Infowars Network | October 04 2005 By Steve Watson, Alex Jones & Paul Watson
They make the profits on creating artificial scarcity.
"Peak oil" is pure military-industrial-complex propaganda.
Publicly available CFR and Club of Rome strategy manuals from 30 years ago say that a global government needs to control the world population through neo-feudalism by creating artificial scarcity. Now that the social architects have de-industrialized the United States, they are going to blame our economic disintegration on lack of energy supplies.
Globalization is all about consolidation. Now that the world economy has become so centralized through the Globalists operations, they are going to continue to consolidate and blame it on the West's "evil" overconsumption of fossil fuels, while at the same time blocking the development and integration of renewable clean technologies.
In other words, Peak oil is a scam to create artificial scarcity and drive prices up. Meanwhile, alternative fuel technologies which have been around for decades are intentionally suppressed.
This year in particular we have seen a strong hike in oil prices and are being told to simply get used to it because this is the way it is going to be. In the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita gas prices have shot up amid claims of vast energy shortages. Americans are being asked to turn off lights, change thermostat settings, drive slower, insulate homes and take other steps. Meanwhile the oil companies continue to make record profits.
Even The New York Times pointed out that the recent "energy crisis" seems to be purely tactical:
"To Mr. Bush's critics, the call for conservation smacked of showmanship, or of shutting the garage door after the S.U.V. had been stolen. After all, the president has spent the past weeks dropping into the hurricane region from the fuel-guzzling Air Force One, which the Air Force estimates costs $40,000 an hour to fly."
Flying in the face of the so called peak oil crisis are the facts. If we are running out of oil so quickly then why are reserves being continually increased and production skyrocketing?
in the 1980s OPEC decided to switch to a quota production system based on the size of reserves. The larger the reserves a country said it had the more it could pump.
Earlier this year Saudi Arabia reportedly increased its crude reserves by around 200 billion barrels. Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials.
"These huge reserves enable the Kingdom to remain a major oil producer for between 70 and 100 years, even if it raises its production capacity to 15 million barrels per day, which may well happen during the next 15 years,"
Is this the normal course of behaviour if we are currently at the peak for oil production? The answer is no, it's the normal course of action for increasing production.
There have also been reports that Russia has vastly increased its reserves even beyond those of Saudi Arabia. Why would they do this if they believed there would be no more oil to get hold of? It seems clear that Russia is ready for unlimited future production of oil.
There is a clear contradiction between the peak oil theory and the continual increase in oil reserves and production.
New untapped oil sources are being discovered everywhere on earth. The notion that there are somehow only a few sources that the West is trying to monopolize is a complete myth, promulgated by those raking in the massive profits. After all how do you make huge profits from something available in abundance?
A Wall Street Journal Article by Peter Huber and Mark Mills describes how the price of oil remains high because the cost of oil remains so low. We are not dependent on the middle east for oil because the world's supplies are diminishing, it is because it is more profitable to tap middle east supplies. Thus the myth of peak oil is needed in order to silence the call for tapping the planet's other plentiful reserves.
Richard Branson has even stated his intention to set up his own refinery because the price of oil is artificially being kept high whilst new sources are not being explored and new refineries not being built.
"Opec is effectively an illegal cartel that can meet happily, nobody takes them to court," Branson has said. "They collude to keep prices high." So if more refineries were built and different resources tapped, the oil prices would come down and the illegal cartel OPEC would see profits diminish. It is no wonder then that the argument for peak oil is so appealing to OPEC. If no one invests to build refineries because they don't believe there is enough oil, then who benefits? OPEC and the oil elites of course.
It seems that every time there is some kind of energy crisis, OPEC INCREASES production. The remarkable thing about this is that they always state that they are doing it to ease prices, yet prices always shoot up because they promulgate the myth that they are putting some of their last reserves into the market. Analysts seem confused and always state that they don't believe upping production will cut prices.
In a recent report the International Monetary Fund projected that global demand for oil by 2030 would reach 139 million barrels a day, a 65 percent increase.
"We should expect to live with high and volatile oil prices," said Raghuram Rajan, the IMF's chief economist. "In short, it's going to be a rocky road going forward."
Yet independent analysts and even some within OPEC seem to believe that the demand for oil is diminishing. Why the contradiction?
The peak oil and demand myth is peddled by the establishment-run fake left activist groups, OPEC and globalist arms such as the IMF.
Rolling Stone magazine even carried an article in its April issue heavily biased towards making people believe the peak oil lie.
The Scientific evidence also flies in the face of the peak oil theory. Scientific research dating back over a hundred years, more recently updated in a Scientific Paper Published In 'Energia' suggests that oil is abiotic, not the product of long decayed biological matter. Oil, for better or for worse, is not a non-renewable resource. It, like coal, and natural gas, replenishes from sources within the mantle of earth.
No coincidence then that the Russians, who pioneered this research have pumped expenditure into deep underground oil excavation.
We have previously scientifically exposed the scam behind peak oil. Here is a 1 hour+ audio clip featuring Alex Jones' comments on peak oil and then the analysis of respected scientific commentator Dr. Nick Begich who presents evidence to suggest the idea of Peak oil is artificial.
A dangerous fallout precedent being set is that people on both the left and right believe wars are being fought in order to tap the last reserves of oil on the planet. The "coalition of the willing", whoever they may be for any given war, will not pay particular attention to refuting this claim because it allows them a reason to start and continue said war.
Even though many will see it as immoral, many will subconsciously attach it as a reason for the war. In reality the war is purely for profit, power and control, oil can be a part of that, but only if the peak oil claim is upheld.
If we continue to let the corrupt elite tell us we are wholly dependent on oil, we may reach a twisted situation whereby they can justify starvation and mass global poverty, perhaps even depopulation, even within the western world due to the fact that our energy supplies are finished.
Peak oil is just another weapon the globalists have in their arsenal to move towards a new world order where the elite get richer and everyone else falls into line
> They make the profits on creating artificial scarcity.
Claim?
> "Peak oil" is pure military-industrial-complex propaganda.
Claim?
> Publicly available CFR and Club of Rome strategy manuals from 30 years > ago say that a global government needs to control the world population > through neo-feudalism by creating artificial scarcity. Now that the > social architects have de-industrialized the United States, they are > going to blame our economic disintegration on lack of energy supplies.
Quite different from what I read. Oh sure, the CFR has known about peak oil for 30 years but that is not the same as, 'government needs to control...' Or is it?
> Globalization is all about consolidation. Now that the world economy > has become so centralized through the Globalists operations, they are > going to continue to consolidate and blame it on the West's "evil" > overconsumption of fossil fuels, while at the same time blocking the > development and integration of renewable clean technologies.
Shades of rant. 'Renewable clean technologies...' At least the folks on the sci. groups knows what cost is all about. Cost is the stumbling block, not the 'conspirators'.
> In other words, Peak oil is a scam to create artificial scarcity and > drive prices up. Meanwhile, alternative fuel technologies which have > been around for decades are intentionally suppressed.
Alternatives are neglected. Cost, cost, cost. A U.S. GDP a year is required to liquefy 4mbl/d of coal.
> This year in particular we have seen a strong hike in oil prices and > are being told to simply get used to it because this is the way it is > going to be. In the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita gas prices have > shot up amid claims of vast energy shortages.
Wow there cowboy. Lack of refinery capacity is real.
> Americans are being asked > to turn off lights, change thermostat settings, drive slower, insulate > homes and take other steps. Meanwhile the oil companies continue to > make record profits.
Yes they do. So?...
> Even The New York Times pointed out that the recent "energy crisis" > seems to be purely tactical:
> "To Mr. Bush's critics, the call for conservation smacked of > showmanship, or of shutting the garage door after the S.U.V. had been > stolen. After all, the president has spent the past weeks dropping into > the hurricane region from the fuel-guzzling Air Force One, which the > Air Force estimates costs $40,000 an hour to fly."
Yep, stupid stuff. But does A mean B?
> Flying in the face of the so called peak oil crisis are the facts. If > we are running out of oil so quickly then why are reserves being > continually increased and production skyrocketing?
What? Now that is a dumb insupportable claim. Production was swung in, the capacity was already there.
> in the 1980s OPEC decided to switch to a quota production system based > on the size of reserves. The larger the reserves a country said it had > the more it could pump.
Duhhhh.
> Earlier this year Saudi Arabia reportedly increased its crude reserves > by around 200 billion barrels. Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say > Officials.
If they say it often enough it becomes truth?
> "These huge reserves enable the Kingdom to remain a major oil > producer for between 70 and 100 years, even if it raises its production > capacity to 15 million barrels per day, which may well happen during > the next 15 years,"
More of the same....
> Is this the normal course of behaviour if we are currently at the peak > for oil production? The answer is no, it's the normal course of action > for increasing production.
The Saudi's say it so it must be true???
> There have also been reports that Russia has vastly increased its > reserves even beyond those of Saudi Arabia. Why would they do this if > they believed there would be no more oil to get hold of? It seems clear > that Russia is ready for unlimited future production of oil.
Really!? Then why didn't they save their own butts rather than fall into decline?
> There is a clear contradiction between the peak oil theory and the > continual increase in oil reserves and production.
Still haven't seen numbers that back this claim.
> New untapped oil sources are being discovered everywhere on earth. The > notion that there are somehow only a few sources that the West is > trying to monopolize is a complete myth, promulgated by those raking in > the massive profits. After all how do you make huge profits from > something available in abundance?
Crank alert. A means B therefor it is true?
> A Wall Street Journal Article by Peter Huber and Mark Mills describes > how the price of oil remains high because the cost of oil remains so > low. We are not dependent on the middle east for oil because the > world's supplies are diminishing, it is because it is more profitable > to tap middle east supplies. Thus the myth of peak oil is needed in > order to silence the call for tapping the planet's other plentiful > reserves.
Where are these reserves?
> Richard Branson has even stated his intention to set up his own > refinery because the price of oil is artificially being kept high > whilst new sources are not being explored and new refineries not being > built.
Wait a minute. Is this about refinery capacity or oil production capacity? Do these guys know what they are talking about?
> "Opec is effectively an illegal cartel that can meet happily, nobody > takes them to court," Branson has said. "They collude to keep prices > high."
Who's 'law' are we referring to?
> So if more refineries were built and different resources tapped, the > oil prices would come down and the illegal cartel OPEC would see > profits diminish. It is no wonder then that the argument for peak oil > is so appealing to OPEC. If no one invests to build refineries because > they don't believe there is enough oil, then who benefits? OPEC and the > oil elites of course.
Now it is a convoluted A means B.
> It seems that every time there is some kind of energy crisis, OPEC > INCREASES production. The remarkable thing about this is that they > always state that they are doing it to ease prices, yet prices always > shoot up because they promulgate the myth that they are putting some of > their last reserves into the market.
Jeee. Another stupid claim. Show us the record.
> Analysts seem confused and always > state that they don't believe upping production will cut prices.
??? (dumb)
> In a recent report the International Monetary Fund projected that > global demand for oil by 2030 would reach 139 million barrels a day, a > 65 percent increase.
> "We should expect to live with high and volatile oil prices," said > Raghuram Rajan, the IMF's chief economist. "In short, it's going to be > a rocky road going forward."
Damn. I need some boots.
> Yet independent analysts and even some within OPEC seem to believe that > the demand for oil is diminishing. Why the contradiction?
???? (boots)
> The peak oil and demand myth is peddled by the establishment-run fake > left activist groups, OPEC and globalist arms such as the IMF.
I don't think boots are enough for this BS.
> Rolling Stone magazine even carried an article in its April issue > heavily biased towards making people believe the peak oil lie.
> The Scientific evidence also flies in the face of the peak oil theory. > Scientific research dating back over a hundred years, more recently > updated in a Scientific Paper Published In 'Energia' suggests that oil > is abiotic, not the product of long decayed biological matter...
So all those production numbers for the last 100 years are lies? What a bunch of BS.
> Oil, for > better or for worse, is not a non-renewable resource. It, like coal, > and natural gas, replenishes from sources within the mantle of earth.
Unsupported claim.
> No coincidence then that the Russians, who pioneered this research have > pumped expenditure into deep underground oil excavation.
Cite?
> We have previously scientifically exposed the scam behind peak oil.
BAWHAWHAWHAWHAW!
> Here is a 1 hour+ audio clip featuring Alex Jones' comments on peak oil > and then the analysis of respected scientific commentator Dr. Nick > Begich who presents evidence to suggest the idea of Peak oil is > artificial.
Don't waste my time.
> A dangerous fallout precedent being set is that people on both the left > and right believe wars are being fought in order to tap the last > reserves of oil on the planet. The "coalition of the willing", whoever > they may be for any given war, will not pay particular attention to > refuting this claim because it allows them a reason to start and > continue said war.
Where are the numbers?
> Even though many will see it as immoral, many will subconsciously > attach it as a reason for the war. In reality the war is purely for > profit, power and control, oil can be a part of that, but only if the > peak oil claim is upheld.
Oh, there may be war. But because of the have nots. Why doesn't Indonesia just increase production if the above claims are true?
> If we continue to let the corrupt elite tell us we are wholly dependent > on oil, we may reach a twisted situation whereby they can justify > starvation and mass global poverty, perhaps even depopulation, even > within the western world due to the fact that our energy supplies are > finished.
Oh brother...
> Peak oil is just another weapon the globalists have in their arsenal to > move towards a new world order where the elite get richer and everyone > else falls into line
I see. Let 'them' start WWIII and profit from obliterating the planet. Do you see how stupid this sounds?
> | October 04 2005 > > By Steve Watson, Alex Jones & Paul Watson
> > They make the profits on creating artificial scarcity.
> Claim?
> > "Peak oil" is pure military-industrial-complex propaganda.
> Claim?
> > Publicly available CFR and Club of Rome strategy manuals from 30 years > > ago say that a global government needs to control the world population > > through neo-feudalism by creating artificial scarcity. Now that the > > social architects have de-industrialized the United States, they are > > going to blame our economic disintegration on lack of energy supplies.
> Quite different from what I read. Oh sure, the CFR has known about peak > oil for 30 years but that is not the same as, 'government needs to > control...' Or is it?
> > Globalization is all about consolidation. Now that the world economy > > has become so centralized through the Globalists operations, they are > > going to continue to consolidate and blame it on the West's "evil" > > overconsumption of fossil fuels, while at the same time blocking the > > development and integration of renewable clean technologies.
> Shades of rant. 'Renewable clean technologies...' At least the folks on > the sci. groups knows what cost is all about. Cost is the stumbling > block, not the 'conspirators'.
> > In other words, Peak oil is a scam to create artificial scarcity and > > drive prices up. Meanwhile, alternative fuel technologies which have > > been around for decades are intentionally suppressed.
> Alternatives are neglected. Cost, cost, cost. A U.S. GDP a year is > required to liquefy 4mbl/d of coal.
> > This year in particular we have seen a strong hike in oil prices and > > are being told to simply get used to it because this is the way it is > > going to be. In the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita gas prices have > > shot up amid claims of vast energy shortages.
> Wow there cowboy. Lack of refinery capacity is real.
> > Americans are being asked > > to turn off lights, change thermostat settings, drive slower, insulate > > homes and take other steps. Meanwhile the oil companies continue to > > make record profits.
> Yes they do. So?...
> > Even The New York Times pointed out that the recent "energy crisis" > > seems to be purely tactical:
> > "To Mr. Bush's critics, the call for conservation smacked of > > showmanship, or of shutting the garage door after the S.U.V. had been > > stolen. After all, the president has spent the past weeks dropping into > > the hurricane region from the fuel-guzzling Air Force One, which the > > Air Force estimates costs $40,000 an hour to fly."
> Yep, stupid stuff. But does A mean B?
> > Flying in the face of the so called peak oil crisis are the facts. If > > we are running out of oil so quickly then why are reserves being > > continually increased and production skyrocketing?
> What? Now that is a dumb insupportable claim. Production was swung in, > the capacity was already there.
> > in the 1980s OPEC decided to switch to a quota production system based > > on the size of reserves. The larger the reserves a country said it had > > the more it could pump.
> Duhhhh.
> > Earlier this year Saudi Arabia reportedly increased its crude reserves > > by around 200 billion barrels. Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say > > Officials.
> If they say it often enough it becomes truth?
> > "These huge reserves enable the Kingdom to remain a major oil > > producer for between 70 and 100 years, even if it raises its production > > capacity to 15 million barrels per day, which may well happen during > > the next 15 years,"
> More of the same....
> > Is this the normal course of behaviour if we are currently at the peak > > for oil production? The answer is no, it's the normal course of action > > for increasing production.
> The Saudi's say it so it must be true???
> > There have also been reports that Russia has vastly increased its > > reserves even beyond those of Saudi Arabia. Why would they do this if > > they believed there would be no more oil to get hold of? It seems clear > > that Russia is ready for unlimited future production of oil.
> Really!? Then why didn't they save their own butts rather than fall into > decline?
> > There is a clear contradiction between the peak oil theory and the > > continual increase in oil reserves and production.
> Still haven't seen numbers that back this claim.
> > New untapped oil sources are being discovered everywhere on earth. The > > notion that there are somehow only a few sources that the West is > > trying to monopolize is a complete myth, promulgated by those raking in > > the massive profits. After all how do you make huge profits from > > something available in abundance?
> Crank alert. A means B therefor it is true?
> > A Wall Street Journal Article by Peter Huber and Mark Mills describes > > how the price of oil remains high because the cost of oil remains so > > low. We are not dependent on the middle east for oil because the > > world's supplies are diminishing, it is because it is more profitable > > to tap middle east supplies. Thus the myth of peak oil is needed in > > order to silence the call for tapping the planet's other plentiful > > reserves.
> Where are these reserves?
> > Richard Branson has even stated his intention to set up his own > > refinery because the price of oil is artificially being kept high > > whilst new sources are not being explored and new refineries not being > > built.
> Wait a minute. Is this about refinery capacity or oil production > capacity? Do these guys know what they are talking about?
> > "Opec is effectively an illegal cartel that can meet happily, nobody > > takes them to court," Branson has said. "They collude to keep prices > > high."
> Who's 'law' are we referring to?
> > So if more refineries were built and different resources tapped, the > > oil prices would come down and the illegal cartel OPEC would see > > profits diminish. It is no wonder then that the argument for peak oil > > is so appealing to OPEC. If no one invests to build refineries because > > they don't believe there is enough oil, then who benefits? OPEC and the > > oil elites of course.
> Now it is a convoluted A means B.
> > It seems that every time there is some kind of energy crisis, OPEC > > INCREASES production. The remarkable thing about this is that they > > always state that they are doing it to ease prices, yet prices always > > shoot up because they promulgate the myth that they are putting some of > > their last reserves into the market.
> Jeee. Another stupid claim. Show us the record.
> > Analysts seem confused and always > > state that they don't believe upping production will cut prices.
> ??? (dumb)
> > In a recent report the International Monetary Fund projected that > > global demand for oil by 2030 would reach 139 million barrels a day, a > > 65 percent increase.
> > "We should expect to live with high and volatile oil prices," said > > Raghuram Rajan, the IMF's chief economist. "In short, it's going to be > > a rocky road going forward."
> Damn. I need some boots.
> > Yet independent analysts and even some within OPEC seem to believe that > > the demand for oil is diminishing. Why the contradiction?
> ???? (boots)
> > The peak oil and demand myth is peddled by the establishment-run fake > > left activist groups, OPEC and globalist arms such as the IMF.
> I don't think boots are enough for this BS.
> > Rolling Stone magazine even carried an article in its April issue > > heavily biased towards making people believe the peak oil lie.
> > The Scientific evidence also flies in the face of the peak oil theory. > > Scientific research dating back over a hundred years, more recently > > updated in a Scientific Paper Published In 'Energia' suggests that oil > > is abiotic, not the product of long decayed biological matter...
> So all those production numbers for the last 100 years are lies? What a > bunch of BS.
> > Oil, for > > better or for worse, is not a non-renewable resource. It, like coal, > > and natural gas, replenishes from sources within the mantle of earth.
> Unsupported claim.
> > No coincidence then that the Russians, who pioneered this research have > > pumped expenditure into deep underground oil excavation.
> Cite?
> > We have previously scientifically exposed the scam behind peak oil.
> BAWHAWHAWHAWHAW!
> > Here is a 1 hour+ audio clip featuring Alex Jones' comments on peak oil > > and then the analysis of respected scientific commentator Dr. Nick > > Begich who presents evidence to suggest the idea of Peak oil is > > artificial.
> Don't waste my time.
> > A dangerous fallout precedent being set is that people on both the left > > and right believe wars are being fought in order to tap the last > > reserves of oil on the planet. The "coalition of the willing", whoever > > they may be for any given war, will not pay particular attention to > > refuting this claim because it allows them a reason to start and > > continue said war.
> Where are the numbers?
> > Even though many will see it as immoral, many will subconsciously > > attach it as a reason for the war. In reality the war is purely for > > profit, power and control, oil can be a part of that, but only if the > > peak oil claim is upheld.
> Oh, there may be war. But because of the have nots. Why doesn't > Indonesia just increase production if the above claims are true?
> > If we continue to let the corrupt elite tell us we are wholly dependent > > on oil, we may reach a twisted situation whereby they can justify > > starvation and mass global poverty,
> | October 04 2005 > > By Steve Watson, Alex Jones & Paul Watson
> > They make the profits on creating artificial scarcity.
> Claim?
> > "Peak oil" is pure military-industrial-complex propaganda.
> Claim?
> > Publicly available CFR and Club of Rome strategy manuals from 30 years > > ago say that a global government needs to control the world population > > through neo-feudalism by creating artificial scarcity. Now that the > > social architects have de-industrialized the United States, they are > > going to blame our economic disintegration on lack of energy supplies.
> Quite different from what I read. Oh sure, the CFR has known about peak > oil for 30 years but that is not the same as, 'government needs to > control...' Or is it?
> > Globalization is all about consolidation. Now that the world economy > > has become so centralized through the Globalists operations, they are > > going to continue to consolidate and blame it on the West's "evil" > > overconsumption of fossil fuels, while at the same time blocking the > > development and integration of renewable clean technologies.
> Shades of rant. 'Renewable clean technologies...' At least the folks on > the sci. groups knows what cost is all about. Cost is the stumbling > block, not the 'conspirators'.
> > In other words, Peak oil is a scam to create artificial scarcity and > > drive prices up. Meanwhile, alternative fuel technologies which have > > been around for decades are intentionally suppressed.
> Alternatives are neglected. Cost, cost, cost. A U.S. GDP a year is > required to liquefy 4mbl/d of coal.
> > This year in particular we have seen a strong hike in oil prices and > > are being told to simply get used to it because this is the way it is > > going to be. In the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita gas prices have > > shot up amid claims of vast energy shortages.
> Wow there cowboy. Lack of refinery capacity is real.
> > Americans are being asked > > to turn off lights, change thermostat settings, drive slower, insulate > > homes and take other steps. Meanwhile the oil companies continue to > > make record profits.
> Yes they do. So?...
> > Even The New York Times pointed out that the recent "energy crisis" > > seems to be purely tactical:
> > "To Mr. Bush's critics, the call for conservation smacked of > > showmanship, or of shutting the garage door after the S.U.V. had been > > stolen. After all, the president has spent the past weeks dropping into > > the hurricane region from the fuel-guzzling Air Force One, which the > > Air Force estimates costs $40,000 an hour to fly."
> Yep, stupid stuff. But does A mean B?
> > Flying in the face of the so called peak oil crisis are the facts. If > > we are running out of oil so quickly then why are reserves being > > continually increased and production skyrocketing?
> What? Now that is a dumb insupportable claim. Production was swung in, > the capacity was already there.
> > in the 1980s OPEC decided to switch to a quota production system based > > on the size of reserves. The larger the reserves a country said it had > > the more it could pump.
> Duhhhh.
> > Earlier this year Saudi Arabia reportedly increased its crude reserves > > by around 200 billion barrels. Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say > > Officials.
> If they say it often enough it becomes truth?
> > "These huge reserves enable the Kingdom to remain a major oil > > producer for between 70 and 100 years, even if it raises its production > > capacity to 15 million barrels per day, which may well happen during > > the next 15 years,"
> More of the same....
> > Is this the normal course of behaviour if we are currently at the peak > > for oil production? The answer is no, it's the normal course of action > > for increasing production.
> The Saudi's say it so it must be true???
> > There have also been reports that Russia has vastly increased its > > reserves even beyond those of Saudi Arabia. Why would they do this if > > they believed there would be no more oil to get hold of? It seems clear > > that Russia is ready for unlimited future production of oil.
> Really!? Then why didn't they save their own butts rather than fall into > decline?
> > There is a clear contradiction between the peak oil theory and the > > continual increase in oil reserves and production.
> Still haven't seen numbers that back this claim.
> > New untapped oil sources are being discovered everywhere on earth. The > > notion that there are somehow only a few sources that the West is > > trying to monopolize is a complete myth, promulgated by those raking in > > the massive profits. After all how do you make huge profits from > > something available in abundance?
> Crank alert. A means B therefor it is true?
> > A Wall Street Journal Article by Peter Huber and Mark Mills describes > > how the price of oil remains high because the cost of oil remains so > > low. We are not dependent on the middle east for oil because the > > world's supplies are diminishing, it is because it is more profitable > > to tap middle east supplies. Thus the myth of peak oil is needed in > > order to silence the call for tapping the planet's other plentiful > > reserves.
> Where are these reserves?
> > Richard Branson has even stated his intention to set up his own > > refinery because the price of oil is artificially being kept high > > whilst new sources are not being explored and new refineries not being > > built.
> Wait a minute. Is this about refinery capacity or oil production > capacity? Do these guys know what they are talking about?
> > "Opec is effectively an illegal cartel that can meet happily, nobody > > takes them to court," Branson has said. "They collude to keep prices > > high."
> Who's 'law' are we referring to?
> > So if more refineries were built and different resources tapped, the > > oil prices would come down and the illegal cartel OPEC would see > > profits diminish. It is no wonder then that the argument for peak oil > > is so appealing to OPEC. If no one invests to build refineries because > > they don't believe there is enough oil, then who benefits? OPEC and the > > oil elites of course.
> Now it is a convoluted A means B.
> > It seems that every time there is some kind of energy crisis, OPEC > > INCREASES production. The remarkable thing about this is that they > > always state that they are doing it to ease prices, yet prices always > > shoot up because they promulgate the myth that they are putting some of > > their last reserves into the market.
> Jeee. Another stupid claim. Show us the record.
> > Analysts seem confused and always > > state that they don't believe upping production will cut prices.
> ??? (dumb)
> > In a recent report the International Monetary Fund projected that > > global demand for oil by 2030 would reach 139 million barrels a day, a > > 65 percent increase.
> > "We should expect to live with high and volatile oil prices," said > > Raghuram Rajan, the IMF's chief economist. "In short, it's going to be > > a rocky road going forward."
> Damn. I need some boots.
> > Yet independent analysts and even some within OPEC seem to believe that > > the demand for oil is diminishing. Why the contradiction?
> ???? (boots)
> > The peak oil and demand myth is peddled by the establishment-run fake > > left activist groups, OPEC and globalist arms such as the IMF.
> I don't think boots are enough for this BS.
> > Rolling Stone magazine even carried an article in its April issue > > heavily biased towards making people believe the peak oil lie.
> > The Scientific evidence also flies in the face of the peak oil theory. > > Scientific research dating back over a hundred years, more recently > > updated in a Scientific Paper Published In 'Energia' suggests that oil > > is abiotic, not the product of long decayed biological matter...
> So all those production numbers for the last 100 years are lies? What a > bunch of BS.
> > Oil, for > > better or for worse, is not a non-renewable resource. It, like coal, > > and natural gas, replenishes from sources within the mantle of earth.
> Unsupported claim.
> > No coincidence then that the Russians, who pioneered this research have > > pumped expenditure into deep underground oil excavation.
> Cite?
> > We have previously scientifically exposed the scam behind peak oil.
> BAWHAWHAWHAWHAW!
> > Here is a 1 hour+ audio clip featuring Alex Jones' comments on peak oil > > and then the analysis of respected scientific commentator Dr. Nick > > Begich who presents evidence to suggest the idea of Peak oil is > > artificial.
> Don't waste my time.
> > A dangerous fallout precedent being set is that people on both the left > > and right believe wars are being fought in order to tap the last > > reserves of oil on the planet. The "coalition of the willing", whoever > > they may be for any given war, will not pay particular attention to > > refuting this claim because it allows them a reason to start and > > continue said war.
> Where are the numbers?
> > Even though many will see it as immoral, many will subconsciously > > attach it as a reason for the war. In reality the war is purely for > > profit, power and control, oil can be a part of that, but only if the > > peak oil claim is upheld.
> Oh, there may be war. But because of the have nots. Why doesn't > Indonesia just increase production if the above claims are true?
> > If we continue to let the corrupt elite tell us we are wholly dependent > > on oil, we may reach a twisted situation whereby they can justify > > starvation and mass global poverty,
Well this about ties it up in a bow. "Oil production in 2007 will be 2m barrels a day less than expected." This is crunch time. We will all know if Peak Oil is real or not within three to four months. And if, by some miracle, the United States recovers from hurricanes Katrina and Rita then I will be the first to admit that all of us have had our legs pulled by the most ornate and elaborate disinformation scheme in human history; a scheme so detailed and masterfully orchestrated that it controlled hundreds of databases, hundreds of press outlets, every stock market and even involved a willing loss of wealth by the world's richest one per cent. The latter is something I have never heard of before.
It might be possible that The Powers That Be want to scare us now about a peak that may be three to five years off - but I doubt it. They just haven't been executing things very well lately, have they? Even the market reports are schizophrenic, dishonest and misleading to say the least.
The Oil Depletion Analysis Centre (ODAC) in the UK precisely detailed for us some months ago, after an evaluation of projects slated to come online, that absolute numeric shortages of oil were a certainty by 2007. The story below is intended to suggest that all was well until the hurricanes screwed up the program; without them, we're told, production would have been enough to meet demand for the time being. But it seems to me that what we are seeing here is another book-cooking episode where what was promised to keep share prices up was nothing more than an accountant's flimflam. - MCR http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/092905_world_stories.shtml
> When US reduces oil usage by 80%, > You will see oil prices drop below $30
80%? Probably not for a long time. And it will drop, REGRETTABLY. Hope "we" don't have to drop a few nukes in the Middle East to keep the price from going that low. Folks, help save lives, stop driving around aimlessly wasting gas.
> I agree completely. Of course peak oil is a complete scam. Oil is > abiotic. There are enormous quantities in the earth mantle, and > everywhere on earth.
> > When US reduces oil usage by 80%, > > You will see oil prices drop below $30
> 80%? Probably not for a long time. And it will drop, REGRETTABLY. > Hope "we" don't have to drop a few nukes in the Middle East to keep the > price from going that low.
Income tax VAT basic social security
Imagine all this taxes vanish, all replaced by a tax on fossile fuel.
So it's no problem when oil goes down to $30, when all the major taxes are abolished, and replaced by a fossile energy tax.
> Folks, help save lives, stop driving around > aimlessly wasting gas.
I can't agree more with the author(s). I have no time to respond now but the author is right on.
What we are seeing is the results of "The Bush 41 New World Order & Global Governance" which is alive and well today.
Our only choice is to completely get away from fossil fuel and go to Green Fuel and leave the Automobile and Oil Cartels in our exhaust and in our rear view mirrors never to let them get into power again.
Turn the pumps directly over to the farmer. From the field direct to the pump! Leave out the Cartels.
It is not the people's fault, we need pull our own Soldiers back home and begin fighting for our own democracy and freedom if we want any left.
You notice there is no big rush of people running to Saudi, Iraq or any of those countries. They sneak in over here and use our fuel and we are asked to conserve!
How about conserving by truning in all suspected aliens, that will save a bunch of gas for those who honestly believe "Saving Gas is the Solution"
Maybe a good Homeland Security Department will also save all the gas we need until we can switch to green fuel.
> I agree completely. Of course peak oil is a complete scam. Oil is > abiotic. There are enormous quantities in the earth mantle, and > everywhere on earth.
So, I take it you're shorting Light Sweet Crude on NYMEX and making a killing doing it?
> Imagine all this taxes vanish, all replaced by a tax on fossile fuel.
Oil does not come from dead dinosaurs. But yeah, get rid of all those nasty taxes and switch to broad based commodity taxes; basically. Use less, pay less. Produce more, earn more. Sounds fair, doesn't it? Remember, and this is really simple, and true, really, anything you tax you will get less of. Tax income, you get less income. Tax value, you get less value. Tax for social security, and you get less security. If you're being honest. If you're in on the ponzi scheme you'll do better to tax those things. But don't let the ignorant know.
> So it's no problem when oil goes down to $30,
Yes, for US it would be a problem. This is not a single issue. Oil backs, as in IT IS, "our" money.
> It will be no problem with rechargebale hybrids.
Hybrids are no panacea. They are marginally better when you consider the potential disposal costs. Off peak (nuclear) rechargeable, turbo biodiesel, hybrid, would be much better.
> > Imagine all this taxes vanish, all replaced by a tax on fossile fuel.
> Oil does not come from dead dinosaurs. But yeah, get rid of all those > nasty taxes and switch to broad based commodity taxes; basically. Use > less, pay less. Produce more, earn more. Sounds fair, doesn't it? > Remember, and this is really simple, and true, really, anything you tax > you will get less of. Tax income, you get less income. Tax value, you > get less value. Tax for social security, and you get less security. > If you're being honest. If you're in on the ponzi scheme you'll do > better to tax those things. But don't let the ignorant know.
Look At Land Value Tax (LVT) and the teachings of Henry George.
> > So it's no problem when oil goes down to $30,
> Yes, for US it would be a problem. This is not a single issue. Oil > backs, as in IT IS, "our" money.
> > It will be no problem with rechargebale hybrids.
> Hybrids are no panacea.
They certainly clean up towns and cities, which have millions of lungs exposed to unnecessary toxic fumes.
> They are marginally better when you consider > the potential disposal costs. Off peak (nuclear) rechargeable, turbo > biodiesel, hybrid, would be much better.
> Look At Land Value Tax (LVT) and the teachings of Henry George.
And where do all commodities come from if not land; and water.
> They certainly clean up towns and cities, which have millions of lungs > exposed to unnecessary toxic fumes.
Agreed. And noise. But one city's toxic fumes could be somebody's landfill problem. Just putting it up for discussion.
> Nuclear? Not another one.
Sure, why not. Despite the scare tactics nuclear power has been quietly humming away for several decades supplying about 20% of our electricity. In France almost 80%.
> > > Income tax > > > VAT > > > basic social security
> > > Imagine all this taxes vanish, all replaced by a tax on fossile fuel.
> > Oil does not come from dead dinosaurs. But yeah, get rid of all those > > nasty taxes and switch to broad based commodity taxes; basically. Use > > less, pay less. Produce more, earn more. Sounds fair, doesn't it? > > Remember, and this is really simple, and true, really, anything you tax > > you will get less of. Tax income, you get less income. Tax value, you > > get less value. Tax for social security, and you get less security. > > If you're being honest. If you're in on the ponzi scheme you'll do > > better to tax those things. But don't let the ignorant know.
Actually you start looking in US tax in the first half of the century. And you see the reason SSI wasn't made like a retirement pension or 401K. Income Tax was just getting written into being legal and like many states with lottery tickets. SSI was a carrot...at a time when income tax would be voted down in voting poll. Part of the reason for resistance to flat tax or converting SSI to something akin to a 401K. Hell...during the 60's the US charged a third tax called surtax on top of the income tax. Some will argue that the surtax is back as a windfall tax.
> > > It will be no problem with rechargebale hybrids.
> > Hybrids are no panacea.
> They certainly clean up towns and cities, which have millions of lungs > exposed to unnecessary toxic fumes.
> > They are marginally better when you consider > > the potential disposal costs. Off peak (nuclear) rechargeable, turbo > > biodiesel, hybrid, would be much better.
> Nuclear? Not another one.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
> > Look At Land Value Tax (LVT) and the teachings of Henry George.
> And where do all commodities come from if not land; and water.
Look at and "understand" LVT. Google "Henry George", Georgism, LVT.
> > They certainly clean up towns and cities, which have millions of lungs > > exposed to unnecessary toxic fumes.
> Agreed. And noise. But one city's toxic fumes could be somebody's > landfill problem. Just putting it up for discussion.
Solve the problem at a local level and it cascades up.
> > Nuclear? Not another one.
> Sure, why not. Despite the scare tactics nuclear power has been > quietly humming away for several decades supplying about 20% of our > electricity. In France almost 80%.
They export the stuff to the UK too. They put their nuclear stations on the Channel coast, so when they go belly up we get it too. Nuclear is a joke. It is unnecessary. More efficiency and a reduction in energy usage is needed. Not rocket science you common and sense and political will.
I can give you very valuable land and you could do absolutely nothing with it to benefit yourself or anybody else. History is replete with such examples. Do you understand?
> Solve the problem at a local level and it cascades up.
Right. Just tap your magic shoes three times. Solve the problem and the problem is solved. Absolutely. The economies of scale we are dealing with are much more global, and therefore the problems are global.
> I can give you very valuable land and you could do absolutely nothing > with it to benefit yourself or anybody else. History is replete with > such examples. Do you understand?
>>Solve the problem at a local level and it cascades up.
> Right. Just tap your magic shoes three times. Solve the problem and > the problem is solved. Absolutely. The economies of scale we are > dealing with are much more global, and therefore the problems are > global.
No they're not global, low energy using countries & Cultures will get by as they always have, first world nations will suffer the most. Each community has its own + and - energy situation and will have to determine what theirs is. In my area energy from garbage ( garbage to fuel), hydro and wind are under utilized. In the future they will play a larger part of the energy picture.
> I can give you very valuable land and you could do absolutely nothing > with it to benefit yourself or anybody else. History is replete with > such examples.
LVT is a tax on the "value" of land, and land only, not the bricks on it. No other tax, only Land Value Tax.
Income tax taxes your Labour, which is ludicrous.
> Do you understand?
It is you lacking understanding.
> > Solve the problem at a local level and it cascades up.
> Right. Just tap your magic shoes three times. Solve the problem and > the problem is solved. Absolutely. The economies of scale we are > dealing with are much more global, and therefore the problems are > global.
Again you lack understanding. Think of...
Combined Heat & Power is easy to do on a district and individual level. High efficiency domestic appliance implemation. Superinsulation standards on buildings. Making buildings air-tight. Passive solar building construction. Town planning to reduce vehicle usage. All many ways at eating away at the problem if implemented. We don't need any nukes.
> > I can give you very valuable land and you could do absolutely nothing > > with it to benefit yourself or anybody else. History is replete with > > such examples.
> LVT is a tax on the "value" of land, and land only, not the bricks on it. > No other tax, only Land Value Tax.
Yes, but what determines the value of land? Its mineral resources, which are commodities. Its fertility to grow and raise commodity foods. Its water availability. Its beauty, a public access commodity. But the land will not produce any of that value by itself. It is the use of the land which generates the value.
>> I can give you very valuable land and you could do absolutely nothing >> with it to benefit yourself or anybody else. History is replete with >> such examples.
>LVT is a tax on the "value" of land, and land only, not the bricks on it. >No other tax, only Land Value Tax.
Is there a difference between LVT and the "property tax", which we pay on unimproved land here in California? Who would determine the "value"?
|
