skinnyflyer

i believe that we're likely to see frequent and more violent price swings in the near futur. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

it won't be clear that we've hit peak until several years after it occurs. and apparantly production has fallen since 2005. and now that the second largest oil field in terms of production; cantarell in mexico, is crashing at something like 14%/year it seems unlikely that new production capacity will be able to offset decline let alone raise overall production. i was also surprised to learn that the u.s. imports more oil from mexico than from saudi arabia. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

it appears the peak of global oil production may have already passed in 2005. which probably means that within the next few years demand will begin to overtake supply. the media will probably tell us that its an opec conspiracy or that its all irans fault. http://youtube.com/watch?v=4IwtAQzrfiw "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

no one said you had to. sorry you really need to watch it. all i can say is that its a 13 year old clip in which prof. albert bartlett brilliantly explains the greatest problem facing humanity namely overpopulation and our inability to understand the exponentiel function. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

ok i guess i overdid the sarcasm "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

the point of the post is for people to watch the video but obviously none of you did. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

I'm sick and tired of hearing about doomers saying that we're running out of oil, we're running out of natural gas, etc. etc. at current consumption levels THERE'S ENOUGH OIL, NATURAL GAS, AND OTHER NATURAL RESSOURCES TO LAST CENTURIES. so stop worrying, take out that second mortgage on the house and swing down to the dealership to pick up that brand new hummer you can't stop thinking about. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2376190597731898896 "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

second song is 'what else is there' by royksopp really amazing track "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

i want some of what ben's smoking "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

who is this 12% or 4 people that would vote for bush again? is it just people joking? if not then who would be so foolish? explain yourselves? "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

funny; http://youtube.com/watch?v=6EITCIgia5c http://youtube.com/watch?v=rnNiW1_bUFE "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

ok get your tinfoil hats on. http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=8677389869548020370&q=war+for+oil "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

yes. this is what nist concluded,aside from the fireproofing allegedly being dislodged. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

calling my arguments stupid doesn't refute anything and only reveals your credibility and maturity. no. my argument is that in order to explain an event that has never happened before, the total collapse of a steel framed highrise from fire/debris, we are told in the case of wtc 1and2 that the dislodged fireproofing and subsequent fires are the main reasons fore their collapse. however; 1-this theory is disproved by nist own experiments. 2-this theory cannot be applied to wtc7. so wtc7 collapsed from minor damage and fire. so we have 2 different causes to explain one new phenomenon. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

wrong. thats what their theory is based on.look it up. whats your point. ok so now the title of the new invented phenomenon, progressive collapse explains everyting so well that we don't even have to explain what it is; -so how did the buildings collapse? -it was a progressive collapse. -whats a progressive collapse? -a progressive collapse is what happened on 9/11. -oh ok. thats funny it looks pretty symmetrical in the dozens of video clips. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

no one except the official nist investigation. this is their official reason for the collapse. dislodged fireproofing allowed the fire to cause the collapse hence the quote above; "However, the towers withstood the impacts and would have remained standing were it not for the dislodged insulation (fireproofing) and the subsequent multifloor fires.” their own experiments showed that the fires alone were not hot enough so they blamed the dislodged fireproofing. and then they disprove their own conclusion with the shotgun experiments.(search and you'll find video of it). these explanations contradict themselves and they fail to expain the collapse of wtc 1 and 2. and it becomes even more absurd if you try and apply this explanation to wtc7. yes like i said the corner was damaged and if by face ripped open you mean tiny kink then ok. feel free to try and explain how the fires in wtc 7 caused the simutaneous failure of multiple columns and caused total symmetrical collapse. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

actually quite the opposite . according to the nist report only 10-15% of the columns were damaged. and since the colums were capable of sustaining 2000 times their load without failure it is quite shocking that the towers exploded..sorry collapsed. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

although this is the official cause of the collapse there is no evidence or experiment to back up this claim. the idea that fireproofing was knocked off in areas that were not directly impacted is ridiculous. even NIST experiments with shotgun blasts(favorable to predetermined conclusion) proves that fireproofing would NOT be knocked off areas not directly impacted. please look it up. most experts including the official nist team agreed that the jet fuel burned off rapidly in 15-20 min. which is why the dislodged fireproofing is so important. and here is nists conclusion; "However, the towers withstood the impacts and would have remained standing were it not for the dislodged insulation (fireproofing) and the subsequent multifloor fires.” you're joking right. i posted links to the two official pictures several times. the only damage is on one corner of the building. hardly severe and certainly not enough to cause total symmetrical collapse. also did this corner damage also knock off the fireproofing in all of building 7? "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

i against i by massive attack and mos def (i think) "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

yes but this is a moving target as infrastructure and operating costs are very oil dependend. this is where the eroei(energyreturnonenergyinvested) comes into play. the north american/subarbia lifestyle was build on cheap oil/very high eroei over 100-1 to 30-1 but oil sands is 2-1. so the tar sands are will be like a bandaid on a severed limb not the saviour it is touted as. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

i provided an article at the beginning of the thread that offers both sides of the debate. i never said that the world is on the cusp of running out oil, it is however on the cusp of running out of cheap oil. again please stop calling me a liar if you can't refute a single point i made. i also left because of the french/english tension and job situation for vancouver and i'm only back here for a few months for medical reasons. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

i couldn't agree more. nickdg originally posted this but i'm reposting it cause its so damn funny; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAL3ceozbRQ "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

being from quebec doesn't change the facts that i just mentioned but thanks for the stereotyping. sorry, im not running the province. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

if you're going to call me a liar can you please back it up. exactly which part is a lie. that sounds like a lie; the oil sands are a joke and also a natural disaster. the energy return is less than 2to1, conventional crude's ratio is +30to1 or so, and it requires tremendous amounts of natural gas. production of natural gas has peaked and is in steep decline in north america. the oil sans may contain trillions of barrels of recoverable oil but this is irrelevant all that matters is production over time. even the most optimistic predictions don't see the oil sands producing more than 5 million barrels per day and that level will over a decade to reach. the world currently produces 85million barrels per day but consumption is predicted to be 120million per day before 2030. there is simply nowhere for this oil to come from. and if the pessimists(realists in this case for me) then we might have peaked in 2005 and will never produce more than 85mb/d and production will start to fall. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

somehow i don't think making animal sounds is going to help solve the stated problem. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs