GAO To Obama: More Oil Than Rest Of The World

Dixie said:
You can bet your ass, when the Jews start in on an idea, it HAS to be a winner. These people are not known for chasing their tails, generally speaking, they're pretty smart about things, and what they touch tends to turn to gold. If the Jews see the potential, there certainly is some.

No one is suggesting there is some "magic bullet" that will suddenly, overnight, solve our energy problems. The argument, ironically enough, is over "progress!" It just so happens the Liberals are opposed to progress in this case. If we have the capacity to put men on the moon, and send robots to Mars, we certainly have the capacity to figure out how to mine shale oil efficiently. The resource is too valuable to leave in the ground, as we stubbornly cling to political ideology. There is virtually NO REASON to not explore this option, and move forward with the idea. We are deep into this thread, and despite pinhead cheers of victory, not a single valid reason has been presented. We've gone through it all, from water supply to electricity, and finally, to the old tried and true liberal trump, the environment. Nothing has been established, it has all been refuted. We have plenty of water supply to do the process, 21.7k cfps, to be exact. We can make electricity, we've known how to do this for years. The environmental impact is LESS than traditional oil drilling on land, and certainly less risk to the environment than offshore drilling. Yes, there are some environmental concerns, as there is with virtually everything man does. That's why we have to address those things up front, and establish proper regulations and guidelines, we have all the necessary governmental agencies to do this, we've been doing it for years and years. Everything the Liberals bring up, is quickly and swiftly shot down, as total and utter nonsense and bullshit... and that's why they play the "environmental issues" card over and over, like broken records... it's supposed to work! Eventually.... it WILL work! Keep screaming "THE ENVIRONMENT!" long enough, and just enough brain-dead morons out there will adopt the viewpoint, and voila...the old trump card works every time! Bottom line, it's LESS ENVIRONMENTALLY HAZARDOUS THAN DRILLING OFFSHORE!
Click to expand...

The two ex-Shell scientists who are masterminding the project, Harold Vinegar and Scott Nguyen are not Jewish.
 
Dixie said:
We don't live in 1842 America, where privateers are blasting away mountains with pressurized water to get at the gold and silver! We have a very elaborate and sophisticated system of environmental regulations and mandates which have to be met. We are already paying a great deal of our tax money to fund these governmental agencies and regulatory groups. This would not cost us anything extra to monitor or regulate.
Click to expand...
Wait a minute...are you praising these groups, or labeling them as 'liberals who do cartwheels in order to keep Big Oil from profitting'?
 
Dixie said:
So your point is, the Jews know how to acquire the smartest minds??? :dunno:
Click to expand...

I am basically saying that the Israelis have the incentive and the means to pursue this particular avenue of research and incidentally, in answer to Dixie, that the top scientists on the project are not Jewish.

The biggest unknowns though are whether it is possible to horizontally drill for long distances and place heating elements which remain intact for long periods of time. That's why it is different to the Shell project in Colorado, where the heating is produced by elements in vertically drilled boreholes.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
I am basically saying that the Israelis have the incentive and the means to pursue this particular avenue of research and incidentally, in answer to Dixie, that the top scientists on the project are not Jewish.

The biggest unknowns though are whether it is possible to horizontally drill for long distances and place heating elements which remain intact for long periods of time. That's why it is different to the Shell project in Colorado, where the heating is produced by elements in vertically drilled boreholes.
Click to expand...
Is there groundwater on this site? I know a big issue in other sites is the fact that groundwater must be 'frozen' in order to drill.
 
Althea said:
Is there groundwater on this site? I know a big issue in other sites is the fact that groundwater must be 'frozen' in order to drill.
Click to expand...


The Piceance Basin, Colorado project uses a freezing process to form an impermeable barrier around the periphery as the rock is not confined to just a thin strata layer. In Israel, they are using a horizontal drilling technique for the heating elements in the Shfela Basin shale, the aquifer beneath is protected by a 200 metre thick non porous chalk bed. Also because hydrogen is produced the resultant crude is partially hydrogenated and consequently much lighter and sweeter in composition than would otherwise be the case.. Another by-product is methane which can be used to provide some if not all of the energy needs for the process. If this all sounds too good to be true, it might just be however it is looking promising so far. The whole thing is explained in far more detail at the link.

Water is destined to not be the issue that it is presently since the discovery of vast gas deposits off the Northern Israeli coast which means there will be an abundant source of cheap energy to power desalination plants in the future, Israel may well end being a net energy exporter!

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/158/israel-oil?partner=homepage_newsletter
 
Last edited:
\\()// said:
So if you recite the Lord's prayer, God doesn't hear you because you didn't write the words?
Click to expand...

So you claim that you wrote the Lord's Prayer when you recite it and believe that a cited article is the same thing as a self-written one?
 
Damocles said:
Then why are you asking silly questions that suggest that? A cited article is a cited article, not the original thought of any poster, is it not?
Click to expand...

Dancin' for Dixie now, Dalai Damocles?

It's simple.

Dixie claims he didn't mention Obama because the author of the article titled the thread.

I claim he did, by titling and posting a thread about "Obama", regardless of original authorship.

The example of the Lord's Prayer was supposed to reveal the absurdity of Dixie's deceptive denial.

Clearly, it wasn't simple enough for him, or you.

Now, dance.

Emi0l.gif
 
\\()// said:
Dancin' for Dixie now, Dalai Damocles?

It's simple.

Dixie claims he didn't mention Obama because the author of the article titled the thread.

I claim he did, by titling and posting a thread about "Obama", regardless of original authorship.

The example of the Lord's Prayer was supposed to reveal the absurdity of Dixie's deceptive denial.

Clearly, it wasn't simple enough for him, or you.

Now, dance.

Emi0l.gif
Click to expand...

Interesting. You say that citing an article doesn't make you the author, but still insist that posting an article means you wrote it?
 
Damocles said:
Interesting. You say that citing an article doesn't make you the author, but still insist that posting an article means you wrote it?
Click to expand...

Still not simple enough for you?

I am saying that by posting the thread Dixie mentioned Obama.

He denies having done so, claiming that because the article was composed by someone else, he did not mention Obama...
 
Damocles said:
Then why are you asking silly questions that suggest that? A cited article is a cited article, not the original thought of any poster, is it not?
Click to expand...
If you recited the Lord's Prayer, then you agree/accept it.

If you cite an author, and offer a thread for discussion, you either agree with the piece, or you refute it.

In this case, Dixie agrees with it. By default, he blames Obama for the lack of investment in a venture with no forseeable profit for a long time.

And then he backpedaled, and agreed that oversight is necessary to guarantee the environmental safety issues that he earlier claimed were bogus.


And he cited a preference for Skippy peanut butter, which is the only sane offering he's made in this thread.
 
Althea said:
If you recited the Lord's Prayer, then you agree/accept it.

If you cite an author, and offer a thread for discussion, you either agree with the piece, or you refute it.

In this case, Dixie agrees with it. By default, he blames Obama for the lack of investment in a venture with no forseeable profit for a long time.

And then he backpedaled, and agreed that oversight is necessary to guarantee the environmental safety issues that he earlier claimed were bogus.


And he cited a preference for Skippy peanut butter, which is the only sane offering he's made in this thread.
Click to expand...

You have done a nice job in a short time of figuring Dixie out!
 
Rana said:
You have done a nice job in a short time of figuring Dixie out!
Click to expand...
It appears as if there are at least 2 people using the acct.

One of them may be a 13 year old child, who hasn't mastered the art of cognitive thought.

And the other has anger issues, that cloud his judgement.
 
Althea said:
If you recited the Lord's Prayer, then you agree/accept it.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. If I recite it I am simply reciting. I don't believe in that magic man, and reciting it won't change that.

If you cite an author, and offer a thread for discussion, you either agree with the piece, or you refute it.
Click to expand...
Or you present it only for comment. I do that often.

In this case, Dixie agrees with it. By default, he blames Obama for the lack of investment in a venture with no forseeable profit for a long time.
Click to expand...

That's possible, but simply posting an article doesn't "say" that.

And then he backpedaled, and agreed that oversight is necessary to guarantee the environmental safety issues that he earlier claimed were bogus.


And he cited a preference for Skippy peanut butter, which is the only sane offering he's made in this thread.
Click to expand...

This is just fluff at this point.
 
Althea said:
Wait a minute...are you praising these groups, or labeling them as 'liberals who do cartwheels in order to keep Big Oil from profitting'?
Click to expand...

See, here is the problem we seem to be having with communication. Can you please copy and paste the text that I posted, which led you to imagine I was "praising" some regulatory agency, or "labeling them as 'liberals who do cartwheels'?" Because I just don't see anything in the text I posted which even comes remotely close to that. So apparently, you are interpreting something I posted incorrectly, or you are imagining you are reading shit that isn't there. Either way, it has become an insurmountable problem in conversing like rational adults, and we really need to get to the bottom of that before we can continue.

All I ever said was, we have governmental regulatory agencies already established, who's job it is to see that companies meet specific environmental guidelines in handling contamination. Whether these are regulations and agencies established by Liberals or whether they were established by a bipartisan Congress, is beside the point. Again, the POINT IS... we have the infrastructure in place to monitor the process and ensure the environment is protected. We pay a lot of tax money each year for this service, and this is precisely why they are there. To sit here and blindly pretend these agencies don't exist, and any such process would simply be left to the discretion of greedy rich oil tycoons who wouldn't give two shits about the environment, is intellectually dishonest. Again, this isn't 1842, we aren't pressure blasting mountains away! Things have changed since then, we have safety mechanisms in place, criteria have to be met, mandates have to be complied with. All of this is calculated and figured into the very expensive price of doing this, it's not cheap or easy, or we'd already be doing it. But the "excuse" of not furthering this technology because it might harm the environment, is a fucking absolute JOKE!
 
Damocles said:
Nonsense. If I recite it I am simply reciting. I don't believe in that magic man, and reciting it won't change that.
Click to expand...
You recite the Lords Prayer? Why? When?


Or you present it only for comment. I do that often.
Click to expand...
Yes, and his comments were in the affirmative.


That's possible, but simply posting an article doesn't "say" that.
Click to expand...
see above

This is just fluff at this point.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you should read the thread? He's running in circles. Why don't you explain how one can argue that 'liberals always trot out the environment as an excuse to keep oil companies from making a profit', and then offer the extensive/mandatory oversight needed to assure environ. safety?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top