Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

Ominous Environmental News Today (Peak Oil in 2006 and Arctic ice) (17 posts)

  1. truthmod
    Administrator

    Will these stories register in the 9/11 "truth" movement? Doubt it. They're too busy being concerned with things like this:

    wr

    Some argue that energy scarcity is an engineered problem--but isn't everything "engineered" then? I think we're talking about some deeper issues in the human psyche--like the insane/suicidal proclivity to dominate our surrounding environment and other beings and our never-ending hunger to hoard, waste, and consume. If you think Peak Oil is "engineered" then you must think that mass extinction is as well. I wouldn't exactly call that engineering, I'd call it a death urge or something along those lines.

    Steep decline in oil production brings risk of war and unrest, says new study http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,,2196435,00....

    Steep decline in oil production brings risk of war and unrest, says new study
    Output peaked in 2006 and will fall 7% a year
    Decline in gas, coal and uranium also predicted

    At the Poles, Melting Occurring at Alarming Rate http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...

    For scientists, global warming is a disaster movie, its opening scenes set at the poles of Earth. The epic already has started. And it's not fiction.

    The scenes are playing, at the start, in slow motion: The relentless grip of the Arctic Ocean that defied man for centuries is melting away. The sea ice reaches only half as far as it did 50 years ago. In the summer of 2006, it shrank to a record low; this summer the ice pulled back even more, by an area nearly the size of Alaska.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  2. chrisc
    Member

    Will these stories register in the 9/11 "truth" movement? Doubt it.

    Based on the view of Peak Oil on the UK's Big Tent discussion board they will believe that the Guardian article is part NWO plot to drive up oli prices -- for an example of this see this awful thread started by a newcomer at the start of the year:

    http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=...

    Of course the people arguing that Peak Oil is an oil industry invention have some overlap with the no-planes / DEW people...

    Posted 17 years ago #
  3. NicholasLevis
    Member

    With regard to the event you cite, I see your point and probably have the same problem with it - nice poster design, by the way - but don't knock Cindy Sheehan appearing alongside Peter Dale Scott. (How are these not the headline names?) I don't think the big picture is going to be ignored by that combination. If anything an encouraging sign, depending on where WR is at this point.

    Also encouraging, as I learned, that the moderator to Griffin's most recent appearance was Dr. Vincent Harding, the writer of Martin Luther King's "Beyond Vietnam" speech in 1967!

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboa...

    Sometimes we get interesting and congenial bedfellows, instead of the frequent loudmouths, and we should appreciate them: Lynn Margulis and William Pepper also come to mind.

    That being said, obviously peak oil is not a hoax - but it's not here yet either. Guaranteed there will be at least two peaks - the one that may be happening, as you say, and the one that will follow with the on-lining of idle but less profitable capacity and as-yet untouched reserves as a result of the first.

    After those also peak - and it won't take as long - then we're really fucked.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  4. chrisc
    Member

    The report that the Guardian article refers to can be found here: http://www.energywatchgroup.org/Erdoel-Report.32+M...

    Posted 17 years ago #
  5. truthmod
    Administrator

    Pile it on. They will not be able to keep this under wraps much longer. The truth will prevail.

    UN issues 'final wake-up call' on population and environment
    http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/25/europe/envi...

    Climate change, the rate of extinction of species and the challenge of feeding a growing population are among the threats putting humanity at risk, the UN Environment Program said in its fourth Global Environmental Outlook since 1997.

    The edge of oblivion: conservationists name 25 primates about to disappear
    Biofuel plantations, logging and hunting are stealing habitats from our closest relatives, says report
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/26/...

    Sri Lanka's Horton Plains slender loris has been seen just four times since 1937. Miss Waldron's red colobus monkey was not found in an exhaustive six-year study ending in 1999 and there have been no definite sightings since. Vietnam's golden-headed langur and the Hainan gibbon in China both number in the dozens.

    These are the primate species on the edge of oblivion and, according to a report commissioned by three leading conservation charities, scores of others of our closest relatives are poised to suffer the same fate. It names the top 25 species most in need of help but concludes that 114 primate species are also close to extinction.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  6. truthmover
    Administrator

    We are destroying biodiversity which can only serve to destroy us. We will not retreat in time to prevent that impact, and so humanity is on a collision course with natures wrath.

    And the present agenda in Washington is based on the premise that greater control will be necessary as resources become more scarce, natural disasters become more common, and civil unrest increases.

    In this sense the environmental movement should express a strong concern for political implications of environmental destruction. The word needs to be spread that these people running the country are planning for everything to go to hell. Some of them literally. Conservation is not on the table.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  7. Victronix
    Member

    Democrats hit White House on warming testimony

    WASHINGTON (AFP) — Democrats on Thursday accused President George W. Bush's administration of trying to hide the threat from global warming by censoring testimony of the top US health official on the issue.

    California Senator Barbara Boxer wrote to Bush to complain that prepared comments by Dr Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had been "heavily edited" by the administration. "I am deeply concerned that important scientific and health information was removed from the CDC Director's testimony at the last minute," Boxer wrote. She later told reporters: "this administration wants to downplay the threat global warming poses."

    Boxer's office released a copy of the testimony which it said had been leaked by angry CDC officials, showing large swathes of Gerberding's remarks crossed out.

    One passage that was not eventually delivered at a hearing of the Senate committee on environment and public works on October 23, went into possible impacts on health of global warming. http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gJLsUHjIiQMt6a...

    Posted 17 years ago #
  8. mark
    Member

    Deep politics needs to meet deep ecology.

    http://www.oilempire.us/climate.html

    The mass media, politicians and most environmental groups do not want to ask why our society largely ignored the warnings about climate change. Few of them also consider how Peak Oil and global warming are two ways of looking at the same problem of overconsumption, since our monetary system is predicated on ever increasing growth. The best analyses of Peak Oil and of global warming each conclude that the problem would have to be addressed a decade or two before it manifests at full strength - yet both problems are here, now. Perhaps the truth is that the shadow government (corporations and the military industrial complex) did not want to deal with these problems because the solutions are inherently decentralized and would require relaxation of centralized power control systems. Since we missed the opportunity to solve these issues as gently as possible, governments are instituting a global surveillance police state to suppress dissent as the oil that runs the show becomes more scarce and expensive, and climate change reduces available food and water supplies.

    ps. I hope that Cindy Sheehan and Peter Dale Scott reconsider their appearance with Mr. Rodriguez. Please forgive me that I don't believe someone who claims he was the only one of the nearly twenty thousand people at the WTC who supposedly experienced an explosion in the basement before the plane crash. Someone who has met with Bush (supposedly five times) is offering us a story that lacks corroboration and avoids the very real (and verifiable) evidence of the Complete 9/11 Timeline, Crossing the Rubicon and the War on Truth. It must be a coincidence that all of these people offering such stuff never seem to mention the word NORAD.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  9. truthmod
    Administrator

    Thanks, mark.

    I hope that Cindy Sheehan and Peter Dale Scott reconsider their appearance with Mr. Rodriguez.

    To question or critique WR must be one of the most un-PC things you can do within the 9/11 movement. I've seen him give his speech/story on several occasions and it really doesn't do much for me. I also question the wisdom of allowing him to be the headliner and face of the movement while others with more concrete information are relegated to the background. His history as an assistant to James Randi is also rather curious.

    Bush admin talks up the "benefits of global warming:"

    http://wonkette.com/politics/turn-up-the-heat/dana... http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/10/20...

    And we have experts and scientists across this administration that can take a look at that testimony and say, this is an error, or this doesn't make sense. And so the decision on behalf of CDC was to focus that testimony on public health benefits -- there are public health benefits to climate change, as well, but both benefits and concerns that somebody like a Dr. Gerberding, who is the expert in the field, could address. And so that's the testimony that she provided yesterday, and I would refer you to her comments in Atlanta today, as well.

    Q: And one more. You mentioned that there are health benefits to climate change. Could you describe some of those?

    MS. PERINO: Sure. In some cases, there are -- look, this is an issue where I'm sure lots of people would love to ridicule me when I say this, but it is true that many people die from cold-related deaths every winter. And there are studies that say that climate change in certain areas of the world would help those individuals. There are also concerns that it would increase tropical diseases and that's -- again, I'm not an expert in that, I'm going to let Julie Gerberding testify in regards to that, but there are many studies about this that you can look into.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  10. BrunoJTesch
    Blocked

    Some argue that energy scarcity is an engineered problem--but isn't everything "engineered" then? I think we're talking about some deeper issues in the human psyche--like the insane/suicidal proclivity to dominate our surrounding environment and other beings and our never-ending hunger to hoard, waste, and consume. If you think Peak Oil is "engineered" then you must think that mass extinction is as well. I wouldn't exactly call that engineering, I'd call it a death urge or something along those lines.

    What people mean by peak oil being engineered is not that it cannot or will not happen. They just mean what is happening is an engineered scarcity. That is to say, those in control of the communication and production resources are claiming that the world is running out of petroleum now while we really aren't. I can certainly see how something like peak oil could be used in an effort to rationalize the US wars of conquest in the ME. It doesn't even need to be stated explicitly by the Administration. AAMOF, from the perspective of mass manipulation, its best if the official line denies that we are hitting such a critical point. That way the opponents of the administration will feel compelled to confront the Administration with what is perceive as the truth.

    "Hey, we know Cheney and the gang got together and concluded that we were facing peak oil, so they orchestrated 9/11 as a pretext to conquering the ME." In the minds of a lot of people who live in TV-land that will make it OK. "Yes it was horrible, but they had to do it."

    As for global warming, I have been warning about such anthropogenic hazards since the 1980s. Nonetheless, there is a possibility that the observed warming is due to a fluctuation in solar intensity. There's a Dutchman, Dr. Bas van Geel, who has studied the archaeological evidence for climate change over the past few thousand years and found indications of a significant solargenic component. Here's where I first encountered the idea:

    http://www.amazon.com/Impact-Environment-Human-Mig...

    Van Geel has suggested the current global warming may be due primarily to solar intensity fluctuation.

    Mind you, I am not advocating that we continue to pave Earth and burning millions of years worth of stored energy in a single geological second. Nor am I suggesting that we should try this experiment, but it is possible that global warming could have benefits. We really don't know what it might do to precipitation patterns. Anybody who claims a high level of confidence in predicting the impact of global warming on precipitation, more than likely does not know what he is talking about.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  11. mark
    Member

    "Hey, we know Cheney and the gang got together and concluded that we were facing peak oil, so they orchestrated 9/11 as a pretext to conquering the ME." In the minds of a lot of people who live in TV-land that will make it OK. "Yes it was horrible, but they had to do it."

    reply:

    I have never heard of anyone saying that this was their opinion from hearing the meme that Peak Oil was the motive for allowing & assisting 9/11. It's as strange as claiming that if 9/11 complicity merely meant that the neo-cons merely allowed it to happen (and did not provide technical assistance) that somehow most of the public would not be too bothered by that, and only the demolition theories cross the boundaries into shaking up public sentiment.

    The issue is not running OUT of oil - but no longer keeping up with demand, which means the end to economic "growth" (a more imminent issue than the end of oil).

    There's also the issue of oil being at the root of the industrial agriculture system - tractors, water irrigation, food processing, food distribution, packaging, pesticides, natural gas based fertilizers, coal generated electricity, refrigeration, petrodollars, etc. Even organic food needs lots of oil to move the food around.

    It is bizarre to see efforts to promote anti-environmentalism in the "truth" movement.

    There are too many variables to know precisely what impacts digging up hundreds of millions of years of stored energy will do to the biosphere, but I've never met anyone who thinks the impact could be moderate or beneficial who has any experience gardening of farming. Agriculture requires a stable, predictable climate. The disconnection with the "natural" world is the sickness of our time, and this is the underlying problem, not 9/11 or Iraq or rigged elections, those are merely (important) symptoms.

    Anyone who has grown food in a temperate climate probably understands that having earlier warm spells before the date of "last frost" risks damage to fruit crops - the premature warming causes early budding or flowering that is then zapped by normal frost (which previously happened before the budding or flowering).

    Fossil fuels should be left in the ground, parking lots torn up for gardens, money for missiles redirected to trains, and solar panels put up on every roof top. It's a nice fantasy, but part of the practical steps that would be needed to mitigate the crisis.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  12. truthmod
    Administrator

    Bruno/Regnator/Vehmgericht/S.H.

    but it is possible that global warming could have benefits.

    there is a possibility that the observed warming is due to a fluctuation in solar intensity.

    Good job injecting deceptive and manipulative arguments into a reasonable-sounding post.

    Interesting that on your blog ( http://vehme.blogspot.com/2007/09/who-owns-911-tru... ) you ignorantly or dishonestly "expose" the "suspicious" fact that many 911 truth websites are registered with Domains by Proxy (a common privacy service), yet you yourself are surfing with a privatized IP address which resolves to :

    http://the-cloak.com/ an anonymous surfing service

    I would suggest that you cease from posting to our forum.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  13. chrisc
    Member

    Repost of a relevant article, Sadad al-Huseini doesn't use the term Peak Oil, he talks about a plateau, but it sounds like the same thing to me... listen to the mp3 for the detail...

    Oil has peaked, prices to soar - Sadad al-Huseini

    Sadad al-Huseini says that global production has reached its maximum sustainable plateau and that output will start to fall within 15 years, by which time the world’s oil resources will be “very severely depleted”.

    In an exclusive interview with http://lastoilshock.com/ , the former head of exploration and production at Saudi Aramco, said that oil production had reached a structural ceiling determined by geology rather than geopolitics, and that the technical floor for the oil price will rise by $12 annually for the next 4 to 5 years as new fields become increasingly costly to exploit.

    According to al-Huseini the technical floor - the basic cost of producing oil excluding factors such as geopolitical risk and hedge fund speculation - is currently about $70 per barrel, meaning the minimum oil price could hit $106 in 2010 and $130 by 2012. Actual crude prices, including financial market factors, could be be as much as $125 by as early as 2010.

    Al-Huseini said that Saudi Arabia’s plans to raise production capacity to 12 million barrels per day by 2012 represented “an achievable number”, as the country had announced oil investments of $55 billion between 2003 and 2011. But he cautioned that since some of the new production will come from entirely new fields “how the reservoirs will respond will be determined as they start producing”.

    However, al-Huseini disparaged Western expectations that the Kingdom would produce significantly more than 12 mb/d. It was unfair, he said, to expect Saudi to “pull everybody’s chestnuts out of the fire”.

    http://www.davidstrahan.com/audio/sadad-al-huseini...

    http://www.davidstrahan.com/blog/?p=67

    Posted 17 years ago #
  14. chrisc
    Member

    Denial in the MSM:

    Javad Yarjani, a leading Iranian oil official, said: “The current rise in oil prices is not because of a lack of producers supply and large demand by consumers but rather it is because of psychological issues caused by stress and geopolitical concerns in the world.”

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5d7c9cb0-87a5-11dc-9464-...

    Posted 17 years ago #
  15. giveback

    So they are saying they aren't very good at handling geopolitical stress? Seems like that sort of poise would be necessary in order to deal directly with ones process and product. Maybe they should look for easier careers, or address stress management.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  16. truthmover
    Administrator

    A post of Dem's moved here:

    Oil Prices: Don't Blame OPEC

    "Commodity speculators are exploiting geopolitical tensions to put a "fear factor premium" on oil prices, says Qatar's Energy and Oil Minister Abdulla Bin Hamad al-Attiya in an interview with TIME."

    ...

    "Right now, says Attiya, there is no actual shortage of fuel. "Why is the price of oil very high? I can confirm to you that there is no relation [to] demand and supply. We don't believe there is any shortage of supply in the whole world. I never saw a long queue in any gas station in the world. If you take the inventories, they are the highest in five years."

    ...

    "For example, he says, the high cost of gasoline in Europe is due to the hefty tax imposed by governments on consumers there. "Europeans should complain to their governments," he explained."

    Continued: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1677...

    Posted 17 years ago #
  17. chrisc
    Member

    "Commodity speculators are exploiting geopolitical tensions to put a "fear factor premium" on oil prices...

    "..I can confirm to you that there is no relation [to] demand and supply."

    Isn't the free market great... ;-)

    Listen to the MP3 I linked to above -- it appears to be a lot more credible than the geopolitical fear factor justification for the high prices, though, of course, this will be a factor...

    Posted 17 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.