Science and Technology news... :: View topic - American Slice of Petroleum Pie In 15 Years

server · Guest

message unavailable

Day Brown · Guest

Yeah, I>ve received form letter bs from my senators and
congressman also.

What I see going on is people trying to figure out how to share a
house so they can dramatically drive down the energy consumption on
a per capita basis. Gardens are getting bigger. Broadband is reaching
out into rural areas so people can work online.

But if they arent making money, they can still harvest from the
orchards, gardens, and woodlots. I was cutting firewood yesterday.

Life may become shit for the average American, but I>ve never been
average, as you see from my postings.

Smart people and smart corporations are moving out of the vast urban
centers to smaller cities and towns. HP just announced a new facility
at Conway AR, pop 12,000 where they>ll put 450 high tech jobs. In a
town where your drive from home to the office is under 2 miles.

Even if gasoline was 20$/gallon, that wont make a lotta diff.

China and India make money selling consumer goods to the USA. Who is
going to create the profits for their corporations if the US dont? I
dont think the Asian peasants making 2$/day will.
---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News Provider ----
http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to 100,000+ newsgroups

ZerkonX · Guest

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 07:04:57 -0700, BretCahill wrote:

[quote]The "brick wall" is the fact of overpopulation.
[/quote]
Take waste and the frivolous use of resources out of the equation and
'over' population becomes something else again in terms of timeline.

Looking at things the way they are now, as if this is the way things will
be, is shortsighted. Necessity, unfortunately dire necessity, has a way
of changing many many things in ways not easily seen until the fan is hit.

This "short brutish existence" is certainly not a given. There are other
possibilities and here is a reason to think so:

Then inter-net as part of human connectivity is here. No matter if 'the
powers' try to shut it down, censure it or defame it, this technical cat
is out of the bag, as it were. It is too easy for too many people to rig
work-a-rounds, hackster boxes and crypto-speak to control it as say
commercial media is controlled. The fact that such a thing as 'open
source code' exists defeats certain long-held, sacred and traditional
givens of the status-quo.

Through this human connectivity the dissemination of information,
technical information specifically, is rampant, as all reading this know.
A common pool of knowledge that could only have been imagined in the very
best of SciFi has become real world. Very real world.

This must be factored into the 'fact' of overpopulation. 'OVER' having
most everything to do with limited earth resources.

My point being that a better use of these resource will emerge very fast
through this pool of common knowledge if left unhindered by aberrant
greed. In fact, it may very well be that even greed will not be strong
enough to control or stop this from happening given necessity which
precedes all.

Let the oldsters bitch their doom and gloom. You young people really need
to keep your own hope for > your < own time and don>t get bogged down in
the stupid and ignorant false finality>s of today.

Bob Eld · Guest

<jtnospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d5394c2c-d42d-426f-bc62-e3cac0ed018a@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 27, 10:12 pm, "(David P.)" <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
[quote]jtnos...@yahoo.com wrote:

The prosperity since WWII isn>t a birthright,
it has specific causes & can be lost by making
foolish public policy decisions. An aging
population can>t ride bicycles around, and bad
weather limits young healthy people. We>re now
living thru the consequences of >30 years of
bad public policy decisions. More bad decisions
risk turning our economy & comfortable life
into a train wreck. - Jitney

Why should the young soldiers have to
fight & die, so we can be fat, dumb & happy
for some more years? 65-75 years of life
aren>t enough? Gotta have 85-90?
What>ll the world be like with the projected
9 billion? Is it fair that future generations
have to live in more crowded conditions and
fight over food, fuel, clean air, clean water
and everything else?
.
.
--
[/quote]
France rejected the Jimmy Carter-Jane Fonda irrational resistance to
nuclear power, 80% of their electricity is nuclear generated, they
don>t have to send soldiers to the Middle East. That was an example of
a good public policy decision on their part. Our ban on it was
foolish, and we are paying a terrible price in blood and treasure. I
agree that we are too fat, dumb, and happiness should not be tied to
external prosperity but one>s inner soul. But having had parents that
grew up thru the Great Depression, I can tell you that this is one
ordeal that would break the back and spirit of the Mr. Rogers
Neighborhood educated generation in a way that would collapse our
system of freedom, democracy, and probably lead to a terrible
dictatorship. Do we want to follow the path of Latin America and
Africa, failed states that swing between banana republics and military
dictatorships? Our currency is already becoming like the peso, which
is a big part of the current price of oil.
Snip....

You talk funny for a republican. Why do you think our currency is becoming
like the peso? And that, of course, is what leads to the high price of oil
and other commodities.

Could it be that we haven>t paid for waging war by giving unprecedented tax
breaks at a time of war and national need, but making up the shortfall by
excessive borrowing?

The very things you crab about are a direct result of the poor fiscal
policies of the Bush administration.

It looks like you may get to experience what your parent grew up through,
another DEPRESSION. Like last time it will be republican policies that cause
it. Stay tuned.

Mark M. · Guest

(David P.) wrote:
[quote]jtnos...@yahoo.com wrote:

The prosperity since WWII isn>t a birthright,
it has specific causes & can be lost by making
foolish public policy decisions. An aging
population can>t ride bicycles around, and bad
weather limits young healthy people. We>re now
living thru the consequences of >30 years of
bad public policy decisions. More bad decisions
risk turning our economy & comfortable life
into a train wreck. - Jitney

Why should the young soldiers have to
fight & die, so we can be fat, dumb & happy
for some more years? 65-75 years of life
aren>t enough? Gotta have 85-90?
What>ll the world be like with the projected
9 billion? Is it fair that future generations
have to live in more crowded conditions and
fight over food, fuel, clean air, clean water
and everything else?
.
.
--
People live crowded together because of stupid land allocation systems, not[/quote]
over-population.

Mark M.

The Trucker · Guest

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 20:21:08 -0700, Bob Eld wrote:

[quote]
"Rob Dekker" <rob@verific.com> wrote in message
news:kcg9k.12632$uE5.9699@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com...

"The Trucker" <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2008.06.28.00.06.23.729897@verizon.net...
....
We need instant imminent domain to acquire an average of 200 acres of
scrub land around current coal/natural gas fired power plants as
directed
by the DOE and advised by the algae based biofuels people. These people
will have free use of the government owned land provided they produce
their fuel quotas of 50k gallons of lipids per acre per year. That is
one
half of the claim of 100k gallons per year that has been made by the
Vertical closed systems people:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=8hioZ7C6HLs&feature=related

Unfortunately, nobody (including GreenFuel) has shown 100k gallons (or
even 50k gallons) per year.
The problem is simple : photosynthesis is not efficient enough for this
kind of production.
In fact, realistic upper limits (for highly optimized systems) are around
5,000 gallons/acre :

http://www.nanostring.net/Algae/CaseStudy.pdf

From the same analysis :
At the 5,000 gallons/acre rate, GreenFuel>s system will probably not be
profitable unless the price of oil exceeds $1,000/gallon.

I think algae plants face 4 major challenges :

(1) They need to be close to enhanced-CO2 producers (like fossil power
plants)
(2) They need to be close to waste-water treatment plants (to get major
amounts of nutrients).
(3) The system needs to be dirt-cheap per acre (plastic tubing instead of
'greenhouse-like' systems).
(4) The land needs to be cheap and large, since algae production is energy
in-efficient in nature, so plants needs a LOT of space.

All 4 challenges need to be solved simultaniously to be successful
(competitive) in oil production.
And this is simply not been solved by anyone yet.
Especially (1),(2) and (4) are not combinable at this point.

Prove me wrong..

Rob

You>re not wrong. Cheap large volume agricultural methods must be employed.
No green houses, vertical structures, concrete. etc. etc. The installed
costs have to be less than $50K per acre and last for a number of years on
average.
[/quote]
I think you are making a mistake here. Cheap fuel _SHOULD_ be over with
(exception may be nuclear). The price per gallon can be as much as $10
and it is totally viable. That is because the price of diesel right now
is close to $9 a gallon when you add the costs of the Iraq debacle. There
is also the value to the fossil fueled power plants to be considered,
and I would "nationalize" the land and allow free use of it based on
production minimums. All the equipment and technology would still
belong to the entrepreneurs and all the income from the sales. Only the
land would be gummint owned.

We need conservation and we need an alternative to escape from the middle
east. We must escape from oil.

[quote]Secondly yields must be improved way beyond the 5,000 gal per acre per year
maximum set by photosynthesis.
[/quote]
I will be spending some time on this "paper" right now. I am pretty sure
that this is a "false framing" of the issue, but I intend to prove it to
at least myself. I need some real clarifications on the terms and I don>t
know if I can find them. I am still not certain why this dude is able to
simply assert that it takes 8 photons to do anything and I am not real
sure that I know what a VAR (I think that>s it) is. Then he seems to just
make up some numbers for the energies.

That>s the problem. With no peer review and without an extensive glossary
and footnotes I can>t tell whether the dude is blowing smoke or nor.

[quote]This means gene splicing and bio engineering
to improve photosynthesis to accept more of the solar spectrum and the use
of dyes and other sensitizers to shift the solar spectrum into the
photosynthesis range. By these methods it should be possible to get into
the 20,000 gal range. Much work needs to be done.
[/quote]
I actually think (right now) that the 27% claim is close to correct. I
have at least found a source for 26% (I think). But I don>t think I see a
proper insertion of time in all this. That may be the VAR part. I
reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeely need to look very hard at the VAR deal. I am
still sorta stuck on how the hell these companies can make the claims they
do.

--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend

Spaceman · Guest

Rob Dekker wrote:
[quote]Trucker, Jitney, please cut the crap.

Blaming is not going to get us anywhere.
The Democrats did it, the Republicans did it, the Saudi>s did it, the
Chinese and Indians did it, the speculators, the oil companies, the
environmentalists, WHATEVER did it.

Let>s face reality : we reached Peak Oil !
[/quote]
You got it!
Humans did it!
and unless you are not human,
you can>t point fingers unless you point it at yourself also
of course.
:)

[quote]The Earth cannot provide more barrels/day of this precious fossil
fuel. More people on this planet are joining us in our
'developed-nation' lifestyle, requiring oil also. So, we are going to
have less of it from now on. As simple as that.
[/quote]
The Earth is an engine,
remove and burn it>s oil.
It will heat up and if you remove enough.
It might even break..
Too simple.

[quote]Drilling is just postponing the inevitable : We need to kick our oil
addiction.
The longer we wait, the worse it gets.
We need all hands on deck for this challenge, and bickering and
blaming is NOT working towards solutions.

This is sci.energy, not some tabloid kind of blame forum.
[/quote]
You are correct Rob,
We need thoughts of fixing a problem,
not just yelling that there is a problem and saying it>s
so and so fault.
:)

--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman

Bret Cahill · Guest

[quote]"Hubbert himself put the peak of global oil extraction between 1993
and 2000.
[/quote]
Ooooooh! Off by a half dozen years! In that case it ain>t a problem.

This reminds me of Eeyore>s correction to the 30%/ year increase in
fuel costs over the next 20 years. Instead of jumping off a 7,000
foot cliff ($800/gallon) Eeyore reassured everyone the cliff wasn>t a
foot over 700'.

Hey, it>s an order of magnitude better!

No problem.

Bret Cahill

Spaceman · Guest

Sylvia Else wrote:
[quote]Spaceman wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
Spaceman wrote:

That is why I know the clocks malfunctioned
in the time dilation problem
I don>t see a clock problem, or a metre rule problem, or a mass
problem, in relativity. The theory doesn>t say that clocks change
their rates, or that rulers change their lengths, and that masses
are altered.

It says is that if I perform measurements on clocks or rulers or
masses that are moving relative to me, then I will get different
results from those I would get if said objects were not moving
relative to me. To suggest that those measurements imply that the
objects themselves have changed is to go beyond the theoretical
framework into the domain of philosophy, or even religion, given the
total lack of any evidence.

So the clock malfunction problem exists only in your mind, because
you>ve extrapolated the theory where it was never meant to go.

So you think time dilation and length contraction do not occur at all
physically?

I don>t think the question has a real meaning. It assumes that time
and length have existence in whatever the underlying reality is, and
we lack any evidence of that.
[/quote]
No it does not,
it implies that you want to find a cause using the science
of measurement and that "science of measurement" has
what has made just about everything we use today for
growth.
Ignoring a multiple standard is ignoring the science of measurement
itself.

[quote]While I>m not suggesting that I think it>s the case, we cannot
logically exclude the possibility that the entire Universe, including
us, is just a simulation running on some vast computer. It that were
the case, then time and length would have no meaning beyond whatever
mathematical model the computer was using for the simulation.

So we>re really getting ahead of ourselves if we assume that time and
length are real. Even if we>re not a simulation, time and length could
be nothing more than our perspective on whatever is really happening.
[/quote]
I am not assuming time and length are "real".
I am saying time and length are the abstracts humans create to
find out how to make things better, and how to see how things work
with a set of logical rulings that do work.
1 of the same object + 1 of the same object = 2 of those objects
always.
It is simply a logical rule to adhere to for science
and of course the science of measurement
:)

--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman

Spaceman · Guest

Eeyore wrote:
[quote]Spaceman wrote:

I am the one asking for physical measurements.

'Cos you can>t calculate them numbnuts.
[/quote]
That is correct,
I can>t do the very complex stuff,
that must really make your ego inflate beyond
it>s normal expansion rate huh?
As I stated I am a hands on laymen,
I look. I see. I fix.
I look. I see what is needed. and I create.
and...
The only numbnuts here is your swelled brain.
:)

--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman

Andy Energy · Guest

On Jun 27, 7:02 am, "Y.y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]While the price of a barrel of oil becomes
140 $
(and you aint seen nothing yet
oil producers 'dont have a God .....' )
so
its more than time for fusion !!

ATB
Y.Porat
-------------
----------------
[/quote]
What ever happened to using less? This is something we can do right
now. We have the technology, products and manpower to reduce our
energy consumption by 80% or more but do we have the will?

We could do this in the next decade if we as a society set it as a
goal. Energy management is something we can do verses fusion which
we only think we can do but do not know when. It is like hydrogen
that we’ve been promised in the next decade, this was about 30 years
ago and we are still far from being practical.

Doing with less is not doing without. The homes we retrofit save
40-60% of their heating and cooling bill and the occupants are more
comfortable than they have ever been in the house. In new
construction getting 70-80% reduction is easy and with some off the
shelf products we can get the other 20-30%. And if our manufactures
would make the electrical consuming devices more efficient (this is
something we already know how to do) the 20-30% would be real easy.

So let’s see, do we put our effort into something we already know how
to do or into something that someone thinks will work? And no I’m not
saying we should not explore fusion just not until we get the low
hanging fruit of energy reduction.

KISS (keep it simple stupid)

Andy

Guest

On Jun 28, 6:44 am, Fred Weiss <fredwe...@papertig.com> wrote:
[quote]On Jun 28, 8:50 am, Fred Weiss <fredwe...@papertig.com> wrote:

Of course if it were the case that oil production was falling, we can
thank the enviroNazis for that. It is not an inherent limitation - and
certainly not when new technology for extraction and production is
factored in.

Btw, in addition to the tar sands, Alaska, and offshore potential,
there is one more not often mentioned:

The Bakken Oil Formation

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

The "Peak Oilers" are of course now in overdrive in busy predictable
denial of its potential.

The one political positive now emerging is recent polls indicating
that Americans are looking with increasing favor at opening up
offshore drilling. The enviroNazis are of course in a panic and one
can be sure that they will ramp up to ensure that Americans continue
to value sunbathing over ample supplies of oil. So, while on the one
hand the enviroNazis are cheering at the "suffering at the pump" and
barely concealing their glee at the financial bloodbath at the auto
companies and airlines, their nihilistic pleasure may be short-lived
as good old-fashioned American commonsense reasserts itself.

Fred Weiss
[/quote]
Dear God, I hope so.-Jitney

Bret Cahill · Guest

[quote]The ONLY thing that can be done FAST is fuel efficiency. And it>s EASY !
[/quote]
Just saying "efficiency" does solve the problem, not in a country with
the great disparity of wealth of the U. S.

The rich don>t really need to change their lifestyles -- Al Gore will
hardly do the bare minimum to have any credible PR -- so all the
"efficiency" gains will come from the poor who will freeze in the
winter and get run over by SUVs trying to cycle to work, assuming they
don>t become homeless first, a bad assumption.

The only market oriented civilized way to encourage efficiency is to
tax fuel and rebate the money on a per head basis.

Bret Cahill

Guest

On Jun 28, 7:39 am, "Bob Eld" <nsmontas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]jtnos...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:d5394c2c-d42d-426f-bc62-e3cac0ed018a@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 27, 10:12 pm, "(David P.)" <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote:

jtnos...@yahoo.com wrote:

The prosperity since WWII isn>t a birthright,
it has specific causes & can be lost by making
foolish public policy decisions. An aging
population can>t ride bicycles around, and bad
weather limits young healthy people. We>re now
living thru the consequences of >30 years of
bad public policy decisions. More bad decisions
risk turning our economy & comfortable life
into a train wreck. - Jitney

Why should the young soldiers have to
fight & die, so we can be fat, dumb & happy
for some more years? 65-75 years of life
aren>t enough? Gotta have 85-90?
What>ll the world be like with the projected
9 billion? Is it fair that future generations
have to live in more crowded conditions and
fight over food, fuel, clean air, clean water
and everything else?
.
.
--

France rejected the Jimmy Carter-Jane Fonda irrational resistance to
nuclear power, 80% of their electricity is nuclear generated, they
don>t have to send soldiers to the Middle East. That was an example of
a good public policy decision on their part. Our ban on it was
foolish, and we are paying a terrible price in blood and treasure. I
agree that we are too fat, dumb, and happiness should not be tied to
external prosperity but one>s inner soul. But having had parents that
grew up thru the Great Depression, I can tell you that this is one
ordeal that would break the back and spirit of the Mr. Rogers
Neighborhood educated generation in a way that would collapse our
system of freedom, democracy, and probably lead to a terrible
dictatorship. Do we want to follow the path of Latin America and
Africa, failed states that swing between banana republics and military
dictatorships? Our currency is already becoming like the peso, which
is a big part of the current price of oil.
Snip....

You talk funny for a republican. Why do you think our currency is becoming
like the peso? And that, of course, is what leads to the high price of oil
and other commodities.

Could it be that we haven>t paid for waging war by giving unprecedented tax
breaks at a time of war and national need, but making up the shortfall by
excessive borrowing?

The very things you crab about are a direct result of the poor fiscal
policies of the Bush administration.

It looks like you may get to experience what your parent grew up through,
another DEPRESSION. Like last time it will be republican policies that cause
it. Stay tuned.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
I agree that the administration of Bush has been a disaster. He and
his Democrat-lite Republicans in Congress spent public money, for war
and non-war purposes, like drunken sailors. He mortgaged our country>s
future to the Chinese. He left the Mexican border open to alien and
drug smuggling to satisfy big business desire for endless supplies of
cheap labor, and possibly set the stage for a European style socialist
North American Union. He betrayed his Oath of office to faithfully
execute the laws. I believe he was a wolf in sheep>s clothing to the
faith community, and his family values campaign did not include
policies that would ensure that families could support themselves. I
am a reluctant Republican, but I am far from being a mindless
partisan. I am essentially a pro-labor conservative, which is about as
odd as a pro-life Democrat, but we do exist. The Democratic party of
Roosevelt and Truman is a dinosaur, and for that matter the two party
system has been so corrupted by big money that it no longer serves the
public good. I hate the Enron and Countrywide style corruption that
Bush tolerated, but Clinton harmed our oil markets far more during his
tenure by ignoring the antitrust laws and allowing the merger of the
then too few seven oil companies into three, re-assembling
Rockefeller>s Standard Oil on the installment plan.
With all that being said, the enviromentalist view that man does not
have any place on this planet, that wants to depopulate rural America
to pre-Columbian times, is an absolute affront to the dignity of Man,
and the cause of extraordinary present and future suffering. After the
last century of atheist socialist ideology that had no respect for the
dignity of man, the left, discredited from the evils of Stalinism and
the fall of the Soviet Union has replaced it with an ideology that
does not distinguish between man and animal

Guest

On Jun 28, 9:55 am, jtnos...@yahoo.com wrote:
[quote]On Jun 28, 7:39 am, "Bob Eld" <nsmontas...@yahoo.com> wrote:

jtnos...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:d5394c2c-d42d-426f-bc62-e3cac0ed018a@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com....
On Jun 27, 10:12 pm, "(David P.)" <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote:

jtnos...@yahoo.com wrote:

The prosperity since WWII isn>t a birthright,
it has specific causes & can be lost by making
foolish public policy decisions. An aging
population can>t ride bicycles around, and bad
weather limits young healthy people. We>re now
living thru the consequences of >30 years of
bad public policy decisions. More bad decisions
risk turning our economy & comfortable life
into a train wreck. - Jitney

Why should the young soldiers have to
fight & die, so we can be fat, dumb & happy
for some more years? 65-75 years of life
aren>t enough? Gotta have 85-90?
What>ll the world be like with the projected
9 billion? Is it fair that future generations
have to live in more crowded conditions and
fight over food, fuel, clean air, clean water
and everything else?
.
.
--

France rejected the Jimmy Carter-Jane Fonda irrational resistance to
nuclear power, 80% of their electricity is nuclear generated, they
don>t have to send soldiers to the Middle East. That was an example of
a good public policy decision on their part. Our ban on it was
foolish, and we are paying a terrible price in blood and treasure. I
agree that we are too fat, dumb, and happiness should not be tied to
external prosperity but one>s inner soul. But having had parents that
grew up thru the Great Depression, I can tell you that this is one
ordeal that would break the back and spirit of the Mr. Rogers
Neighborhood educated generation in a way that would collapse our
system of freedom, democracy, and probably lead to a terrible
dictatorship. Do we want to follow the path of Latin America and
Africa, failed states that swing between banana republics and military
dictatorships? Our currency is already becoming like the peso, which
is a big part of the current price of oil.
Snip....

You talk funny for a republican. Why do you think our currency is becoming
like the peso? And that, of course, is what leads to the high price of oil
and other commodities.

Could it be that we haven>t paid for waging war by giving unprecedented tax
breaks at a time of war and national need, but making up the shortfall by
excessive borrowing?

The very things you crab about are a direct result of the poor fiscal
policies of the Bush administration.

It looks like you may get to experience what your parent grew up through,
another DEPRESSION. Like last time it will be republican policies that cause
it. Stay tuned.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I agree that the administration of Bush has been a disaster. He and
his Democrat-lite Republicans in Congress spent public money, for war
and non-war purposes, like drunken sailors. He mortgaged our country>s
future to the Chinese. He left the Mexican border open to alien and
drug smuggling to satisfy big business desire for endless supplies of
cheap labor, and possibly set the stage for a European style socialist
North American Union. He betrayed his Oath of office to faithfully
execute the laws. I believe he was a wolf in sheep>s clothing to the
faith community, and his family values campaign did not include
policies that would ensure that families could support themselves. I
am a reluctant Republican, but I am far from being a mindless
partisan. I am essentially a pro-labor conservative, which is about as
odd as a pro-life Democrat, but we do exist. The Democratic party of
Roosevelt and Truman is a dinosaur, and for that matter the two party
system has been so corrupted by big money that it no longer serves the
public good. I hate the Enron and Countrywide style corruption that
Bush tolerated, but Clinton harmed our oil markets far more during his
tenure by ignoring the antitrust laws and allowing the merger of the
then too few seven oil companies into three, re-assembling
Rockefeller>s Standard Oil on the installment plan.
With all that being said, the enviromentalist view that man does not
have any place on this planet, that wants to depopulate rural America
to pre-Columbian times, is an absolute affront to the dignity of Man,
and the cause of extraordinary present and future suffering. After the
last century of atheist socialist ideology that had no respect for the
dignity of man, the left, discredited from the evils of Stalinism and
the fall of the Soviet Union has replaced it with an ideology that
does not distinguish between man and animal- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
and this leads to two scenarios: animals are treated like men (animal
rights) or, more often, men are treated like animals (human
trafficking,labor exploitation, yes, slavery, it is making a comeback,
and the slaughter of abortion.) It is an ideology of death and self-
destruction, and we are going there full speed ahead. Plant a garden
if you can, McCain is a mediocre choice, but Obama is one that will
lead us into a socialist monopoly of slavery to the state, he will
appoint judges that will rule with the gavel long after he is gone,
and ordinary people will be nailed to the cross of political
correctness. Most importantly, after the election is over, keep on
hollering and screaming at wickedness in both parties, society, and
business wherever you see it. -Jitney


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Energy forum	Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 52, 53, 54 Next
Page 1 of 54