You mean the magnetic pole? Yes, that is changing and shifting as we speak.On 2006-01-09 21:07, garyb wrote:
how about the earth's axis point changing?
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: BingoTheClowno on 2006-01-10 07:54 ]</font>
Global Warming
-
BingoTheClowno
- Posts: 1722
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
-
Counterparts
- Posts: 1963
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Bath, England
There was an interesting program on BBC2 (might have been Horizon) last year, which investigated a human-driven effect which is working against the effects of global warming.
It was based on studies which have been going on for some time (I think that the program focussed on research based in Australia) which simply measures the amount of sunlight striking the Earth's surface, by measuring the evaporation of water.
What they found was that, over the last fifty years or so, the amount of sunlight reaching the surface of the Earth has dramatically reduced, which causes a cooling effect.
The direct cause of this is the emission of particles (as opposed to greenhouse gasses, most notably CO2) into the atmosphere.
Incredibly, in the few days following 9/11, they found that the amount of sunlight striking the Earth's surface rose considerably - a direct result of grounding America's commercial airline fleet! The vapour trails left by these high-altitude aircraft have a significant impact on sunlight levels at the Earth's surface.
The Kyoto agreement (which many countries have agreed to) aims to reduce these particulate emissions.
The contention of the program was that we've been masking the true extent of the global warming effect by emmiting these particles into the atmosphere, and if we continue to reduce the levels of these emissions, global warming will accelerate alarmingly as we would be reducing the amount of cooling which our actions are causing.
I was pretty amazed at the degree of the effect of having many planes airbourne and this has led me to reconsider how much of global warming may be contributable to our release of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, and how much may be a natural cycle.
I've previously been of the opinion that our actions could only be having a very small effect compared to that of natural processes, but now I'm not so sure.
Either way, whether it's natural forces or our actions there is such a huge degree of hysteresis in a system as large as the Earth that, should the entire planet stop burning fossil fuel tomorrow it will make not one bit of difference. The Earth will continue to warm up and will continue to do so for some time to come yet.
As the Chinese say, we are "living in interesting times".
It was based on studies which have been going on for some time (I think that the program focussed on research based in Australia) which simply measures the amount of sunlight striking the Earth's surface, by measuring the evaporation of water.
What they found was that, over the last fifty years or so, the amount of sunlight reaching the surface of the Earth has dramatically reduced, which causes a cooling effect.
The direct cause of this is the emission of particles (as opposed to greenhouse gasses, most notably CO2) into the atmosphere.
Incredibly, in the few days following 9/11, they found that the amount of sunlight striking the Earth's surface rose considerably - a direct result of grounding America's commercial airline fleet! The vapour trails left by these high-altitude aircraft have a significant impact on sunlight levels at the Earth's surface.
The Kyoto agreement (which many countries have agreed to) aims to reduce these particulate emissions.
The contention of the program was that we've been masking the true extent of the global warming effect by emmiting these particles into the atmosphere, and if we continue to reduce the levels of these emissions, global warming will accelerate alarmingly as we would be reducing the amount of cooling which our actions are causing.
I was pretty amazed at the degree of the effect of having many planes airbourne and this has led me to reconsider how much of global warming may be contributable to our release of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, and how much may be a natural cycle.
I've previously been of the opinion that our actions could only be having a very small effect compared to that of natural processes, but now I'm not so sure.
Either way, whether it's natural forces or our actions there is such a huge degree of hysteresis in a system as large as the Earth that, should the entire planet stop burning fossil fuel tomorrow it will make not one bit of difference. The Earth will continue to warm up and will continue to do so for some time to come yet.
As the Chinese say, we are "living in interesting times".
well, in any case, the solution is not to give all power to a centralized "illuminated" cadre that cares so little for humanity that they would speak blithely of 80% population "reduction". i'm not volunteering for death to save myself from death, thank you.
studies and numbers are unreliable as the oil example shows. the "powers" that be are perfectly willing to lie about these things. everyone wants to take the position that they know what is up because they saw a show or heard something once, but i still dare tthat person to do some research on HAARP and other weather weapons(yes, i know HAARP is not specifically a weapon, it just CAN be one if you set it up that way...), check out "earthquake causing weapons" and see what they do with quantum physics(and it's not just the magnetic axis that has shifted, remember the big quake and tsunami? the physical axis has shifted. a few degrees = no life on the planet...). check out abiotic oil....or not....
studies and numbers are unreliable as the oil example shows. the "powers" that be are perfectly willing to lie about these things. everyone wants to take the position that they know what is up because they saw a show or heard something once, but i still dare tthat person to do some research on HAARP and other weather weapons(yes, i know HAARP is not specifically a weapon, it just CAN be one if you set it up that way...), check out "earthquake causing weapons" and see what they do with quantum physics(and it's not just the magnetic axis that has shifted, remember the big quake and tsunami? the physical axis has shifted. a few degrees = no life on the planet...). check out abiotic oil....or not....
-
BingoTheClowno
- Posts: 1722
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
Was it Global Dimming by any chance?On 2006-01-10 08:40, Counterparts wrote:
There was an interesting program on BBC2 (might have been Horizon) last year, which investigated a human-driven effect which is working against the effects of global warming.
from the wikipedia link:
The hypothesis of abiogenic petroleum origin (synonyms: abiotic, abyssal, endogenous, inorganic, juvenile, mineral, primordial) holds that petroleum is formed by non-biological processes deep in the earth's crust and mantle. It contradicts the more widely-held view that petroleum is a fossil fuel produced from the remains of ancient living organisms. The constituent precursors of petroleum (mainly methane) are commonplace and it is possible that appropriate conditions exist for hydrocarbons to be formed deep within the earth. This hypothesis dates to the 19th century, when the French chemist Marcellin Berthelot and the Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleev proposed it, and was revived in the 1950s.
The theory stands in contrast to that of Peak Oil, which presumes a fixed and dwindling supply of oil that was formed through biological processes.
"The capital fact to note is that petroleum was born in the depths of the earth, and it is only there that we must seek its origin." (Dmitri Mendeleev, 1877)[1]
Russian geologist Nikolai Alexandrovitch Kudryavtsev was the first to propose the modern abiotic theory of petroleum in 1951. He analyzed the geology of the Athabasca Tar Sands in Alberta, Canada and concluded that no "source rocks" could form the enormous volume of hydrocarbons, and that therefore the most plausible explanation is abiotic deep petroleum. The Russian-Ukrainian theory of petroleum, based on thermodynamic calculations made for the first time by the Ukrainian scientist, Prof. Emmanuil B. Chekaliuk (1967), contends that petroleum is formed at high pressure and temperature in the earth's mantle, out of inorganic carbon never part of animals or plants. This theory is said to be supported by experimental studies conducted by Dr J.F. Kenney and his Russian colleagues. Their conclusions about petroleum origin are also said to vindicate the theories propounded by Kudryavtsev.
Although this theory is supported by a large minority of geologists in Russia and Ukraine, where it was intensively developed since the 1950s, it has only recently begun to receive attention in the West, where the biogenic petroleum theory is still believed by the vast majority of petroleum geologists. Kudryavtsev's work was continued by a constellation of bright researchers — Petr N. Kropotkin, Vladimir B. Porfir'ev, Emmanuil B. Chekaliuk, Vladilen A. Krayushkin, Georgi E. Boyko, Georgi I. Voitov, Grygori N. Dolenko, Iona V. Greenberg, Nikolai S. Beskrovny, Victor F. Linetsky and many others. Their pupils and schools have successfully developed in spite of steady resistance from powerful opponents. The torch of abiogenic knowledge has now been taken up by the third generation of scientists in the CIS countries and abroad. Planetary scientist Thomas Gold was one of the abiogenic theory's most prominent proponents in recent years in the West.[2] Although it was originally denied that abiogenic hydrocarbons exist at all on Earth, this is now accepted by Western geologists. The orthodox and widely accepted position now is that while abiogenic hydrocarbons exist (in inverse proportion to hydrocarbon chain complexity), they are not produced in commercially significant quantities.
A variation of the abiogenic theory includes alteration by microbes similar to those which form the basis of the ecology around deep hydrothermal vents.
One prediction of most abiogenic theories is that other planets of the solar system or their moons have large petroleum oceans, either from hydrocarbons present at the formation of the solar system, or from subsequent chemical reactions.
One indication that this theory is receiving increasing attention from Western geologists is indicated by the conference of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists designed by Michel T. Halbouty was scheduled previously for June 2003 in London than postponed to July 2004 in Vienna, entitled "Origin of Petroleum—Biogenic and/or Abiogenic and Its Significance in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production". Several considerations caused it to be cancelled. Instead, AAPG held a one day session on the topic just prior to the June 2005 annual meeting in Calgary, Alberta.[3]
synthetic petroleum has been made by men for years(nazi germany fueled tanks with it). petroleum is known to be abiotic by the fact that it is easily and commonly produced in the lab under conditions that are common in the inside of the earth. conditions that are much more likely to exist in the real world deep in the earth than billions of tons of organic matter deposited almost all at once, makes petroleum for fuel and lubrication daily. ocams razor always wins EXCEPT in a situation where profits are involed, as oil is only expensive when it's not common and is limited. what a stupid argument that the hypnotized repeat; millions of years ago a bunch of stuff died and turned to oil and this is not a continuing but a limited process. this principle is demonstrated in the diamond industry, an industry which is controlled by a shady cabal who manipulate the market making scarce another carbon form(the most common element on the earth)look scarce. in reality, there are MANY parts of africa where diamonds are everywhere on the ground. diamonds are at best SEMI-precious, like jade or turqoise, plentiful. if you try to pick up those diamonds from the ground and sell them, however, you may be shot on sight or put in jail for many years as a smuggler....so it is with oil.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2006-01-10 16:08 ]</font>
The hypothesis of abiogenic petroleum origin (synonyms: abiotic, abyssal, endogenous, inorganic, juvenile, mineral, primordial) holds that petroleum is formed by non-biological processes deep in the earth's crust and mantle. It contradicts the more widely-held view that petroleum is a fossil fuel produced from the remains of ancient living organisms. The constituent precursors of petroleum (mainly methane) are commonplace and it is possible that appropriate conditions exist for hydrocarbons to be formed deep within the earth. This hypothesis dates to the 19th century, when the French chemist Marcellin Berthelot and the Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleev proposed it, and was revived in the 1950s.
The theory stands in contrast to that of Peak Oil, which presumes a fixed and dwindling supply of oil that was formed through biological processes.
"The capital fact to note is that petroleum was born in the depths of the earth, and it is only there that we must seek its origin." (Dmitri Mendeleev, 1877)[1]
Russian geologist Nikolai Alexandrovitch Kudryavtsev was the first to propose the modern abiotic theory of petroleum in 1951. He analyzed the geology of the Athabasca Tar Sands in Alberta, Canada and concluded that no "source rocks" could form the enormous volume of hydrocarbons, and that therefore the most plausible explanation is abiotic deep petroleum. The Russian-Ukrainian theory of petroleum, based on thermodynamic calculations made for the first time by the Ukrainian scientist, Prof. Emmanuil B. Chekaliuk (1967), contends that petroleum is formed at high pressure and temperature in the earth's mantle, out of inorganic carbon never part of animals or plants. This theory is said to be supported by experimental studies conducted by Dr J.F. Kenney and his Russian colleagues. Their conclusions about petroleum origin are also said to vindicate the theories propounded by Kudryavtsev.
Although this theory is supported by a large minority of geologists in Russia and Ukraine, where it was intensively developed since the 1950s, it has only recently begun to receive attention in the West, where the biogenic petroleum theory is still believed by the vast majority of petroleum geologists. Kudryavtsev's work was continued by a constellation of bright researchers — Petr N. Kropotkin, Vladimir B. Porfir'ev, Emmanuil B. Chekaliuk, Vladilen A. Krayushkin, Georgi E. Boyko, Georgi I. Voitov, Grygori N. Dolenko, Iona V. Greenberg, Nikolai S. Beskrovny, Victor F. Linetsky and many others. Their pupils and schools have successfully developed in spite of steady resistance from powerful opponents. The torch of abiogenic knowledge has now been taken up by the third generation of scientists in the CIS countries and abroad. Planetary scientist Thomas Gold was one of the abiogenic theory's most prominent proponents in recent years in the West.[2] Although it was originally denied that abiogenic hydrocarbons exist at all on Earth, this is now accepted by Western geologists. The orthodox and widely accepted position now is that while abiogenic hydrocarbons exist (in inverse proportion to hydrocarbon chain complexity), they are not produced in commercially significant quantities.
A variation of the abiogenic theory includes alteration by microbes similar to those which form the basis of the ecology around deep hydrothermal vents.
One prediction of most abiogenic theories is that other planets of the solar system or their moons have large petroleum oceans, either from hydrocarbons present at the formation of the solar system, or from subsequent chemical reactions.
One indication that this theory is receiving increasing attention from Western geologists is indicated by the conference of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists designed by Michel T. Halbouty was scheduled previously for June 2003 in London than postponed to July 2004 in Vienna, entitled "Origin of Petroleum—Biogenic and/or Abiogenic and Its Significance in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production". Several considerations caused it to be cancelled. Instead, AAPG held a one day session on the topic just prior to the June 2005 annual meeting in Calgary, Alberta.[3]
synthetic petroleum has been made by men for years(nazi germany fueled tanks with it). petroleum is known to be abiotic by the fact that it is easily and commonly produced in the lab under conditions that are common in the inside of the earth. conditions that are much more likely to exist in the real world deep in the earth than billions of tons of organic matter deposited almost all at once, makes petroleum for fuel and lubrication daily. ocams razor always wins EXCEPT in a situation where profits are involed, as oil is only expensive when it's not common and is limited. what a stupid argument that the hypnotized repeat; millions of years ago a bunch of stuff died and turned to oil and this is not a continuing but a limited process. this principle is demonstrated in the diamond industry, an industry which is controlled by a shady cabal who manipulate the market making scarce another carbon form(the most common element on the earth)look scarce. in reality, there are MANY parts of africa where diamonds are everywhere on the ground. diamonds are at best SEMI-precious, like jade or turqoise, plentiful. if you try to pick up those diamonds from the ground and sell them, however, you may be shot on sight or put in jail for many years as a smuggler....so it is with oil.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2006-01-10 16:08 ]</font>
both sides are correct. those opposed to abiotic theory because it makes it look good to use hyrocarbons for everything are correct in saying that oil is not nessessarily a good substance to abuse. those who say that peak oil theorists are in the pocket of oil companies and are driving prices up unnessessarily are correct as well. one look at the firt argument shows the truth of the second. the fear of telling the TRUTH about where oil comes from(there is certainly SOME biological petroleum. if it's POSSIBLE it probably happens. if you read the lit, it's obvious that biotic oil must be the exception and not the rule, however)is that people will find it ok to use it like crazy when the price comes down to where supply and demand would actually put it(about 30cents per gallon for gasoline).
the point about all this oil rant is that those in charge WILL flat-out LIE about this stuff for reasons that are dubious, at best. the question ISN'T whether the weather is changing(it IS), but WHY....
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2006-01-10 16:22 ]</font>
the point about all this oil rant is that those in charge WILL flat-out LIE about this stuff for reasons that are dubious, at best. the question ISN'T whether the weather is changing(it IS), but WHY....
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2006-01-10 16:22 ]</font>
-
Counterparts
- Posts: 1963
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Bath, England
Solution? We are a creature which has no natural enemies and breeds like rabbits - the result of that equation is shit heading towards a fan, whatever way you slice it up.garyb wrote:
well, in any case, the solution is not to give all power to a centralized "illuminated" cadre that cares so little for humanity that they would speak blithely of 80% population "reduction". i'm not volunteering for death to save myself from death, thank you.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with conspiracy theories, axis-shifting experiments, political orientation or whatever. This massive population is underpinned and supported by our technology and energy consumption, however.
Besides our own stupid selves, the only natural enemies we now potentially face are the super virii and bacterium which our own actions are creating.
Remember - when the original bubonic plague was over and done with, 50% of the (then) Earth's population lay dead! I won't be betting any of my own money that something like this could never happen again.
The Earth's axis is always shifting - it's called precession. Ditto the magnetic axis - there is some evidence to suggest that it was aligned 180 degrees to where it is now in the past. I couldn't give a rat's arse, to be honest - I have to take a philosophical attitude to all this - whatever has a beginning has an end, and that includes the human race. Maybe we continue for another billion years, maybe another thousand. Nothing is ever lost however, all of our experience, thought and emotion are held within Eternity. Humankind is just yet another little detour which the universe is taking. Enjoy your own little journey whilst it lasts.studies and numbers are unreliable as the oil example shows. the "powers" that be are perfectly willing to lie about these things. everyone wants to take the position that they know what is up because they saw a show or heard something once, but i still dare tthat person to do some research on HAARP and other weather weapons(yes, i know HAARP is not specifically a weapon, it just CAN be one if you set it up that way...), check out "earthquake causing weapons" and see what they do with quantum physics(and it's not just the magnetic axis that has shifted, remember the big quake and tsunami? the physical axis has shifted. a few degrees = no life on the planet...). check out abiotic oil....or not....
Royston
" The theory stands in contrast to that of Peak Oil, which presumes a fixed and dwindling supply of oil that was formed through biological processes. "
Peak oil is here now! I still beleve it is the motive for every country to quickly get there hands on oil. A desperate move of America to go invade Irak to get control over the last carbon energy. Conducting 911 themselves opening the door to wage a war in the middle east. Peak oil is as real a can be! Watch the major deals that are already closed and are jet o come.
The motive to tell people that new oil field are discovered or refilled is just so the stocks go up! If they found a field of 4000000 barrels they do the same trick. Making public that they found 1000000 barrels this year, and the next year, and the next year, and the next. Why ? Because if they'd make public they found 4000000 barrels in one year, they have to pay all taxes for 4000000 that same year.
The solution that the American administration came up with is to force down demand on carbon energy. How ? By letting the economy collapse. In other words , the dollar will fall very soon.
Counties all over the world are preparing for Peak oil.
Sources:
Book
"Crossing the rubicon" Micheal C. Ruppert
ISBN: 0-86571-540-8
Lectures:
"The truth and lies of 911"
"Denial stops here" (2005)
Then you all forget the Gulfstream that is responsible for our tempered climate. It is dropping already ! That's our climate change.
Look it up!
Am I being to pesimistic ?
Casper
Peak oil is here now! I still beleve it is the motive for every country to quickly get there hands on oil. A desperate move of America to go invade Irak to get control over the last carbon energy. Conducting 911 themselves opening the door to wage a war in the middle east. Peak oil is as real a can be! Watch the major deals that are already closed and are jet o come.
The motive to tell people that new oil field are discovered or refilled is just so the stocks go up! If they found a field of 4000000 barrels they do the same trick. Making public that they found 1000000 barrels this year, and the next year, and the next year, and the next. Why ? Because if they'd make public they found 4000000 barrels in one year, they have to pay all taxes for 4000000 that same year.
The solution that the American administration came up with is to force down demand on carbon energy. How ? By letting the economy collapse. In other words , the dollar will fall very soon.
Counties all over the world are preparing for Peak oil.
Sources:
Book
"Crossing the rubicon" Micheal C. Ruppert
ISBN: 0-86571-540-8
Lectures:
"The truth and lies of 911"
"Denial stops here" (2005)
Then you all forget the Gulfstream that is responsible for our tempered climate. It is dropping already ! That's our climate change.
Look it up!
Am I being to pesimistic ?
Casper
-
BingoTheClowno
- Posts: 1722
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
The chances ARE VERY HIGH that it *IS* running out.
Think about it ... Why do you think Iran have taken such a stance on Atomic Energy? A. They're gonna bloomin' need it, because they plan to continue selling their oil to the rest of the world. B. Despite what they say in denial of planning to make atomic bombs & missiles, they of course will because they know that the Bush administration will try to stop them selling their oil in Euros & causing the demise of the dollar as the world's leading/ruling currency.
Think about it ... Why do you think Iran have taken such a stance on Atomic Energy? A. They're gonna bloomin' need it, because they plan to continue selling their oil to the rest of the world. B. Despite what they say in denial of planning to make atomic bombs & missiles, they of course will because they know that the Bush administration will try to stop them selling their oil in Euros & causing the demise of the dollar as the world's leading/ruling currency.
-
BingoTheClowno
- Posts: 1722
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
The day someone tries attack Iran , is the day we can kiss our asses goodbye. The world want's oil too! Not only America.. Not only the west.
We all become aware of peak oil, and try to deal with this. Oil means being able to develop , so more demand is on the way as we all know.
The draft is back , a bankruption law ?
If you got bankrupt in America , they can force by law , were you eat ,sleep, work etc.
They are making survants! That's what it is.
Poor people , likely to join the army...
We all become aware of peak oil, and try to deal with this. Oil means being able to develop , so more demand is on the way as we all know.
The draft is back , a bankruption law ?
If you got bankrupt in America , they can force by law , were you eat ,sleep, work etc.
They are making survants! That's what it is.
Poor people , likely to join the army...
china announced this week that they are divesting of dollars.....
counterparts, i agree with your last paragraph completely, but unlike you, i take it to the point that i AM humanity. i don't want any suffering, dead or debased. in the event that the end comes(as it always does)i'll go willingly, but i won't hasten it for anyone if i can help it. there is NO shortage of ANYTHING on the face of the earth that is notman-made. elitist PIGS are the ones putting forth the idea that killing a bunch of people is nessessary. these pigs foment wars and worse, found societies like eugenics and worship moloch, the god of death, don't believe them, they're liars(or haven't you noticed?). disagree all you want, there are studies to prove and disprove. i'm telling you that there's more money and power to be made from scarcity and fear than plenty and calm....
the iranians want atomic power for a bomb and why wouldn't they? recent documents show that plans for a bomb were given to iran by the cia years ago, they love destabilization and plan for the future unlike the rest of us(whoever "they" are...)...
counterparts, i agree with your last paragraph completely, but unlike you, i take it to the point that i AM humanity. i don't want any suffering, dead or debased. in the event that the end comes(as it always does)i'll go willingly, but i won't hasten it for anyone if i can help it. there is NO shortage of ANYTHING on the face of the earth that is notman-made. elitist PIGS are the ones putting forth the idea that killing a bunch of people is nessessary. these pigs foment wars and worse, found societies like eugenics and worship moloch, the god of death, don't believe them, they're liars(or haven't you noticed?). disagree all you want, there are studies to prove and disprove. i'm telling you that there's more money and power to be made from scarcity and fear than plenty and calm....
the iranians want atomic power for a bomb and why wouldn't they? recent documents show that plans for a bomb were given to iran by the cia years ago, they love destabilization and plan for the future unlike the rest of us(whoever "they" are...)...
"the iranians want atomic power for a bomb and why wouldn't they? recent documents show that plans for a bomb were given to iran by the cia years ago, they love destabilization and plan for the future unlike the rest of us(whoever "they" are...)... "
For a bomb , for a bomb. We have nuke reactors too. For the energy! Not to make boms. What document are you refering to?
But it doesn't matter anywayzz.
The world has surrounded Iran and holding tight grip on it. US attack will trigger world wide attacks. China , Russia ,Europe, Afrika, A battle for the oil. All are carbon based economies. They will not turn back to lesser energy consumption on there own free will. No nation ever has.
Power blackouts all over the world occure more and more. China , Afrika , France ,and more.. Sometimes China has powerloss of three days. They are desperate.
If there was more oil wouldn't it be time to get it it out already? Obviously there is not.
For a bomb , for a bomb. We have nuke reactors too. For the energy! Not to make boms. What document are you refering to?
But it doesn't matter anywayzz.
The world has surrounded Iran and holding tight grip on it. US attack will trigger world wide attacks. China , Russia ,Europe, Afrika, A battle for the oil. All are carbon based economies. They will not turn back to lesser energy consumption on there own free will. No nation ever has.
Power blackouts all over the world occure more and more. China , Afrika , France ,and more.. Sometimes China has powerloss of three days. They are desperate.
If there was more oil wouldn't it be time to get it it out already? Obviously there is not.
China's 200 billion will just go straight back into the cycle. The US will simply use it to buy oil as they import over 60% of what they (US as mentioned 2 lines up) use. If the US can buy oil in dollars, great. If not, they'll need to buy Euros with Dollars to buy the oil (this will cost money (10-20% of that 200 billion))
The US is one of the world's top producers of lies. They can't print Dollars fast enough & don't want to either because every Dollar printed just becomes more debt. The Dollar is Definately dying & the only thing that could save it is TIRANY cloaked as democracy.
Like you say, why shouldn't Iran arm themselves to the hilt. Why shouldn't they draw a line not to be crossed by Invading forces. Holy moly, the US is parked on their doorstep bleeding oil from a trodden Iraq. The US consume around 25% of the world's yearly oil production, which is a bigger problem for the rest of the world than it is for f**king America
I have noticed that most people saying "there's plenty oil" or "rubbish it's nothing to worry about" are Americans. Meanwhile, the same dude jumps back in his 6 litre engine driven joke & does a burnout, doughnut & handbrake turn before hurtling off down the road .. saying "yeehah" .... "God bless America"
The US is one of the world's top producers of lies. They can't print Dollars fast enough & don't want to either because every Dollar printed just becomes more debt. The Dollar is Definately dying & the only thing that could save it is TIRANY cloaked as democracy.
Like you say, why shouldn't Iran arm themselves to the hilt. Why shouldn't they draw a line not to be crossed by Invading forces. Holy moly, the US is parked on their doorstep bleeding oil from a trodden Iraq. The US consume around 25% of the world's yearly oil production, which is a bigger problem for the rest of the world than it is for f**king America
I have noticed that most people saying "there's plenty oil" or "rubbish it's nothing to worry about" are Americans. Meanwhile, the same dude jumps back in his 6 litre engine driven joke & does a burnout, doughnut & handbrake turn before hurtling off down the road .. saying "yeehah" .... "God bless America"