Apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
In gold we trust sort of thing?Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherdoobie
-bd :dabs:
Printable View
Apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigglesIn gold we trust sort of thing?Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherdoobie
-bd :dabs:
Someone - either one of you will do - tell me exactly why a natural gas pipeline in/through ANWR is a bad idea, and/or who would it hurt.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigglesIn gold we trust sort of thing?Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherdoobie
Do it now.
I will reply by reciting a short litany of those who would benefit.
I rarely debate politics. It's not my cup of tea. I prefer to let my vote speak for me (talking about politics - bores me to tears, mostly).Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4Someone - either one of you will do - tell me exactly why a natural gas pipeline in/through ANWR is a bad idea, and/or who would it hurt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
Do it now.
I will reply by reciting a short litany of those who would benefit.
I wasn't really questioning the idea of a pipeline in/through ANWR. However, I find it ridiculous that Palin claims it's "Gods will" to do so.
-bd
Ah.Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherdoobieI rarely debate politics. It's not my cup of tea. I prefer to let my vote speak for me (talking about politics - bores me to tears, mostly).Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I wasn't really questioning the idea of a pipeline in/through ANWR. However, I find it ridiculous that Palin claims it's "Gods will" to do so.
-bd
So you object on religious grounds. :dabs:
I don't like the fact...that she professes to know what God's will is. It's arrogant and offensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4Ah.Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherdoobie
So you object on religious grounds. :dabs:
-bd :dabs:
This isn't original, I got it off the web.
As a military member residing in Alaska with a child old enough to enter kindergarten in most states and a wife whom has worked in education for the state of Alaska, Sarah Palin is not the candidate you wish to support if education is high on your list of priorities. Schools in her state (specifically the Fairbanks area, interior Alaska) are not in accordance with the "No Child Left Behind” Act of 2001 signed into law by President Bush. They lack Special Education teachers and tutors for special needs students and students behind the learning curve on the suggested curriculum. Alaska does not fund its schools using state taxes. Rather, it uses federal income tax to fund its schools. Alaska schools refuse to become Title I schools. Title I schools are those schools required under the “No Child Left Behind” Act of 2001 to provide supplemental instruction to students that are special needs or falling behind in their curriculum. The state of Alaska, under Governor Palin, has cut the aforementioned programs that the federal money was intended to provide for by labeling these students other than special needs in the areas stated and not classifying as Title I. In doing so the State of Alaska, under Governor Palin, deceptively has accepted federal money for services not rendered, while continuing the permanent dividend fund. She is quite a reformer indeed. This is quite a disturbing revelation considered she has mothered a special needs child.
I prefer Aunt Bessie's.
Generally a nature reserve is left pretty much untouched. Is it proposed that the pipeline be buried out of view or it going to be one of those cheap jobs that blight the scenery and rust and leak like anything?Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4Someone - either one of you will do - tell me exactly why a natural gas pipeline in/through ANWR is a bad idea, and/or who would it hurt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
Do it now.
I will reply by reciting a short litany of those who would benefit.
Why can't the pipe go around the nature reserve if it is one of the above ground jobs?
Beneficiaries? Exxon etc., :shifty: I doubt it would make petrol cheaper.
[QUOTE=Biggles;2958631]Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Okay, first some perspective, and leaving aside the pipeline for a moment:Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
All of the United Kingdom (if Google is to be trusted) comprises just under 60 million acres.
Alaska comes in at seven times that size - 420 million acres.
ANWR is 19 million acres, or about one-third the size of the entire United Kingdom.
All of which begs a wee, tiny question - are there any pipelines anywhere in the UK that are regarded as the blight of, what...Olde Blighty?
Would anyone here seriously posit this vast track of land has been or will be blighted by (in the case of drilling in ANWR) the use of three thousand acres?
Pipelines are homely, yes.
Convince me, in light of the above information, of the overwhelming weight of opinion relative to looks.
If it bothers you, give it a coat of paint, ffs.
If we drilled for oil in ANWR, I could drop you anywhere in the preserve and you would likely not even find the pipeline for six months.
See above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
So?Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
What about the 700,000 jobs to build and run the operation?
How could gasoline not be at least slightly cheaper?
Not to mention the positive effect of providing our own oil, rather than supporting Wahabbist Saudi church-schools by purchasing from the mid-east?
Need I go on? :whistling
Yes, you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
BTW...I find this ironic and pathetically amusing:
Four years ago, when neither Republican candidate had any military service to speak of, being a military hero was considered to be a non-qualification. Kerry was keelhauled- or "Swift-boated"- by the Republican right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rush Online (Rush Limbaugh's website, Feb. 8, 2004)
What is today being claimed as John McCain's greatest asset?
His military service.
Check out details of Matanuska Maid Dairy in Alaska under governor Sarah Palin, and you'll ask yourself, "Why was I thinking she could help run the country?"
http://confrontaal.blogspot.com/2008...dal-final.html
Clearly just the ranting of the liberal press.Quote:
Originally Posted by cuthalion
And probably sexist too.
She MUST be qualified...she has a vagina.
Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
It should be duly noted; that President Bush served with the Air National Guard - proudly defending Texas and Alabama from the Viet Cong.
-bd :mellow:
And to this very day neither state has gone Commie, so he did a hell of a job.Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherdoobie
Did you know that McCain was a POW and Palin hunts wolves from helicopters?
Somehow, that makes me feel safer.
USA! USA! USA!
I thought they banned helicopter hunts?
Are helicopters endangered species now :unsure:Quote:
Originally Posted by IdolEyes787
Are helicopters endangered species now :unsure:Quote:
Originally Posted by IdolEyes787
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpatulaGeekGirl
Noice. How's it going, SGG?
-bd :happy:
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by IdolEyes787
No but there's enough pressure on them that the government is considering a 3 Bell limit.Quote:
Originally Posted by enoughfakefilesAre helicopters endangered species now :unsure:Quote:
Originally Posted by IdolEyes787
Quote:
Cunt.
Then I will, but tomorrow, rather than tonight.Quote:
Originally Posted by clockerYes, you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I'm gonna have some ice cream and kick back. :dabs:
On this at least, we are in total agreement.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Ice cream>internet bullshit.
Did you know that Haagen Daz dropped (as in, STOPPED MAKING!!) Vanilla Fudge?
Fukkin elitist, fake Scandinavian bastards.
They've stopped responding to my calls....
That's socialism for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by clockerOn this at least, we are in total agreement.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Ice cream>internet bullshit.
Did you know that Haagen Daz dropped (as in, STOPPED MAKING!!) Vanilla Fudge?
Fukkin elitist, fake Scandinavian bastards.
They've stopped responding to my calls....
Vanilla fudge shortages, ftw.
Ben and Jerry's > *
-bd :wub:
Sorry, inferior mouthfeel.Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherdoobie
Best ice cream ever is from the University of Wisconsin's Agriculture School (Dairy division), sold in the student union hall in Madison.
Supposedly, the U. of Pennsylvania's is equally as good but I can't confirm this.
If I lived in Madison I'd be a bleedin blimp in no time.
Okay, in order:Quote:
Originally Posted by clockerYes, you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
The 700K number comes from a 1997 study commissioned in response to the original decision to remove ANWR from consideration for drilling.
Currently ANWR.org estimates job generation could/would fall anywhere between 250K and 735K.
Check here, if you like:
http://www.anwr.org/topten.htm
Never mind "dumping" a fraction of those people into a wildlife refuge - dump twice that many, and they'd still be lost in an area that size.
700K divided by 3K = 230-odd people per acre.
Not many at all, considering it as an industrial site.
Besides which, what "adverse" effect do you refer to, and, on top of that, who are you (or Uncle Sam, for that matter) to tell Alaskan citizens they can't do something that is good for them and the rest of our country?
Really, now - what's it to you, as long as it's done right?
As to precisely what type of oil is under ANWR, I'm sure some forecasting can be done, but again, if whatever-it-is roughly fits the definition of "oil", it will be of benefit, even ignoring the boon of jobs.
Gasoline isn't the only consideration; we have tons of other uses for petroleum, as you know.
As to this...
-"The total production from ANWR would be between 0.4 and 1.2 percent of total world oil consumption in 2030. Consequently, ANWR oil production is not projected to have a large impact on world oil prices.
...I would ask, if you claim it cannot even be known what type of crude you will find, how can this info be treated as gospel?
Bottom line:
We know there's a shitload of oil, but we cannot know anything else to any degree of precision, apart from the fact it will have a beneficial effect on prices, and we have no further to look for evidence of that than the reaction (price-wise) to Bush's statement urging more drilling, and that's a fact.
As to the rest, China and India aside, I daresay even the Canadians might be offended at being equated with Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and the like.
The more we do for ourselves, the less we'll need done by others - fact.
I'd also like an answer to this question:
What is the point, even if we are running short of oil, and need to develop alternatives, of leaving a single drop of it in the ground?
Why ask me?Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Ask the oil companies.
Currently, less than a quarter of the 40 million acres of land that they already lease is under development.
Why is that?
Bush/Cheney have already overridden environmental protections, loosened licensing procedures and provided tax incentives - effectively given the land away (the average cost to the oil companies is approximately $3 per year per acre for these leases) and what have they done with it?
Absolutely nothing.
You want to drill for every last drop...fine, let's start with land that oil companies already control- land that's within the continental US (lower transportation cost) and far less challenging climate-wise.
Edit:
In addition...
You do realize that there is absolutely no prohibition against exporting oil from any of the US sites?
Given that all our refineries are privately owned by multinational corporations whose #1 priority is profit, what guarantee do we have that oil produced from ANWR will even end up in US gas stations?
I'll take your word for it, Clocker. Those Badgers know their dairy.Quote:
Originally Posted by clockerSorry, inferior mouthfeel.Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherdoobie
Best ice cream ever is from the University of Wisconsin's Agriculture School (Dairy division), sold in the student union hall in Madison.
Supposedly, the U. of Pennsylvania's is equally as good but I can't confirm this.
If I lived in Madison I'd be a bleedin blimp in no time.
Fact.
-bd
Except we've designated it as a Federal Wildlife Preserve, which is a bit different.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Putting an oil derrick in your front yard isn't all that intrusive "considering it as an industrial site".
What about "dumping" 700k people in an area a quarter of that size? It's my understanding - that they (the people) will be heavily packed; into a much smaller area.Quote:
Never mind "dumping" a fraction of those people into a wildlife refuge - dump twice that many, and they'd still be lost in an area that size.
700K divided by 3K = 230-odd people per acre.
Not many at all, considering it as an industrial site.
-bd
Who's this "we"?Quote:
Originally Posted by clockerExcept we've designated it as a Federal Wildlife Preserve, which is a bit different.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Putting an oil derrick in your front yard isn't all that intrusive "considering it as an industrial site".
What about the citizens of Alaska?
If they don't mind oil derricks why should you or anyone else?
Can you see Alaska from your place?
I don't follow, BD. :huh:Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherdoobie
"We" would be the entirety of the US population.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
ANWR is FEDERAL property, not state controlled.
Sarah Palin's opinion about it's use carries no more weight than mine (at least in theory).
On June 9th the BLM auctioned off 55,000 acres of the Roan Plateau in Colorado to oil/gas producers despite significant public opposition.
Since "Drill, Baby, Drill" is the new Republican mantra, presumably that deed is ok, huh?
State's rights are fine as long as they don't get in the way of energy producers?
[QUOTE=clocker;2961692]Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Then your use of the term "we" must be considered theoretical as well; I have no memory of being consulted on the matter of land use in Alaska, and I'm pretty sure you don't, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
How does that apply, especially since there was public opposition?Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
BTW-
Colorado has just over 93 million acres, and you are griping over 55,000.
ANWR (once again) is, by itself, 19 million acres, and approximately 3,000 would be subject to development.
Perhaps if the Roan Plateau weren't Federal land, this deal you object to wouldn't even have taken place.
Seems to me you've forgotten that the central player in all this is supposed to be the people, not the state; after all, we are not Communists.
Well, too bad the point is moot...McCain opposes drilling in ANWR.
Oh wait, does he?
I guess we'll have to see what Sarah tells him to do.
That was my thought, too. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by clocker
It's interesting, McCain seems almost irrelevant to his own campaign.