—-I am telling the truth about AGW”. As I said before, go troll on some other site and leave us in peace.

        • huapakechi

          Provide the decisions of those lawsuits, and the links to those cases.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        huapakechi says, “Provide the decisions of those lawsuits, and the links to those cases”.

        Sorry, HP, I already said that dealing with your lies was a waste of time and I’m not going to play your stupid game. If you want anyone to believe YOU, then YOU can go look up the decisions and show us that I’m the one that’s wrong.

        Cuccinelli and the State of VA LOST the case where they were demanding access to Michael Mann’s work.
        PROVE IT DIDN’T HAPPEN!

        The climategate smears were proven to be unfounded by several independent inquiries, including by the University of East Anglia and are a long-dead issue.
        PROVE IT DIDN’T HAPPEN!

        YOU show US one speck of truth behind anything you say, and I don’t mean more links to “garbage” non-science denier sites that are funded by the Koch brothers, Exxon-Mobil, and other fossil fuel interests. Otherwise go away—-you’re an embarrassment to the concept of rational and honest discourse.

        • huapakechi

          Didn’t you state that there were no FOIA lawsuits? What about the others I listed?

        • huapakechi

          Richmond Times-Dispatch columnist Bart Hinkle is one of the region’s shining editorial lights. But on the matter of Ken Cuccinelli’s request for documents in the Michael Mann/UVA imbroglio, I think he’s off base. Principled, to be sure. But his column doesn’t go nearly deep enough in its exploration of what Mann’s defenders inside and outside the University of Virginia are doing to thwart the commonwealth’s freedom of information laws.

          In his latest column he makes several appeals to authority to justify why former UVA professor Michael Mann’s work product while a state employee at the very public University of Virginia should remain beyond the Attorney General’s investigatory powers.

          He makes a compelling case. Even those who disagree with Mann’s research, and have taken great pains to show it is wrong, believe Cuccinelli is on a fishing expedition, or worse, has set himself up as some sort of modern day Torquemada:

          …he is not a grand inquisitor putting all of climate science on trial. His job is to enforce the law. To that end, he should have some concrete grounds for thinking the law has been broken. Cuccinelli doesn’t.

          Indeed he should. In the AG’s eyes, he does have such grounds. In our interview with him in March, Cuccinelli reiterated that the Albemarle county judge Hinkle cites didn’t toss the subpoena the AG’s office issued, but limited it, and in doing so, added a new subsection to the law in question. The judge’s action is before the Virginia Supreme Court. In the meantime, the AG’s office has refiled a request consistent with the lower court judge’s ruling. The University of Virginia has “objected to that subpoena” as well.

          So no matter in what form Cuccinelli asks for the documents, the University objects. It would seem their problem is with the law itself, not Cuccinelli. This brings into question this part of Bart’s column:

          Cuccinelli’s defenders are right when they point out that waving the banner of “academic freedom” does not give professors at public universities blanket immunity. But that is a straw man. Nobody has said it does. And if Cuccinelli had reason to think Mann had spent his grant money on fast cars and loose women rather than on the research he was paid to do, then nobody would object to his investigation. That is precisely the sort of activity the Fraud Against Taxpayers Act is supposed to stop.

          Good heavens, Bart. Without straw men, three quarters of the nation’s pundits would be out of work.

          So long as UVA fights even a limited subpoena tailored to the specifications issued by a friendly judge, we have to wonder what the school’s motivation really is. On the surface, it appears they object to releasing any information Mann generated to anyone at all.

          As Chris Horner told us in a recent interview, his request for Mann’s documents under the Freedom of Information Act is being fought as well, and by the same groups fighting the PR war against Cuccinelli. None of these groups, including the ACLU, lifted a finger when Greenpeace asked for former UVA climate scientist Pat Michaels’ work product. They uttered not a peep, and certainly issued no press releases, when Michaels was hounded out of his post as state climatologists by the Kaine administration for holding unorthodox climate change views.

          But as to the matter of a blanket exemption for academics from either Cuccinelli or FOIA…that’s what the groups backing Mann are asking for:

          The undersigned organizations, dedicated both to academic freedom and the exchange of scholarly and scientific ideas and to the critically important ideals of government transparency that are embodied by FOIA, urge the University of Virginia to follow Chancellor Martin’s lead in balancing the interests in public disclosure against the public interest in academic freedom, which the University of Virginia has recognized in its faculty handbook as “an essential ingredient of an environment of academic excellence.”

          In addition, the Virginia FOIA statute expressly provides an exemption for “data, records or information of a proprietary nature produced or collected by or for faculty or staff of public institutions of higher education . . . in the conduct of or as a result of research on medical, scientific, technical or scholarly issues . . . where such data, records or information has not been publicly released, published, copyrighted or patented.”

          That’s quite a comfy blanket, particularly as it allows the University wide discretion to decide what might fall under FOIA. As Horner noted, “Apparently this is an objection of convenience, and is therefore not serious.” Indeed, FOIA is important to these groups, but only if your views dovetail with theirs.

          Referring to the school’s legal bill, Horner thinks UVA has given us 500,000 reasons to believe Mann has something to hide. Had the University spent the same amount defending Michaels, the left would have howled that he was hiding something and UVA was wasting precious resources defending a charlatan.

          in the end, this whole affair leaves us in quite a pickle. If we open the documents, we’ve embraced politically-motivated prosecutions. If they remain sealed, we will never know whether Mann did anything illegal. If even the narrowed subpoena or the FOIA are unsuccessful, the laws upon which they are based become irrelevant.

          So which alternative will it be?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        huapakechi continues with his laziness—-using denial and diversion to distract rsther than make any real arguments. He asks, “Didn’t you state that there were no FOIA lawsuits? What about the others I listed?”. He didn’t “list” any unfortunately—-just sloppily plucked some citations for propaganda purposes. I pointed out two well known cases that have been resolved, one of which was a FOIA case—-the rest are all old and have been resolved as I stated. ALL were garbage citations (as I have also stated).

        I stated to HK, “Cuccinelli and the State of VA LOST the case where they were demanding access to Michael Mann’s work. PROVE IT DIDN’T HAPPEN!”

        So what does he do? More of the same—-a long clip copied from somewhere that IS about the UVA-Mann-Cuccinelli case but is SO OLD that it talks about how the case WILL go before the VA Supreme Court. Guess what, folks? It DID go before the VA Supreme Court, Cuccinelli got egg all over his face and was laughed out of the building, and HK is STILL wasting our time and disrespecting our intelligence with his foolish pursuit of meaningless old trash. HInkle’s column was just a right wing “:fishing expedition” in the oceans of truth—-the case NEVER had any merit and was just one of several our KookyNelly cooked up to satisfy his Tea Party base.

        Hinkle said of Kooky, “…he is not a grand inquisitor putting all of climate science on trial. His job is to enforce the law. To that end, he should have some concrete grounds for thinking the law has been broken. Cuccinelli doesn’t”. Hinkle was wrong in the first case and right in the second.

        And it is interesting that HK would bring up Michaels. “Michaels was hounded out of his post as state climatologists by the Kaine administration for holding unorthodox climate change views” Michaels was JUST PLAIN FIRED for being a biased AGW denier and not doing his job. He is now safely ensconced at the CATO Institute and admits proudly that half the funding for his work comes from fossil fuel interests. There’s a reason we elected Kaine first as Governor and now as our new Senator in VA—-he does the right thing, as he did in FIRING Michaels.

        Once more HK shows us that he is lazy and a lightweight when it comes to argument and logic. Of course, he did once say that all he wanted to do was “pester” people like GALT and I—-he is probably tickled pink that we pay him any attention. He is certainly good at “pestering”—-like a demented and retarded puppy nipping at the heels of his betters—-who will bat him down but allow him to live in the hopes that one day he will grow up enough to at least run behind the big dogs—-he will never catch up.

        • Huapakechi

          Well, you’ve kept to the pattern. Deny, deflect, denigrate, and ridicule.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Huapakechi says, “Well, you’ve kept to the pattern”

        Yep, I have denied or deflected nothing (unlike you), and ridiculing someone like you (who sits up and begs for it) is so easy that I’m almost ashamed to do so.

        You’ve been noticed—–wag your puppy tail and enjoy!

        Come back when you have something significant (and truthful) to contribute.

  • Practical please

    There’re a few things everybody is missing here no one is talking about how the EPA rules have kept us from building any new refineries in the USA in over 30 years that is why the some of the oil will have to be exported also we are wasting refinery capacity because we are letting state and city governments set different standards for gas ,so you have
    Refinery capacity siting to make winter high altitude gas for Denver or summer gas for NY and so on one national standard would free up capacity and bring down prices and done right wouldn’t increase pollution

    As far as clean electricity goes I’m all for it but there are a few things you are all missing again
    1 there is huge line loss due to resistance about 1/3 in 200 miles so as nice as it would be to cover the desert of Nevada with solar panels by the time the power got to LA most would be lost to lines ( don’t believe me plug your table saw or space heater into a 150 ft cord and see what happens)

    2 the cost of those big windmills is about 1 million each and in the time it takes to produce that much power (10yrs) they break even and will need to be replaced even the pole and concrete pad.

    3 how about instead of handing a half of billion tax payer dollars to solyndra let’s encourage any renewable energy idea with tax deferment while in development stage so that private Capitol will be used the money will be there if there is a potential for profit that way the people who’s money is at stake will be there to make sure the best people are in place to develop the technology and they can weed out the CEO s that are getting over paid and not helping the cause this would need to have over site to make sure it’s not a tax dodge ,then once the energy system is working faze in the tax on the profits slowly so that the r&d costs can be recovered and then we all would gain clean energy and a thriving tax paying job producing company no upfront tax dollars gone to a bankrupt company

    • Mick

      I find the whole windmill thing ironic. We want to protect Gaeia and all Her creatures, then we put up bird-mincers all over the place. We couldn’t take a saw to a tree due to spotted owls, yet at the base of a local chopper I found the remains of Canda and snow geese, bald eagles, and sparrowhawks that I could identify, as well as various other birds; in the surrounding snow were tracks from coyotes, skunks and raccoons. At least the garbage-eaters are getting something out of the deal; my electric bill is higher, not lower than when on coal-fired.

      • WILDFIRE

        the bird mincer is likely not a contingency they look at, but could likely be corrected with a shroud of some sort to cover the moving parts without effecting the functionality of the wind mill. However they will not vest money into that safety feature until they are mandated to do it. Because that additional cost will not bring them any profits.

        As far as your energy bill going down, don’t hold your breathe on that, That is just a selling point to try to get people to buy into the program, same as they pulled with Obamacare being some $2500 less on average and we see how that lie is working out. Wind, solar are simply not cost effective yet. Even if you wanted to set up your own solar system on your house, the cost are around $20 k and up. It would take the better part of 10 + years before the average person would benefit from converting.

        Also look for your bill to go up with add on taxes with savvy names such as universal charges and things like that so you can pay for other peoples energy bills.

      • http://yahoo.com Maynard

        I am a bird lover and a tree hugger too.(I know admitting that ranks me right up there with those horrible socialists who don’t think all earth’s resources should be used for greedy ends) I feel there may be a way to scare the birds off of the dicers. I heard the people who are destroying their habitats with their filthy oil shale extraction have placed noise makers around the poisonous cess pools their rip off of the pristine Canadian forests have been creating.. These pools are murder for wildelife.
        I will research the possible ways to save their lives from the extremely slow moving blades and get back to you.

    • huapakechi

      You raise a valid point about the long dearth in building new refineries. Much of this is due to machinations by the epa and environmental (opec front) groups.
      Electrical line loss is due to a combination of factors. Frequency of the AC current, size of the conductor, and voltage are the key factors. High voltage transmission lines are more efficient that the figures you stated.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission
      Long-distance transmission of electricity (thousands of kilometers) is cheap and efficient, with costs of US$0.005–0.02/kWh (compared to annual averaged large producer costs of US$0.01–0.025/kWh, retail rates upwards of US$0.10/kWh, and multiples of retail for instantaneous suppliers at unpredicted highest demand moments).[7] Thus distant suppliers can be cheaper than local sources (e.g., New York City buys a lot[quantify] of electricity from Canada).
      Solar panels are even worse than you stated. Aside from the ten year payback of the original investment, the panels degrade in performance over time, and the storage media (batteries) with associated inverters to change the current from DC to AC are a further recurring expense.

      Windmills are great, except they are noisy, expensive, require expensive maintence, fly apart or burn, kill birds and bats, and they don’t work when the wind doesn’t blow. One sure way to stop the wind is to build a wind generator.

      A better investment would be a small reactor. They are sealed, safe, good for at least ten years at full power, and relatively cheap. They can be delivered by a semi, buried, and ignored until it’s time to change ‘em.
      http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle/Power-Reactors/Small-Nuclear-Power-Reactors/#.UU_i7De4KSo
      Another benefit would be the eradication of the huge power line towers and vulnerable wires between the large production facilities and the end user. The biggest problem with a small reactor program would be rabid anti-nuclear protestors. Usually the same people that demand that we stop drilling for oil and gas.

      • http://yahoo.com Maynard

        Mr. Huapakechi: Maybe you have not heard that radioactive wastes last for thousands of years and that nuclear power plants produce lots of them. Nobody wants them in their backyard. Do the names Three Mile Island, Chernobyl or Japanese tsunami ring a bell? Accidents happen and cancers for generations to come will be the result. The area around Chernobyl will be a ghost town for the forseeable future. It can’t happen here. (Famous last words). Barry Commoner, long ago, said that nuclear reactors are the most expensive way to boil water known to man. They heat water into steam.
        What about clean cheap photovoltaics that can be put on our rooftops? What about using the earth’s warmth to bring temperatures up to a higher base level or cool in hot weather? Just because humans stumbled upon filthy fossil fuels first doe NOT mean we cannot change and adapt. That trait is why we are so populated the world over. The adaptability of the human species must not be prevented by the greedy profit motive. Money is paper or metal.
        Does this knowledge that we must give up dangerous outdtated methods of obtaining energy make us RABID? No, but not giving them up will make our species and many others DEAD.
        No, it means we must not fall in the trap of thinking there is no other way. Take hydrogen in every drop of water. It is the fuel of the future and we should be making it TOP Priority.
        Instead, Obama’s energy czar killed Bush’s funding into it in 2008.

        • huapakechi

          You ‘true believers’ are amusing. You’ve never heard of reprocessing? There’s also a facility under Yucca Mountain that’s never been used, because some lawyers convinced a judge that it might leak some water a few thousand years from now.
          The area around Chernobyl is so radioactive that it exports crops. There is more radiation released during cancer treatment than was released by TMI. The Japanese pretty much had things under control at Fukushima until they ran out of diesel fuel. Why didn’t they have a Stirling cycle engine to power their emergency generators?
          I agree that huge nuclear power plants are expensive, labor intensive, and dangerous. Small and self contained reactors are the way to go. When was the FIRST time you’ve heard of a Naval nuclear power plant having problems?
          Heat pump systems are great. If you live in an area with volcanic activity. Up here you can spend $600/month on electricity alone to run ‘em.
          Got 20 years to recoup the installation of a solar system? How much are the storage batteries and how often are they replaced?
          What’s a few thousand endangered species of birds and bats chopped by wind generators? What’s the cost per KWH?
          CNG/LNG works. It just takes the volume of the car’s trunk to have a tank to store more than 100 miles worth of fuel. A recent incident in Las Vegas shows how well it burns too.
          Hydrogen is a great idea. Make it economically feasible with your own money.

  • Rabble-rouser

    What’s with John Myers’s hair in that picture. Looks like a mug shot. Got arrested did we?

  • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

    For Daniel Melton,

    Re: Your comments, both above and below.

    First, thank for joining us….( below ) and while you were not acknowledged directly
    by me, the closing sentence was mostly for your benefit……

    How does one become a “top commenter” in “facebook land”? Given the
    probable inputs……quantity and quality……while factoring in both venue and
    its subjective bias, does one post with more “authority” having “earned” the
    STAR? BTW, I have noticed that some sites include a dislike option?

    In any case, is there a formula that you are aware of? Or does the star just appear
    one day as if by magic? ( and just one star? ) I am curious, so if you know….indulge
    me.

    You seem to have covered all the bases……..selective evidence, subjective labeling,
    misdirection, logical fallacies, etc………..while saying absolutely nothing, and
    managing to stay reasonably civil in the process. Admirable restraint in the
    scheme of things…….and completely worthless in terms of logically reasoned
    intelligence regarding the relevant evidence, and its proper priority in the
    determination of the correct course of action in terms of the “common benefit”.

    Recognition of “perceived self interest” as the “least common denominator”
    in appealing to the generally naive realists……would be to raise the threat
    of increased fuel costs and specifically, for this “article”, the suggestion that
    the XL Pipeline……is somehow, a solution, and as such a deterrent, to the
    possibility……that increased fuel costs can be avoided by its approval and
    completion.

    It ( the article ) ends with this dire prediction……

    Without a lifeline from the Canadian oil sands, the inevitable will happen: the Mideast will explode while the U.S. economy, under the yoke of $10 per gallon gasoline, will implode.

    invoking “national security interest”, catastrophic economic consequences,
    conflagration in the middle east, and a political agenda directed at the consistent
    target that is the “mantra” for the “mindless faction”, who couldn’t think their
    way out of a paper bag, even if the bag wasn’t there.

    Currently the destination of the XL Pipeline ends at a refineries with the capability
    (design) to process this type of oil…….they are not idle, BUT the source of this
    oil is Venezuelan which costs more for these refineries……than the discounted
    Canadian version. Unfortunately, price is determined by the world market,
    speculation, etc. so how does the XL Pipeline affect world market price of
    oil and the claim of “national security interests”……as it relates to “energy
    independence”?

    Since the oil is going to go to where ever it can get the highest profit margin,
    the only other factor that is actually involved, if we approach this question on
    the two specific concerns of cost and domestic supply……is that of the ease
    with which the domestic supply ( and the transport costs ) can be made
    available for export.

    We currently are experiencing an actual downward price movement for
    natural gas, due to the increased supply ( domestic ) now being tapped.
    BUT the real reason for this, is that at present, the infrastructure is
    not available to export this product to overseas markets. ( port facilities,
    lng tankers, etc. )

    The effect of the XL Pipeline, will simply take a product whose current costs
    make it more efficient to refine and sell domestically, and allow it to be
    processed at a lower cost in a location where it can now be exported.

    So, in terms of “cost” and “securing domestic supply”, the XL Pipeline
    has precisely the opposite effect……..than that of the “claimed reasons”
    for building it. ( without even having to consider anything else, which
    consists of all the other negative consequences and the single relevant
    positive exaggeration that is easily discredited, provided someone is astute
    enough to actually make the attempt.)

    • huapakechi

      I have no idea how one becomes a “top commentator” on facebook. My only utilization to that tool is to log in to some of the forums I frequent. Many of those have a “like” button, perhaps that is the factor for being awarded a ‘star’. Don’t know, don’t care.

      As to your critique of my posting, I simply employ many of the tactics used by the mob of sneering liberals who infest these comment forums, but I use sources that back my opinion.

      Who are you to criticize the relevance and content of my posts? I have discovered that liberals attempt to bully and shout down those who disagree by claiming the right to define and limit the sources, terminology, and semantics of the debate. I simply refuse to play that game.

      When you post bafflegab such as “Recognition of “perceived self interest” as the “least common denominator” in appealing to the generally naive realists……would be to raise the threat of increased fuel costs and specifically, for this “article”, the suggestion that the XL Pipeline……is somehow, a solution, and as such a deterrent, to the possibility……that increased fuel costs can be avoided by its approval and completion.” I have to take a break to stop laughing and actually attempt to translate this pompous verbosity into English. I haven’t seen phraseology like this since I had to read articles in Pravda. For your information, “realists” are not naive, and never will be. Socialists such as yourself, on the other hand demand that reality conform to their expectations. Oh yes, a stable source of supply will reduce prices. Economics 101.

      Your “article”, (unsourced) ends with the ‘dire prediction’ “Without a lifeline from the Canadian oil sands, the inevitable will happen: the Mideast will explode while the U.S. economy, under the yoke of $10 per gallon gasoline, will implode.” presupposes that oil production in the continental United States will be completely stifled. While the current administration has attempted this tactic, they can only control the land and offshore oil fields owned by the federal government. The “article” also ignores the mutiplicity of factors that comprise economics at a national level. Hard as they might try, they cannot stop drilling on private land, thus the Bakken. This administration may not last out the current term, and even if they manage to survive the full four years, they will be so embroiled in scandal and contention that the survivors may flee to friendlier countries rather than live in what would amount to solitary confinement security.

      I am having difficulty discerning whether you are posting clips from other articles or the disconnected fragments without capitalization and quotation are your own rants. Paragraphs such as this:
      invoking “national security interest”, catastrophic economic consequences,
      conflagration in the middle east, and a political agenda directed at the consistent
      target that is the “mantra” for the “mindless faction”, who couldn’t think their
      way out of a paper bag, even if the bag wasn’t there. (copied verbatum)
      indicate a confused thought process and hypercritical attitude.

      From your post: “Currently the destination of the XL Pipeline ends at a refineries with the capability (design) to process this type of oil…….they are not idle, BUT the source of this
      oil is Venezuelan which costs more for these refineries……than the discounted Canadian version. Unfortunately, price is determined by the world market, speculation, etc. so how does the XL Pipeline affect world market price of oil and the claim of “national security interests”……as it relates to “energy independence”?”
      I see the question mark, but is the foregoing diatribe a political statement or is it an appeal to the easily confused?
      1) Cheaper raw material means reduced price for the product.
      2) Venezuela can sell its’ oil elsewhere. This increases the worldwide supply. More supply, cheaper product. Economics 101. The only recourse the oil cartels have is to stop the pipeline (the watermelon ‘save the earth’ eco-terrorist movement) or to attempt market manipulation that can only bring about the collapse of the cartel.

      From your post: “We currently are experiencing an actual downward price movement for
      natural gas, due to the increased supply ( domestic ) now being tapped.
      BUT the real reason for this, is that at present, the infrastructure is
      not available to export this product to overseas markets. ( port facilities,
      lng tankers, etc. )”
      You presuppose that there will be no benefit to the lessors, drillers, producers, investors, and ancillary industries and various vendors that flock to such booming economies. I know several Bakken millionaires. Even the bar owners out there are rich. Their biggest problem is getting supply trucks in through the constant stream of trucks hauling for the wells. I’ve heard rumor that McDonalds is building housing for their $20/hour employees.

      Keep it up. I haven’t had this much fun since I was interrogating prisoners in VN.

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        I don’t presuppose anything…and you have been dismissed……of course, being
        a “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate”……maybe you believe you are
        Daniel Melton……and that you DO post on “facebook”?

        Try learning some basic HTML commands…..and with a few decades of directed
        study…..you might be worth my time……at the moment you still can read, so that
        mass of rhetoric is not worthy of a response…..

        BYE NOW!!!!!!

        • huapakechi

          Do I detect an infantile tantrum? Are you declaring victory and refusing to play further? Why should I learn HtML commands? If and when I think such knowledge necessary, it should not be difficult. Until then, I can utilize the knowledge of others.

          *”The “article” is the one by MYERS, the one you and everyone else
          is responding to……..the TOPIC of THIS THREAD…..why you are here?”
          At no time did I use the word “outsourced”. Are you having problems?
          Shouldn’t you cite your source each and every time you refer to the article, in published material it’s called a bibliography. Since you have been rather scattershot with your responses, you owe the reader at least that much.

          Why am I here? To irritate you, of course. It delights me to drive you pompous pseudo-intellectuals into incoherent sputtering rage.

          Dismissed? I’m just getting started.

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        That would be can’t read……and since I am here……

        Your “article”, (unsourced) ends with the ‘dire prediction’…..

        Which is supposedly you quoting me……while adding ( “outsourced” )…
        it is why you were and are being “ignored”!

        The “article” is the one by MYERS, the one you and everyone else
        is responding to……..the TOPIC of THIS THREAD…..why you are here?

        Learn where you are…….try to figure out what you are doing…….and

        LEARN TO READ!!!!!!!

        You are STILL DISMISSED!!!!!!

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        You didn’t?……because I didn’t….and I copied and pasted what you wrote….

        which any idiot can see for themselves…….well clearly not any IDIOT.

        BTW I agree…….I would “owe” the “reader” whatever “clarity” they require.

        But as a “willfully ignorant, functional ILLITERATE”…..you do not qualify
        as a reader………

        • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.melton.353 Huapakechi

          Please reference your comments. It’s difficult to asertain your particular objection through the disjointed fragments of your post. Perhaps you are replying to a comment made to another of your identities?

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        What part of “you are a “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate”!!!!! do you not get?

        You are the only one who responded here, and the comment wasn’t
        addressed to you……..

        Which makes you the only “functional illiterate” responding to the comment not
        addressed to you…….

        Do the math.

        • huapakechi

          I just saw a high, hanging curve ball and I just had to swing.

          You seem a might testy. Something bothering you?

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        “willfully ignorant, functional illiteracy”…….SNAFU……

        So, no. SSDD…..you?

        • huapakechi

          Is that all ya got?

          GIGO.

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        w.i.f.i’s are irrelevant….nothing is needed. Q.E.D.

    • http://yahoo.com Maynard

      Good analysis GALT. Unfortunately, like with my long winded messages, many will not read them. Others will not get the bottom line which is Keystone is only good for the in-crowd (The UN Ambassador, Susan Rice, is said to have a million invested.) My guess is that Obama is sniffing the wind and getting a lot of pressure from the filthy rich filthy fossil fuel folk. Like NDAA 2012, I expect him to cave at the last minute.
      No way Keystone makes economic sense for the rest of us and it is dangerous. It goes over our nation’s largest aquifer and the New Madrid Fault. Who will clean up the mess if there’s a leak? If anyone does, it will be us the taxpayers. Remember that excludes the big and powerful. Why should they pay more when they can brainwash all the people scared of Socialists?
      Pelosi has it right but some people think she spends too much on hair-dos. Hardly a sensible argument.
      WE HAVE CLEAN, ABUNDANT ENERGY ALTERNATIVES, BUT BECAUSE THE BIG BUCKS are controlled by the fossil fuel monopoly, we have to fight through many barricades they put up to convince the people, who are not the sharpest tools in the shed when it comes to scientific understanding It is an uphill battle mankind will probably lose. Like lemmings, we will follow the BPs and Shells and the Military Industrial complex over the cliff.
      The problem by the way is not just CO2. Nitrates,acid rain, carbon monoxide, heavy metals, water pollution, air borne particulates, political wrangling over limited resources – all doom us to an ever sicker Earth.

      • http://gravatar.com/plfprime GALT

        In terms of science and all things empirical, humans have not “adapted”
        well…..while they have always been curious as to the why of things, in
        order to disspell ignorance, there seems to be no particular rigor,
        regarding the accuracy or validity for the answers which serve this purpose.

        Given this predeliction when analyzed from a historical perspective we observe

        1.) Any answer is preferable to no answer.

        2.) Convenient answers which require no effort, and are preferred over
        inconvenient answers which do.

        3.) Regardless of which of the conditions apply to the “answers” that are
        derived, no thought is given to a.) the consistency of any particular answer
        with other answers., and: b.) any anticipation of the consequences as it
        would pertain to the effects of the answers chosen, intended or unintended.

        With the arrival of empirical answers, humans have been presented with
        the additional conundrum of being confronted with the stark nature of
        the REALITY of their existence, which not only exposes and disposes of
        the possibility that any previous mythology can be relied on as a plausible
        explanation for it, but also the congruent fact that in terms of logically
        reasoned intelligence, humans are neither endowed with this ability, nor
        has their behavior ever been directed by it, but is still being driven
        by those things which are common to all other forms of life.

        Due to all of the above, and the arrogance that persists and is only
        available within mythologies, these are the preferred choices…….and
        this cognitive dissonance, permits all manner of manipulation to
        achieve outcomes whose benefit is directed at specific, immediate
        and individual advantage to claim success…..in terms of environment
        whose conditions have been altered to such an extent that this outcome
        produces precisely the opposite effect, for both the individual and the
        environment, where the latter will no longer be capable of supporting
        the existence of the former…….providing the final proof, that “humans”
        are NOT, nor have ever been INTELLIGENT.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.