China is building refineries out the ass,not only in China,but in Africa.

Refineries are being built all over the globe but not in the U.S..

So, Wolfgang, tell me: Why do you think no refineries have been built in the USA since 1976? Is it because there is no suitable place in all this vast land in which to build one? And despite the crunch of refinery capacity, they still can't find a good place to build one? I mean, you'd think out of 9,000,000 sq km they could find some piece of land on which to build one? Or is it because the oil majors can see the end of the industry in sight and don't want to make the major investment in the refineries, because it's not going to pay off?

So, Wolfgang, tell me: Why do you think no refineries have been built in the USA since 1976? Is it because there is no suitable place in all this vast land in which to build one? And despite the crunch of refinery capacity, they still can't find a good place to build one? I mean, you'd think out of 9,000,000 sq km they could find some piece of land on which to build one? Or is it because the oil majors can see the end of the industry in sight and don't want to make the major investment in the refineries, because it's not going to pay off?

End of the industry?!?
If the industry was at its end,there would be no refineries being built anywhere.

Why are refineries being built everwhere but the U.S.?
Why has our manufacturing base been gutted?
Why "free trade" agreements that act to lower our standard of living?

All these things play right into jew Kunstler's and the UN's "sustainable development'" i.e. Sovietization of the West.

Read all you can about "sustainable development" to see what the control freaks have in store for us.

"Peak oil" plays right into the scheme.

End of the industry?!?
If the industry was at its end,there would be no refineries being built anywhere.

Why are refineries being built everwhere but the U.S.?
Why has our manufacturing base been gutted?
Why "free trade" agreements that act to lower our standard of living?

All these things play right into jew Kunstler's and the UN's "sustainable development'" i.e. Sovietization of the West.

Read all you can about "sustainable development" to see what the control freaks have in store for us.

"Peak oil" plays right into the scheme.

You keep changing the subject. I want to know why you think refineries are not being built in the USA? You keep giving vague, nebulous answers and dodging the hard facts.

You keep changing the subject. I want to know why you think refineries are not being built in the USA? You keep giving vague, nebulous answers and dodging the hard facts.

You need to answer one simple question for me:if the age of oil is over then why are refineries being built all over the globe?

You claim I'm dodging the question and giving "nebulous" answers,when I've tried to explain to you in different posts that there are efforts long underway to reduce the living standards of America and the West in general,and making energy costs many times higher for the American public would certainly go a long way toward that end.How hard is that for you to comprehend?

Go Google "sustainable development" and read thoroughly and you'll likely come to the same conclusion that I did:that there are various global interests at work to level america's living standard down to the level of the rest of the world.
Deliberately keeping oil fields and refineries offline on our soil would certainly be a good way to ratchet up energy costs while serving a dual purpose of making America more weak and dependent on imports,
which not coincidentally,"free trade" agreements and the gutting of our manufacturing base also serves.

Does this clear things up for you a bit?
Our independence,sovereignty,manufacturing capacity,wealth-producing capacity,living standards,demographics are all being ratcheted down in order to meld America into a larger regional/global economic/political control system.

You need to answer one simple question for me:if the age of oil is over then why are refineries being built all over the globe?

Simple: they are being built in places like China where the oil industry is state-regulated. They're not a business, they don't have to worry about a future.

You claim I'm dodging the question and giving "nebulous" answers,when I've tried to explain to you in different posts that there are efforts long underway to reduce the living standards of America and the West in general,and making energy costs many times higher for the American public would certainly go a long way toward that end.How hard is that for you to comprehend?

I agree that there are such effort in existance, but this relates to Hubbert Peak Theory how?

Go Google "sustainable development" and read thoroughly and you'll likely come to the same conclusion that I did:that there are various global interests at work to level america's living standard down to the level of the rest of the world.

This sustainable developement certainly is BS, you're right about that. But I'm having some trouble linking this back to the Hubbert Peak concept?

Deliberately keeping oil fields and refineries offline on our soil would certainly be a good way to ratchet up energy costs while serving a dual purpose of making America more weak and dependent on imports,
which not coincidentally,"free trade" agreements and the gutting of our manufacturing base also serves.

That's very plausable, and right now it's impossible to say what the motives of the oil majors are.

Does this clear things up for you a bit?
Our independence,sovereignty,manufacturing capacity,wealth-producing capacity,living standards,demographics are all being ratcheted down in order to meld America into a larger regional/global economic/political control system.

I can only hope you're wrong about that one.

Cars and highways make White people fat and lazy and more "open minded" to having Mexicans come and mow the lawn, to living a lazy lifestyle of luxury cars and golfing and being "open minded" to Tiger Woods dating your daughter.

I can't believe you guys think the car system is good! As Antiochus Epiphanes said -- no Eisenhower highway, no freedom riders, no freedom riders, no desegregation.

A "worse lifestyle" would mean BIGGER WHITE FAMILIES!!

I can't believe you are taking the side of the filthy, disgusting, anti-White status quo, like the Wall Street Journal neo-cons who love the car system.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's one thing for second-graders to hold such childish notions, but quite another for presumably educated adults to argue that automobiles are economically and environmentally unsustainable "axles of evil." But with higher gas prices, as well as Malthusian-sounding warnings about catastrophic global warming and the planet running out of oil, the tirade has taken on a new plausibility. Maybe Al Gore had it right all along when he warned that the car and the combustible engine are "a mortal threat . . . more deadly than any military enemy."

* * *

Welcome to the modern-day Luddite movement, which once raged against the machine, but now targets the automobile. Just last month, environmentalists organized a "world car-free day," celebrated in more than 40 cities in the U.S. and Europe. In the left's vision of utopia, cars have been banished -- replaced by bicycles and mass transit systems. There is no smog or road congestion. And America has been liberated from those sociopathic, gas-guzzling, greenhouse-gas-emitting SUVs and Hummers that Jesus would never drive.

It all sounds idyllic, but in real life this fairy tale has a tragic ending. As Fred Smith, president of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, reminds us, if the "no car garage" had been a reality in New Orleans in August, we wouldn't have suffered 1,000 Katrina fatalities, but 10,000 or more. The automobile, especially those dreaded all-terrain four-wheel drive SUVs (ideal for driving through floodwaters) saved more lives during the Katrina disaster than all the combined relief efforts of FEMA, local police and fire squads, churches, the Salvation Army and the Red Cross. If every poor family had had a car and not a transit token, few would have had to be warehoused in the hellhole of the Superdome.

Welcome to the USA where not having a car means risking death and destruction? Give me a break.

Is this be best argument in favor of a car he can come up with? It's so specious that it's grounded in the idea that only a car can move a person in a time of need.Quote:
This month we paid honor to the heroism of Rosa Parks for fighting racism through the bus boycott in Montgomery. What helped sustain that historic freedom cause was that hundreds of blacks owned cars and trucks that they used to carpool others around the city.

Oy Vey, Vat a Deal this Wonderful Car System![/SIZE]

Hubbert's peak is predicated on the assumption that oil is a "fossil" fuel and is finite.
I think the theory ridiculous.
Logic would dictate that oil is abiotic in nature,not biotic.

The onus of scientific proof should be on the biotic side,the side that claims that dinosaurs and plant matter magically turned into trillions of barrels worth of material that we call oil.

As for China and others building refineries because they are state-subsidized,hence,not worried about profits and losses,why doesn't the U.S. govt. subsidize new refineries? Because perhaps our treasonous political elite has sold america down the river to globalist interests that don't desire america to be self-sustaining and independent,hence,remaining out of the clutches of global controllers?

I hate to beat a dead horse,but I can't emphasize enough that the lack of refining capacity in the U.S. has been deliberately created ,and it ties right into "free trade" agreements and the gutting of our manufacturing base and the ceding of our soverignty away to the WTO,and other global interests that look at America as just one more piece of their well-regulated,controlled economic and political plantation.

P>S> We no longer manufacture tvs,clothes,cars,electronics or anything else.Is that a result of "peak" tvs,clothes,cars,electronics" or is it a result of a deliberate deindustrialization of this country?

Hubbert's peak is predicated on the assumption that oil is a "fossil" fuel and is finite.
I think the theory ridiculous.
Logic would dictate that oil is abiotic in nature,not biotic.

The onus of scientific proof should be on the biotic side,the side that claims that dinosaurs and plant matter magically turned into trillions of barrels worth of material that we call oil.

As for China and others building refineries because they are state-subsidized,hence,not worried about profits and losses,why doesn't the U.S. govt. subsidize new refineries? Because perhaps our treasonous political elite has sold america down the river to globalist interests that don't desire america to be self-sustaining and independent,hence,remaining out of the clutches of global controllers?

I hate to beat a dead horse,but I can't emphasize enough that the lack of refining capacity in the U.S. has been deliberately created ,and it ties right into "free trade" agreements and the gutting of our manufacturing base and the ceding of our soverignty away to the WTO,and other global interests that look at America as just one more piece of their well-regulated,controlled economic and political plantation.

P>S> We no longer manufacture tvs,clothes,cars,electronics or anything else.Is that a result of "peak" tvs,clothes,cars,electronics" or is it a result of a deliberate deindustrialization of this country?

Well, all I can say is that we disagree on some things, but we seem to agree on the bigger picture. Jews are gutting this country, and we want them OUT. And that's good enough for me. :cheers:

A "worse lifestyle" would mean BIGGER WHITE FAMILIES!!

I think you'll have a hard time selling that one - even around here. Maybe you should call it a more healthy and natural lifestyle.

Hubbert's peak is predicated on the assumption that oil is a "fossil" fuel and is finite.
I think the theory ridiculous.
Logic would dictate that oil is abiotic in nature,not biotic.

The onus of scientific proof should be on the biotic side,the side that claims that dinosaurs and plant matter magically turned into trillions of barrels worth of material that we call oil.

?

in the book "Twilight in the Desert" the coming Saudi Oil Shock and The World Economy: Mathew Simmons outlines how when U.S Oil companies relinqished their control in the Saudi oil fields in 1979 they recorded that 150 billion barrels remained in the Sauid oil fields. Today the Saudi's are claiming there are 250 billion barrels in their posession 26 years later after they've been sucking 5 million barrels out of there a day. This means one of 2 things a) they are lieing and the world is in for an economic wipsaw of epic purportions when they run out of crude. or b) the shit grows underground like some of you have been speculating perhaps off of lava or sheat rock, and really there's nothing to worry about soon we'll be driving our Mustangs to the moon!

in the book "Twilight in the Desert" the coming Saudi Oil Shock and The World Economy: Mathew Simmons outlines how when U.S Oil companies relinqished their control in the Saudi oil fields in 1979 they recorded that 150 trillion barrels remained in the Sauid oil fields. Today the Saudi's are claiming there are 250 trillion barrels in their posession 26 years later after they've been sucking 5 billion barrels out of there a day. This means one of 2 things a) they are lieing and the world is in for an economic wipsaw of epic purportions when they run out of crude. or b) the shit grows underground like some of you have been speculating perhaps off of lava or sheat rock, and really there's nothing to worry about soon we'll be driving our Mustangs to the moon!

I think you have your numbers mixed up.

I think you have your numbers mixed up.

they aren't my numbers to mix up. That's what the book says, if you don't believe it take it up with Mathew R. Simmons

I think you have your numbers mixed up.

Looks like, it should be: 150 billion became 250 billion barrels for the Saudi reserves and 5 million a day being taken. This is likely an overestimation on the part of the Saudis and OPEC.

Looks like, it should be: 150 billion became 250 billion barrels for the Saudi reserves and 5 million a day being taken. This is likely an overestimation on the part of the Saudis and OPEC.

exactly, how can you have 260 billion barrels with no significant new discoveries over a 26 year period in which 5 million barrels a day have been taken out of the ground when the estimated total oil in the groung was 150 billion in 1979? even if oil grows under ground like some here have infered I doubt it grows that quick or we'd be hitting geisers in Louisianna again. I predict crude will hit $100 a barrel by summer 06'.