Keystone opponents:Which is worse a 1.4 million spill or 3,000 barrels

[kwc57]

Comparing a pipeline to a tanker is invalid.

The title is clear! Which is worse: 1 million barrels spill or 3,000 barrels ?

I mean why is there ANY question but I would rather have 3,000 barrels spilling on DRY LAND then ONE MILLION in the ocean!

You are working under a terribly false assumption that opponents of the XL Keystone are rational.

They see no reason for ONE DROP of oil spilt ANYWHERE as long as they can successfully live in mud huts eating raw cabbage.

I hope they never see my garage floor.

 

[Samson]

The title is clear! Which is worse: 1 million barrels spill or 3,000 barrels ?

I mean why is there ANY question but I would rather have 3,000 barrels spilling on DRY LAND then ONE MILLION in the ocean!

You are working under a terribly false assumption that opponents of the XL Keystone are rational.

They see no reason for ONE DROP of oil spilt ANYWHERE as long as they can successfully live in mud huts eating raw cabbage.

I hope they never see my garage floor.

After living a few years in a mud hut eating cabbage, I bet they'd kill to sleep in your garage.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Simply labeling everything I say a "logical fallacy" isn't pointing out anything. All you're doing is applying a pejorative label to everything I say. Your so-called "logical fallacies" are stuff you made up from whole cloth.

And what would you have me do? Should I educate you in logic? It would be one thing to say that "Actually, that point is division fallacy," if you merely had a bad point in your argument. But there are two problems with me bothering to do that here. First of all, I've already done that, and you merely wrote it off and tried to claim that I was making up fallacies. Which just goes to show that you are completely ignorant about logic or how to form a logical argument, so any attempt on my part would be like trying to explain the finer points of quantum physics to a 10 year old.

Second problem is the fact that 90% of everything you've been saying is entirely illogical. I don't have the time to sit here and give you a course. That's not what this thread or this board is about. It's not my job. So how about you take some responsibility for your horribly flawed arguments and your complete ignorance about how to argue logically, and go out and get yourself educated. I even gave you the name of a very good textbook. It is not my responsibility to educate you in how to argue logically. It is YOUR fault that your arguments are illogical. Despite all your objections, you still can't even defend your position with a logical argument. I doubt you even know what makes an argument logically valid or not, or even know what a fallacy is. Go educate yourself, then come back and we can have a little exercise to see how much you've learned. You can go through and tell me the names of all the fallacies that you've committed in the posts I pointed out.

 

[healthmyths]

Comparing a pipeline to a tanker is invalid.

The title is clear! Which is worse: 1 million barrels spill or 3,000 barrels ?

I mean why is there ANY question but I would rather have 3,000 barrels spilling on DRY LAND then ONE MILLION in the ocean!

You are working under a terribly false assumption that opponents of the XL Keystone are rational.

They see no reason for ONE DROP of oil spilt ANYWHERE as long as they can successfully live in mud huts eating raw cabbage.

hmm.... "live in a mud hut"???
Are you describing huts like Obama's half brother's $12/yr hut in Africa?

 

[Samson]

The title is clear! Which is worse: 1 million barrels spill or 3,000 barrels ?

I mean why is there ANY question but I would rather have 3,000 barrels spilling on DRY LAND then ONE MILLION in the ocean!

You are working under a terribly false assumption that opponents of the XL Keystone are rational.

They see no reason for ONE DROP of oil spilt ANYWHERE as long as they can successfully live in mud huts eating raw cabbage.

hmm.... "live in a mud hut"???
Are you describing huts like Obama's half brother's $12/yr hut in Africa?

I'm certain that Robert Redford would be happy to see OTHER People living in that sort of Hut

 

[Skull Pilot]

Comparing a pipeline to a tanker is invalid.

What rule of logic says that?

A tanker is at much higher risk of accident than a pipeline.

Anyone should be able to figure that out.

 

[bripat9643]

Simply labeling everything I say a "logical fallacy" isn't pointing out anything. All you're doing is applying a pejorative label to everything I say. Your so-called "logical fallacies" are stuff you made up from whole cloth.

And what would you have me do? Should I educate you in logic? It would be one thing to say that "Actually, that point is division fallacy," if you merely had a bad point in your argument. But there are two problems with me bothering to do that here. First of all, I've already done that, and you merely wrote it off and tried to claim that I was making up fallacies. Which just goes to show that you are completely ignorant about logic or how to form a logical argument, so any attempt on my part would be like trying to explain the finer points of quantum physics to a 10 year old.

Second problem is the fact that 90% of everything you've been saying is entirely illogical. I don't have the time to sit here and give you a course. That's not what this thread or this board is about. It's not my job. So how about you take some responsibility for your horribly flawed arguments and your complete ignorance about how to argue logically, and go out and get yourself educated. I even gave you the name of a very good textbook. It is not my responsibility to educate you in how to argue logically. It is YOUR fault that your arguments are illogical. Despite all your objections, you still can't even defend your position with a logical argument. I doubt you even know what makes an argument logically valid or not, or even know what a fallacy is. Go educate yourself, then come back and we can have a little exercise to see how much you've learned. You can go through and tell me the names of all the fallacies that you've committed in the posts I pointed out.

InTheMiddle fallacy.

 

[bripat9643]

Comparing a pipeline to a tanker is invalid.

What rule of logic says that?

A tanker is at much higher risk of accident than a pipeline.

Anyone should be able to figure that out.

You just compared a tanker with a pipeline.

 

[healthmyths]

The title is clear! Which is worse: 1 million barrels spill or 3,000 barrels ?

I mean why is there ANY question but I would rather have 3,000 barrels spilling on DRY LAND then ONE MILLION in the ocean!

You are working under a terribly false assumption that opponents of the XL Keystone are rational.

They see no reason for ONE DROP of oil spilt ANYWHERE as long as they can successfully live in mud huts eating raw cabbage.

I hope they never see my garage floor.

Funny you mention that...
Nearly 85 percent of the 29 million gallons of petroleum that enter North American ocean waters each year as a result of human activities comes from land-based runoff, polluted rivers, airplanes, and small boats and jet skis,
while less than 8 percent comes from tanker or pipeline spills.
Oil Spills

do you know that the AVERAGE vehicle leaks about a quart a month.
With 255 million vehicles leaking a quart a month over 152,332 barrels of oil dripping on sidewalks, going into air and contaminates: 6.3 trillion gallons
EACH AND EVERY MONTH!!!

 

[Big Fitz]

I wonder if I should even reward this kind of intentional stupidity and absence of logic with a reply pointing out its flaws. But I can't help it.

Your argument commits what I like to call the worse flood fallacy. It poses an undesired event next to an even less desirable event, and concludes that the first is actually desirable. For example:

Would you rather have a six foot flood or ten foot flood? Obviously you don't want a ten foot flood, so we agree to have a six foot flood.

This fallacy, is in fact, a form of the complex question, in that it wrongly assumes an affirmative to the unasked "Do you want any flood at all." It is also a form of the false dilemma. I've made the habit of identifying this special type independently not so much for the difference in form in the way it is applied here or elsewhere. But to identify the special kinds of subject matter in which it is often employed, namely that of catastrophic events.

I'd also like to point out that in the larger scheme of things, this argument further is illogical, committing fallacy of hasty generalization, in assuming all opponents of the Keystone project hold opposition for fear of an oil spill.

This is also another logical fallacy for it assumes that all water in any amount causes floods. If it rains, it will flood, when it is common knowledge to not be true. In the same manner, just because a pipeline exists does not mean it will always leak.

To say that rain should be banned because it MIGHT flood is the acme of foolishness, the same way denying resources needed for civilization to survive is foolishness. You minimize risk, you cannot eliminate risk. If you cannot accept reasonable risk and attempts to prevent disaster, you should be leaving your house. Of course, you shouldn't live in your house either for most accidents happen in the home.

 

[Inthemiddle]

This is also another logical fallacy for it assumes that all water in any amount causes floods. If it rains, it will flood, when it is common knowledge to not be true. In the same manner, just because a pipeline exists does not mean it will always leak.

To say that rain should be banned because it MIGHT flood is the acme of foolishness, the same way denying resources needed for civilization to survive is foolishness. You minimize risk, you cannot eliminate risk. If you cannot accept reasonable risk and attempts to prevent disaster, you should be leaving your house. Of course, you shouldn't live in your house either for most accidents happen in the home.

Question, are you a dwarf? Or are you just not paying any attention whatsoever?

 

[Big Fitz]

Did I read the previous 5 pages of posts? No. I didn't feel the need to bother. You blathered something important? Historical trends point to this not being likely, let alone possible.

I suppose miracles COULD occur, but I'm not going to go on the assumption they did.

 

[Samson]

You are working under a terribly false assumption that opponents of the XL Keystone are rational.

They see no reason for ONE DROP of oil spilt ANYWHERE as long as they can successfully live in mud huts eating raw cabbage.

I hope they never see my garage floor.

Funny you mention that...
Nearly 85 percent of the 29 million gallons of petroleum that enter North American ocean waters each year as a result of human activities comes from land-based runoff, polluted rivers, airplanes, and small boats and jet skis,
while less than 8 percent comes from tanker or pipeline spills.
Oil Spills

do you know that the AVERAGE vehicle leaks about a quart a month.
With 255 million vehicles leaking a quart a month over 152,332 barrels of oil dripping on sidewalks, going into air and contaminates: 6.3 trillion gallons
EACH AND EVERY MONTH!!!

Damn those "Human Activities!!!!"

 

[Big Fitz]

I hope they never see my garage floor.

Funny you mention that...
Nearly 85 percent of the 29 million gallons of petroleum that enter North American ocean waters each year as a result of human activities comes from land-based runoff, polluted rivers, airplanes, and small boats and jet skis,
while less than 8 percent comes from tanker or pipeline spills.
Oil Spills

do you know that the AVERAGE vehicle leaks about a quart a month.
With 255 million vehicles leaking a quart a month over 152,332 barrels of oil dripping on sidewalks, going into air and contaminates: 6.3 trillion gallons
EACH AND EVERY MONTH!!!

Damn those "Human Activities!!!!"

we must stop them before they become a trend!

 

[Samson]

Funny you mention that...
Nearly 85 percent of the 29 million gallons of petroleum that enter North American ocean waters each year as a result of human activities comes from land-based runoff, polluted rivers, airplanes, and small boats and jet skis,
while less than 8 percent comes from tanker or pipeline spills.
Oil Spills

do you know that the AVERAGE vehicle leaks about a quart a month.
With 255 million vehicles leaking a quart a month over 152,332 barrels of oil dripping on sidewalks, going into air and contaminates: 6.3 trillion gallons
EACH AND EVERY MONTH!!!

Damn those "Human Activities!!!!"

we must stop them before they become a trend!

You hijack the airplanes......I'll take care of the small boats and jet skis....I hate those noisy fuckers.

 

[Big Fitz]

Damn those "Human Activities!!!!"

we must stop them before they become a trend!

You hijack the airplanes......I'll take care of the small boats and jet skis....I hate those noisy fuckers.

but I'm not muslim!

 

[Samson]

we must stop them before they become a trend!

You hijack the airplanes......I'll take care of the small boats and jet skis....I hate those noisy fuckers.

but I'm not muslim!

Don't shower or shave for three months....you'll be good to go.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Fine. So is building a pipeline through Nebraska (which include thousands of miles of private property) okay if there are citizens who say "Not through MY private property, thank you!".
As that is the case in Nebraska, to such an extent that it would take eminent domain to overcome, it seems your position is that it should definitely not be built.

When the federal and state government outlaws eminent domain, get back to me. The only issue here is what should be done given current law, not in some fantasy libertarian world.

Ah. Nice dodge. So Federal power should be used when it supports the Conserv position until it is outlawed? So then Affirmative Action is not outlawed! You're behind that! Abortion clinics are not outlawed! You're behind them! Marvelous!

Oh wait. That's right. Your view of the Constitution and laws are that they should apply only when in agreement with your opinion. You said that if it violates the private citizens' rights, it should not be done - which you immediately contradicted when it didn't suit your purpose, by saying "Well if it's legal for the Federal government to restrict gun ownership, then okay! Get back to me when it's illegal!" Seems pretty hypocritical to me.

Now if I were you, I'd say "I didn't say that!". And make sure you continue to never actually say anything! Keep dodging, avoiding, changing the subject! It's whatcha got to work with...

 

[healthmyths]

Comparing a pipeline to a tanker is invalid.

What rule of logic says that?

A tanker is at much higher risk of accident than a pipeline.

Anyone should be able to figure that out.

You would think "anyone" would be able to figure out that:
1) one million barrels are MORE then 3,000 barrels.. RIGHT?
2) A ship on water has a greater chance of of damaged then a buried pipe..RIGHT?
3)It is cheaper to use Oil sold to USA then Oil on the open market after China buys oil.

That last point.. Canada sells OIL to USA at rate of $XX.XX amount.
BUT if Canada sells OIL to China.. USA will have to pay MORE then $XX.XX !
Say Canadian oil is $100.00/barrel and open market is $110.00.
That is $10 million MORE a day.. $3.65 billion more a year all because of why???
A fear that 3,000 barrels of oil will damage less then 2 acres of land?