Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: average joe who wrote (29217)	6/14/2010 6:43:14 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

I have: <"I have no idea what new energy sources are going to be available, what technologies might drive down the price of renewable energies," he said. > It's silly for a president who knows next to nothing about physics, chemistry, technology, oil, etc to want to define what sort of energy is used. His job is to protect the commons and allocate it [in co-operation with Congress and the Supreme Court and under instruction of the electorate]. It isn't to think up an alternative food to pizza, a new type of bicycle, new house designs or new energy sources. Also, comparing this little oil spill accident with the mass murder of thousands, the destruction of a few airliners and the Twin Towers as part of a continuing attack by a vicious ideology is amazing. Obama seems more angry about BRITISH Petroleum and Tony Hayward than he is about Islamic Jihad and Osama. I wonder who he thinks is worse, Osama or Tony. I bet he would have to think about that for a while. Don't forget, the evil British took over Kenya and stopped Obama's ancestors from enslaving people and probably eating them. Like Gerry Adams, Obama had father problems too. So Gerry Adams thought killing English people was a fine idea. Perhaps Obama should bomb London - or at least Parliament, Buckingham Palace, BP's Headquarters and put BP operatives in Guantanamo prison. Not really: <"What we can predict is that the availability of fossil fuel is going to be diminishing; that it's going to get more expensive to recover; that there are going to be environmental costs that our children… our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren are going to have to bear." > What is more likely is that Peak People and technological development and culture changes will reduce the amount of oil people buy. As Sheik Yamani said, the oil age won't end for lack of oil just as the stone age didn't end for lack of stones. Production techniques continue to improve for all fossil fuel types and there is a lot of the stuff. There isn't an environmental problem other than local and downwind when fuels are handled as they are in China -- blow the muck out the chimney. 11 dead by accident in the Halliburton/Transocean/BP oil well fire, 3300 or so dead in the deliberate mass murder of the Twin Towers, the Pentagon attack and flight 93. They are not comparable. It's interesting that Obama thinks they are similar. He is not wanting to kick Moslem HQ ass though that's the deliberate driving force for the attacks, but he wants to kick English BP 'ass' for having a terrible accident. I note that the USA government was responsible for preventing Islamic Jihad attack but failed though it was plain to me that cockpits were very vulnerable to attack [BEFORE the attacks - when I was sitting just behind a cockpit crossing the USA a decade or maybe 15 years ago]. All the government had to do was see a bunch of middle eastern Moslem men with box cutters and make a rule that cockpit doors are locked. They failed to do such a simple thing. The government also made a mistake about WMDs [obviously not there BEFORE the attack] but launched a $1 trillion war with horrendous consequences making the oil well problem insignificant. If you want BIG problems and blunders ask for help from politicians like Obama. Good luck with Obamacare. Mqurice