it's official... we're out of oil.

[mal]

How much oil do we have left?

Well... That's what the expert's said back in 1981.

There is also no ice at the caps... Ask algore.



peace...

 

[JoeB131]

Not to worry. We'll destroy the planet with climate change long before we run out of oil.

Happy now?

 

[mal]

Not to worry. We'll destroy the planet with climate change long before we run out of oil.

Happy now?

Why do you waste oxygen existing?..,



peace...

 

[PoliticalChic]

How much oil do we have left?

Well... That's what the expert's said back in 1981.

There is also no ice at the caps... Ask algore.



peace...

"The best source for new oil is the world's largest consumer economy: this country. We could go back to 10 million barrels if we had the permitting that would enable it to happen. We have the oil. There is more oil in this country that we're not allowed to get at than oil we're allowed to get at.”

But much of the oil is off limits thanks to the policies of this President:
-The outer Continental shelf.
-The Arctic National Wildlife Reserve in Anwar.
-And Shale Oil where the United States has the largest deposits in the world estimated by the government to be over 2 trillion barrels.

Even when the production is not in this country, the President will do anything he can to stop it, like blocking the Keystone pipeline.

Also, what the President is refusing to acknowledge is the United States is in the middle of an oil boom thanks to new technology like deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
So the President needs to stop with the 2% lie.
The solutions are right in front of us, but this administration flatly refuses to explore them."

Obama's 2% Lie | Blog | The Willis Report with Gerri Willis | Fox Business

 

[Zander]

peak oil!!
peak water!!
Peak air!!

We're running out of air!! Liberals should stop breathing! Do it for Mother Earth!! Do it for the childrens!! Do it for GAIA!!

 

[Missourian]

Not to worry. We'll destroy the planet with climate change long before we run out of oil.

Happy now?

​

 

[TruthSeeker56]

The Democrats SURVIVE on dependence and control.

It is the firm belief of the Democrats that keeping U.S. citizens DEPENDENT on the U.S. government for virtually ALL of their needs..........food, shelter, health care, transportation, water, electricity, natural gas, gasoline, diesel fuel, etc............allows the U.S. government to CONTROL every man, woman, and child in this country through FEAR.

Peripheral control of our lives is attained by the Democrats via contrived racial inequality, near absolute control of the news media, and contrived divisive issues like "gay rights" and "women's rights".

Energy independence, free market health care, full employment, and all other means of independence, are all the ENEMIES of the Democrat Party.

WIthout fear, control, fabrications, lack of integrity, irresponsibility, lack of morals, no regard for human life, false promises, and a complete lack of conscience, the Democrat Party ceases to exist.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

peak oil!!
peak water!!
Peak air!!

We're running out of air!! Liberals should stop breathing! Do it for Mother Earth!! Do it for the childrens!! Do it for GAIA!!

lol made me laugh ;-)

 

[rdean]

Satellites have been parked over the Arctic since 1979. What do the photo's say?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Satellites have been parked over the Arctic since 1979. What do the photo's say?

Doesn't matter. Digging fossil fuels out of the ground has no impact. Duh.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Not to worry. We'll destroy the planet with climate change long before we run out of oil.

Happy now?

We have a far greater danger of people like you reproducing first.

 

[JoeB131]

Not to worry. We'll destroy the planet with climate change long before we run out of oil.

Happy now?

We have a far greater danger of people like you reproducing first.

So you can't argue the point, so you want to name-call?

Okay.

do you really think we can be burning 90 million barrels of oil every year, along with billions of tons of coal and it doesn't have an effect?

Really?

 

[Mad Scientist]

We're out of oil? Dammit I TOLD that Woman to pick some up at the store the last time she went!

Where's my Belt?

 

[Mr. H.]

peak oil!!
peak water!!
Peak air!!

We're running out of air!! Liberals should stop breathing! Do it for Mother Earth!! Do it for the childrens!! Do it for GAIA!!

 

[percysunshine]

How much oil do we have left?

Well... That's what the expert's said back in 1981.

There is also no ice at the caps... Ask algore.



peace...

Did you read the article? It points out why 'peak oil' is a dumb theory.

.

 

[Missourian]

Not to worry. We'll destroy the planet with climate change long before we run out of oil.

Happy now?

We have a far greater danger of people like you reproducing first.

So you can't argue the point, so you want to name-call?

Okay.

do you really think we can be burning 90 million barrels of oil every year, along with billions of tons of coal and it doesn't have an effect?

Really?

Yes, it has an effect...an effect equivalent to a mouse fart at NRG Stadium.

99.72% of greenhouse gasses are produced by natural sources.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/envir...ecedes-10-miles-in-8-years-2.html#post1341995


Now, I'm sure you will go off on some tangent, but the fact remains, 0.28% is man's contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions.

And that's overall...burning fossil fuels emissions is a smaller amount still.

 

[JoeB131]

We have a far greater danger of people like you reproducing first.

So you can't argue the point, so you want to name-call?

Okay.

do you really think we can be burning 90 million barrels of oil every year, along with billions of tons of coal and it doesn't have an effect?

Really?

Yes, it has an effect...an effect equivalent to a mouse fart at NRG Stadium.

99.72% of greenhouse gasses are produced by natural sources.


Now, I'm sure you will go off on some tangent, but the fact remains, 0.28% is man's contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions.

And that's overall...burning fossil fuels emissions is a smaller amount still.

That's like saying a small pinch of arsenic would still only be .28% of your body if you ingest it...

But it will still kill you.

But, heck, you know more about this than 95% of climate scientists, right?

 

[Missourian]

So you can't argue the point, so you want to name-call?

Okay.

do you really think we can be burning 90 million barrels of oil every year, along with billions of tons of coal and it doesn't have an effect?

Really?

Yes, it has an effect...an effect equivalent to a mouse fart at NRG Stadium.

99.72% of greenhouse gasses are produced by natural sources.


Now, I'm sure you will go off on some tangent, but the fact remains, 0.28% is man's contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions.

And that's overall...burning fossil fuels emissions is a smaller amount still.

That's like saying a small pinch of arsenic would still only be .28% of your body if you ingest it...

But it will still kill you.

But, heck, you know more about this than 95% of climate scientists, right?

If your body was producing 95% of the total arsenic, that .28% wouldn't even make the balance sheet.

95% of climate scientists have been wrong 95% of the time.

And then they lie about it.

Here you go...peer reviewed paper...

Information Manipulation and Climate Agreements



It appears that news media and some pro-environmental organizations have the tendency to accentuate or even exaggerate the damage caused by climate change.

This article provides a rationale for this tendency by using a modified International Environmental Agreement (IEA) model with asymmetric information. We find that the information manipulation has an instrumental value, as it ex post induces more countries to participate in an IEA, which will eventually enhance global welfare.

From the ex ante perspective, however, the impact that manipulating information has on the level of participation in an IEA and on welfare is ambiguous.

Information Manipulation and Climate Agreements

​

What's the upshot?

That they know you, they and the media are full of shit...but it "enhances global welfare" so that makes it ok.

 

[Missourian]

Another humdinger:

Study suggesting global warming is exaggerated was rejected for publication in respected journal because it was 'less than helpful' to the climate cause, claims professor

A scientific study which suggests global warming has been exaggerated was rejected by a respected journal because it might fuel climate scepticism, it was claimed last night.

The alarming intervention, which raises fears of ‘McCarthyist’ pressure for environmental scientists to conform, came after a reviewer said the research was ‘less than helpful’ to the climate cause.

​

Read more: Study suggesting global warming is exaggerated was rejected for publication in respected journal because it was 'less than helpful' to the climate cause, claims professor | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
​

 

[westwall]

Satellites have been parked over the Arctic since 1979. What do the photo's say?

Actually since 1970. They show that the ice level was lower in 1970, then got higher, then got lower and is now beginning to build again....