Guest Post: Past Peak Oil - Why Time Is Now Short

Submitted by Chris Martenson

Note:  With so much going on with Europe's debt crisis, the continuing disaster and economic contraction in Japan, and the potential for a very hard landing in the Chinese growth miracle (which is in the running as my favorite "black swan candidate" for 2011), I am going to return our attention to oil in this report.  The next report will assess the developing and unfolding debt crisis that will drag down most of the developed economies at some point, and this report will provide essential context for understanding why this result is inevitable and when it will occur.

The Next Oil Shock

The only thing that could prevent another oil shock from happening before the end of 2012 would be another major economic contraction.  The emerging oil data continues to tell a tale of ever-tightening supplies that will soon be exceeded by rising global demand.  This time, we will not be able to blame speculators for the steep prices we experience; instead, we will have nothing to blame but geology.

Back in 2009, I wrote a pair of reports in which I calculated that we’d see another price spike in oil by 2010 or 2011, based on some assumptions about global GDP growth rates, rates of decline in existing oil fields, and new projects set to come online.  Given the recent price spike in oil (Brent crude over $126, now at $115) and recent oil supply data, those predictions turned out to be quite solid (for reference, oil was trading in the low $60s at the time). 

One part I whiffed on was in my prediction that the world community would have embraced the idea of Peak Oil by now and begun adjusting accordingly, but that’s not really true except in a few cases (e.g. Sweden).  Perhaps things are being differently and more seriously considered behind closed doors, but out in public the dominant story line concerns reinvigorating consumer demand, not a looming liquid fuel crisis.

How the major economies can continue proceeding with a business-as-usual mindset given the oil data is really quite a mystery to me, but that’s just how things happen to be at the moment.

At any rate, with Brent crude oil having lofted over $100/bbl at the beginning of February and remained above that big, round number for four months now, we are already in the middle of a price shock.  It may not be a perfect repeat of the circumstances of the 2008 oil shock, but it's close enough that the risk of an economic contraction, at least for the weaker economies, is not unthinkable here.  Japan, now in recession and 100% dependent on oil imports, comes to mind.

Looking at the new data and reading even minimally between the lines of recent International Energy Agency (IEA) statements, I am now ready to move my ‘Peak Oil is a statistically unavoidable fact’ event to sometime in 2012, which tightens my prediction from the prior range of 2012-2013.

Upon this recognition, the next shock will drive oil to new heights that are currently unimaginable for most.  First, $200/bbl will be breached, then $300, and then more.  And these are in current dollar terms; any additional dollar weakness will simply be additive to the actual quoted price.  By this I mean that if oil were to trade at $200 but the dollar lost one half of its value along the way, then oil would be priced at $400. 

Stampeding Into a Box Canyon

In 2009, I wrote a special report on oil that explored the interplay between energy and the economy.  At that time, the stock market was in the tank, global growth was in a freefall, and things looked gloomy.

But I knew that thin-air money is not without its charms and that we’d experience a rebound of sorts.  Here’s what I wrote:

I am of the opinion that these trillions and trillions of dollars, which, along with their foreign equivalents, are being applied to “ease the credit crunch,” will eventually find their mark and deliver what feels like a legitimate rebound in activity.  All those trillions have to eventually go somewhere and do something. 

For now, debts are defaulting faster than the various central banks and governments can inject new money and borrowing activity into the system.  Banks aren’t lending because there are very few compelling loans to make, especially if future losses have to actually be carried by the bank making the loan. 

But this won’t be true forever.  Sooner or later, all the trillions of new dollars will trot out of the barn, begin to gallop, and then thunder off, creating the appearance of a healthy advance.

It will be a cruel illusion, though, as this stampeding herd of money is headed straight into a box canyon.

Money is only one component of growth.  As we’ve strenuously proposed, energy is a necessary prerequisite for growth.

(Source)

Well, here we are a couple of years later, with those trillions and trillions out of the barn and stampeding off trying to create some real and lasting economic growth.  As we score these efforts, it appears to us that the amount and type of growth that has been achieved is underwhelming, to say the least. 

Housing remains in a serious slump, wage-based income growth is poor, Europe remains mired in a serious debt crisis, Japan has slumped back into recession, and the US fiscal deficit is a structural nightmare.  Worse, GDP growth is relatively tepid and would be negative, deeply negative, without all the deficit spending and liquidity measures. 

As predicted, all that thin-air money, once released into the wild, had a mind of its own and created a serious bout of commodity inflation, especially in food and fuel, which is now seriously impacting the poor and middle classes. 

So it’s hard to call the trillions and trillions ‘well spent.’  I was hoping for better results.

Yet we can’t call the re-flation efforts a complete failure, as we are not in a serious, destructive deflation, and we’ve all been granted a bit more time to get ourselves prepared in whatever ways make sense. The gift of time has been invaluable, and for that I am grateful.  But in terms of creating a true and lasting economic miracle?  It turns out, once again, that 'printing' money electronically is no more effective than calling in the silver coin of the realm, making each unit slightly smaller, and then re-issuing it.  Real economic growth has not been created.

What has happened is that false demand, spurred on by trillions in thin-air money, has also spurred on renewed demand for oil, hastening the day that a geologically inspired supply/demand mismatch will finally arrive. 

We are driving at a high rate of speed into a box canyon.

World Crude Supply

Before we get into the specifics of where I think the immediate trouble lies in the world oil data, let's take a moment to look at the big picture.

There are a number of ways to look at the petroleum data.  The one I prefer to look at is something called 'crude + condensate' (C+C), which leaves out things like ethanol and natural gas liquids, both of which are converted to 'barrel of oil equivalents' (BOE) and added to the C+C to yield total liquid fuels.  The reason I like to focus on C+C is that this is mainly conventional oil, the cheap and easy stuff, and it gives us a better idea of where we are in the Peak Oil story.

Note:  This next cluster of charts comes from data from the U. S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) that I am, frankly, uncomfortable with, so take them all with a grain of salt.  The EIA upwardly revised the data for 2010 and added between 750,000 and 800,000 barrels per day of production to each month.  This is the largest upward revision of which I am aware, and it's not yet clear to me why this occurred.  Further, the EIA obtained some of that data from IHS, which is the parent company of CERA, the organization that best qualifies for the 'influential Peak Oil deniers of the decade' award. 

And somewhat ominously, as suspect as the data may be, it has been an important source for decades for analysts, myself among them.  Quite recently, the EIA has announced that, due to budget cutbacks, it will immediately terminate the collection and distribution of international energy statistics -- right at the exact moment they are needed most.  Ugh.  Very disappointing, and all due to a $15 million budget cut. (Source). This echoes the loss of the M3 monetary statistic, which turned out to be a perfect gold-buying signal.  If this is a parallel event, it means that now is a great time to take Peak Oil more seriously.

A chart of C+C reveals that the world has been bouncing along in a channel roughly between 72 and 74 mbd since 2005:

Yes, a new high was made in December 2010 and was exceeded in January 2011, offering hope that the world could break out of this limiting band of production, but then production fell back in February due to the Libyan conflict.  I have added a purple dotted line to reflect where the data will most likely be for March after subtracting out the Libyan losses and the Saudi cutbacks.  As you can see, we will be right back in the 72-74 channel.  

Some will be tempted to write this off to a temporary setback due to the unrest in North Africa, but such unrest has always been part of the equation: Iraq, Nigeria, Kuwait, and many other countries have experienced supply disruptions along the way due to war and/or civil unrest.

Note also in this chart that oil production fell off by more than 2 mbd as a consequence of the global recession between 2008 and 2009.  From the lows in August 2009, it has since climbed more than 2.4 mbd to its current level.

Where did those gains come from?  Can we expect more? 

There's a very interesting story in here if we dig down one more layer. This next pie chart shows each region's relative contribution to the gains of 2.4 mbd that happened between August 2009 and February 2011: 

In the above chart, I had to include negative percentages for two regions, which is an odd way to display things (how does one draw a negative pie wedge?), but it still all sums to 100%.  I've included the negatives for comparison purposes and because they are important to keep in view.  It's clear that the Middle East is the most important region; no surprise there. North America is about evenly split in gains between the US (Bakken) and Canada (tar sands), and Russia and China are the major players in their respective regions.

Taking the analysis one level deeper, here are the seven major countries that contributed 88% of the August 2009 to February 2011 gains (in thousands of barrels per day): 

Saudi Arabia is the hands-down leader, being responsible for 700,000 barrels per day, or 29%, of the entire gains logged in that period.

There is a variety of interesting sub-stories that could be told across each of the other countries, but it's time to focus on the big fish.

Saudi Arabia – Where There's Smoke, There's Fire

Something is seriously wrong with the signals coming from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), and I am of the opinion that KSA is having geological difficulties that are preventing it from pumping more oil.  Said plainly, I am of the mind that the KSA is already at peak.

One troubling bit of information is that Saudi Arabia justified its lowered oil output for March by claiming that the oil markets are oversupplied, even as Brent crude was perched above $120/bbl. There are several possibilities here:

1. There really is an oil glut, and the KSA is being truthful.
2. There is an oversupply, but only of the heavier, poorer grades of oil that the KSA has in relative abundance.
3. The KSA can produce more, but doesn’t want to, preferring to withhold oil production in the interest of receiving higher prices.
4. The KSA is already past peak and cannot pump more, despite its best efforts, and the oversupply issue is really just a cover story for the fact that the KSA cannot pump more even if it wanted to. 

Let’s start at the beginning of this odd tale.  Early in May, the KSA said this:

Saudi lifts April oil output to 8.5 mln bpd-sources

May 01, 2011

DUBAI/KHOBAR, Saudi Arabia, May 1 (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia's crude oil output edged back up in April to around 8.5 million barrels per day (bpd) from roughly 8.3 million bpd in March as demand picks up, Saudi-based industry sources said on Sunday.

The kingdom slashed output by 800,000 bpd in March, due to oversupply, oil minister Ali al-Naimi said last month, adding that he expected production in April to be a little higher than March's level. 

So the story here is that the KSA claims to have 12.5 mbd of total capacity.  Therefore, meeting the Libyan shortfalls of 1.3 mbd should be simple enough; just open the taps and let it flow.  Yet the KSA barely cracked the 9 mbd mark, briefly, before falling back to 8.3 – 8.5 mbd, telling the world that this was a purposeful response to markets that were oversupplied.  That's one possibility.

Several analysts thought that perhaps the KSA was simply gaming the markets and trying to obtain the best possible prices:

Saudi unlikely to lift oil output quickly

May 3, 2011

WASHINGTON — Saudi Arabia is unlikely to boost oil production quickly to ease the rise of crude prices, because it needs high prices for its own increased spending, analysts at an international banking think tank said Tuesday. 

After producing 8.6 million barrels a day in 2010, the world's leading oil supplier will only kick up production to about 8.9 million barrels this year, said analysts at the Washington-based Institute of International Finance. 

"So far the production of crude oil in Saudi Arabia for the first quarter was around 8.7, 8.8 (million barrels a day). And recently some unconfirmed reports said that production dropped in March," said Garbis Iradian, the IIF's deputy director for Africa and the Middle East. 

"So we don't expect crude oil production in Saudi Arabia will rise over nine million barrels a day," he said.

While it's possible that the KSA production limitations are a matter of trying to engineer higher prices, one person I trust is Sadad Al-Husseini.  The former Aramco engineer, who has a lot of credibility in these matters, thinks that the production limits have more to do with the grades of available oil rather than any mercenary market tactics on the part of KSA.

Saudi Sweet Oil Supply Too Low to Offset Libya, al-Husseini Says

May 17, 2011

Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest crude exporter, won’t be able to produce enough low-sulfur blends to replace lost Libyan output for refiners in Europe, said Sadad al-Husseini, a former Saudi Aramco executive. 

The country doesn’t have enough Arab Super Light to create sufficient amounts of low-sulfur, or sweet, oil similar to Libya’s grades, al-Husseini, Aramco’s former executive vice president for exploration and development, said today by e-mail.

The basic problem is that each refinery is geared for a specific and relatively narrow band of crude oil feedstocks, with the specific gravity and sulfur content being the most critical factors.  So it is not as simple as the KSA pumping more heavy sour crude to offset the lost Libyan production.  This is yet another possible explanation, and it is far more believable to me than either oversupplied markets or a pricing strategy.

The somewhat shocking news that followed just a few days after the above article was the begging by the IEA for OPEC to lift production.  Such a frank admission or plea has never been made before.  Reading between the lines, we can suspect that a serious supply shortage is looming if more oil does not find its way to market soon.

International Energy Agency Urges Oil Producers to Lift Output

May 19, 2011

PARIS — Expressing “serious concern” about elevated crude prices, the International Energy Agency on Thursday called for an increase in world oil production. It was an unusual move that highlighted consumer countries’ frustration at the failure of oil-producing nations to lift output in the face of rising demand and tighter supply.

(...)

The agency’s monthly Oil Market Report, respected by industry practitioners, has recently been warning about tightening market conditions as supply has not caught up with strong demand.

Despite commitments from Saudi Arabia, the biggest producer, to use its spare capacity to increase output and replace the supplies lost because of the uprising in Libya, the cartel’s production is now running 1.3 million barrels a day below the level seen before the crisis, according to the I.E.A.

Although the New York Times has positioned this unusual call by the IEA as perhaps a bit of political maneuvering, I feel they missed the real picture by not spending more time characterizing the mismatch between supply and demand.  If that's true, then we have a near-perfect repeat of the 2008 situation, where, in the six quarters preceding the oil price spike, demand exceeded supply in five of those quarters.

Confirming this view recently was Goldman Sachs' energy division, which said:

While near-term downside risk remains as the oil market negotiates the slowdown in the pace of world economic growth, we believe that the market will continue to tighten to critical levels by 2012, pushing oil prices substantially higher to restrain demand.

Events in the Middle East and North Africa are having a persistent impact, which leads us to increase our oil price targets. We expect that the ongoing loss of Libyan production and disappointing non-OPEC production will continue to tighten the oil market to critically tight levels in early 2012, with rising industry cost pressures likely to be felt this year.

We are now embedding in our forecasts that Libyan production losses will lead to the effective exhaustion of OPEC spare capacity by early 2012. Consequently, we are raising our Brent crude oil price forecast to $115/bbl, $120/bbl, and $130/bbl on a 3, 6, and 12 month horizon.

(Source)

There’s a lot in there, including the idea that the unrest in the Middle East will be persistent, that non-OPEC production will continue to disappoint (which it should, as nearly every non-OPEC country is past peak), and that the more globally relevant Brent contract is the right one to quote now when discussing oil, not the US-centric WTIC contract.

So count Goldman Sachs among those that are now calculating an imminent supply-demand mismatch.

The End of Easy Oil

The really big news is that the Wall Street Journal finally ran an oil piece (on the front page, no less) acknowledging the difficulties involved in Saudi Arabia regarding oil production and the extraordinary efforts that are now underway to boost production by unlocking their remaining heavy oil reserves. 

The critical parts in this story revolve around the costs of getting this oil out of the ground (in terms of both energy and money), the decades it will take to get the oil out, and the clear implication that going after such oil tells us everything we need to know about where we are in the Peak Oil story in general (and specifically in Saudi Arabia).  All the better, easier, cheaper grades are already drilled and in production.  This is what's left:

Facing Up to End of 'Easy Oil'

WAFRA, Kuwait—The Arabian Peninsula has fueled the global economy with oil for five decades. How long it can continue to do so hinges on projects like one unfolding here in the desert sands along the Saudi Arabia-Kuwait border.

Saudi Arabia became the world's top oil producer by tapping its vast reserves of easy-to-drill, high-quality light oil. But as demand for energy grows and fields of "easy oil" around the world start to dry up, the Saudis are turning to a much tougher source: the billions of barrels of heavy oil trapped beneath the desert.

Heavy oil, which can be as thick as molasses, is harder to get out of the ground than light oil and costs more to refine into gasoline. Nevertheless, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have embarked on an ambitious experiment to coax it out of the Wafra oil field, located in a sparsely populated expanse of desert shared by the two nations.

That the Saudis are even considering such a project shows how difficult and costly it is becoming to slake the world's thirst for oil. It also suggests that even the Saudis may not be able to boost production quickly in the future if demand rises unexpectedly. Neither issue bodes well for the return of cheap oil over the long term.

The whole story is worth a read.  I’ve excerpted quite a bit because there’s so much important information in there that I wanted you to see.  Most importantly, the mainstream media in the US is finally waking up to the idea that all of the cheap and easy oil is gone.

They’ve not yet gotten to the appreciation of the idea of Net Energy, which is the real key to understanding why the future will not resemble the past, but they are edging ever closer. And they are beginning to circle around the idea that depletion in the fields that have driven the world’s economy for the past 50 years is a critical reality.

It’s not much of a hop, skip, and a jump from there to seeing it finally named for what it is:  Peak Oil, otherwise known as the geological reality that will resist all efforts at human ingenuity and technology because it is a matter of finite limits, not of willpower or optimism.

One thing I thought the article did an especially good job of was actually delving into the engineering realities involved in the project.  The article continues:

The Wafra project, however, is far more of a challenge than traditional steam projects. As in most of the Middle East, the oil at Wafra is trapped in a thick layer of limestone that also contains minerals that can build up inside pipes and corrode equipment.

An even bigger challenge is getting the two crucial elements for generating steam: water and a source of energy to boil it. Most successful steam projects are in places with easy access to relatively pure water and a cheap fuel source, usually natural gas. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have little of either.

With no fresh-water sources in the Arabian desert, Chevron has been forced to use salt water found in the same underground reservoirs as the oil. That water is full of contaminants that must be removed before it can be boiled and injected into the ground.

Finding the energy to boil the water will be even tougher. Chevron could use oil instead of natural gas—literally burning oil to produce oil—but that would burn profits, too. So the company likely will be forced to import natural gas from overseas, an expensive process that involves chilling it to turn it into a liquid, then shipping it thousands of miles.

Some experts are shaking their heads.

The hurdles include mineral buildups, corrosion, water impurities, and the energy costs of heating all that water into steam.  In short, getting this stuff out of the ground is going to be far more difficult and costly than prior efforts.  End of story.

The reality involved in getting at the non-conventional oil is really just a story of declining net energy; the red curtain will extend down into the luscious green space that represents the surplus energy available to society. Less net energy means less economic activity and complexity.  It means less growth.  Below a certain level, it means no growth at all.  And eventually it means persistent negative growth, a possibility not yet priced into any financial markets.

In some cases I have my concerns about whether these heroic efforts are worth the trouble at all.  Perhaps we should invest the same amount of energy, talent, and expertise in energy conservation efforts and technological development.

At this point in the timeline, it's imperative for each of us to ask ourselves: how well prepared are we for this post-Peak Oil future? Part II of this report: How To Position for the Next Oil Shock explores the probable impact the next energy crisis will have on key asset classes, employment, and society in general. As we've shown above, we likely have little time left. Use it wisely.

Click here to access Part II: How To Position for the Next Oil Shock (free executive summary; paid enrollment required to access).

Comments

[Hook Line and S...]

Dial in the on-board computer with the power curves and get those special shocks for the front of that Mazda and you'll be on the road to to hucking a lugie on those Masertis, and dealing with your front end doing the funny car jump.

[Mr Sir]

Peak Oil has been around for 100 years. This notion that we will peak oil in 2012 is dumb and I look forward to adding this guy to my long list of Peak Oil theorist quotes: Oh, and just a fact here, 1976 world's known reserves was 640 billion barrels. World's consumption of oil from 1976 to 2009 = 865 billion barrels...OOPS!!!! Get this crap off ZH.

Below are my top 5 favorite Peak Oil Dummies:

“American oil will run out in 9 years”
- U.S. Geological Survey, 1919

“If there should be a World War III it will have to be fought with someone else’s petroleum because the United States will not have it.” - Secretary of the Interior, Harold Ickes, in a 1941 article titled “We are Running Out of Oil!”

“The world is risking running out of oil in a few years if there is not an immediate shift to other sources of energy.” - U.S. State Department Middle East expert, James Akins, 1969

“We believe that world oil production is probably at or near its peak.” – CIA report, 1979

“The world’s remaining oil reserves stand at 550 billion barrels and with consumption growing 4% annually over the next 20 years, the world will see oil scarcity by the mid 1990’s.” - 1972 report from the Club of Rome

[anomalous]

Agreed, I wish hydrocarbons were more exotic on this planet. But I'm afraid we're awash in them, and hot air.

Remember the Carter years when Exxon testified that there was not enough natural gas in North America to make a significant contribution to the energy mix? The PTB outlaw gas water heaters west of the Mississippi, brilliant, got us quite a few additional nuke plants.

[Mr Sir]

Yes, and currently we only recover about 35% of the hydrocarbons in a given well. As for Jimmy Carter,

“The world’s oil wells are drying up all over the world.”

-         President Jimmy Carter, 1979

[hardcleareye]

"1976 world's known reserves was 640 billion barrels. World's consumption of oil from 1976 to 2009 = 865 billion barrels...OOPS!!!! Get this crap off ZH."

Perhaps you need to read this ZH article by Cognitive Dissonance!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/zero-hedge-%E2%80%93-maturing-fight-club-community-or-just-excuse-be-rude-and-abusive

[Joe Sixpack]

"Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest crude exporter, won’t be able to produce enough low-sulfur blends to replace lost Libyan output for refiners in Europe...,"

"The basic problem is that each refinery is geared for a specific and relatively narrow band of crude oil feedstocks, with the specific gravity and sulfur content being the most critical factors.  So it is not as simple as the KSA pumping more heavy sour crude to offset the lost Libyan production. "

Thus NATO is protecting civilians in Libya.

[Joe Sixpack]

"An even bigger challenge is getting the two crucial elements for generating steam: water and a source of energy to boil it. "

Duh.

Now we know why Iran wants nuclear energy!

www.gold-silver.us/forum

[pitz]

Instead of burning oil....they can burn bankers!  Burn the motherfuckers! 

Seriously though, all of the resources in the world that are currently behind propping up the completely unsustainable and broken financial system, including the unearned wealth of its participants in the past 30 years, needs to be confiscated and given to participants in the energy/engineering industries to fix this most serious world problem.  Governments can achieve this through either fiat, or by letting hyperinflation take its course.  The latter probably being more violent than the former.

[hardcleareye]

Believing that "energy/engineering industries" will "fix" this problem is very naive.  Your belief and hope that "technology" will save the day is referred to as "The Fake Fire Brigade".

[kito]

Yeah that fake fire brigade really fell short with the advent of antibiotics and vaccines and the lightbulb and now stem cells. Check out yields on crops now vs 60 years ago genius and see how far the fake fire brigade has taken us

[trav7777]

crop yields...lol.  Due to petrochem fertilizer and mechanized (read: oil) agriculture, bud

[tmosley]

Ok, to start, Trav wants Eugenics to be practiced.  He wants to "save" us from starvation caused by peak oil.  This is why he will NEVER accept the fact that new technology can every be implemented, and will deny facts that  are shoved right in his face (ie ionic liquids), or acknowledge the possibility of any form of nuclear, wind or solar application--even with another 20, 50, 100, 1000, or a billion years of research.

Fri, 02/18/2011 - 15:49 | 

trav7777 (Total Score:1)

wtf is wrong with eugenics?  Why should we condemn the cretins to a future of starvation?  Likewise, humanity as an institution, cannot afford to have itself breeded back into the stone ages by cretins.

genocide of inferior populations is in fact an evolutionary MANDATE

link: http://argo.zerohedge.org/news/guest-post-beyond-false-dawn-global-crisi...

More eugenics bullshit:

by trav7777 

on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 22:18

#1024940

You're an idiot...you should not reproduce.

The SB IQ test was not in ANY WAY intended to promote eugenics.  IQ tests have literally nothing whatsoever to do with a DESIRE to promote one type of person over another.  Some people may have seized on them in order to justify such a promotion- in case you didn't figure out by what I said earlier, moron, I AM ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.  I pretty clearly stated as much, so if you think you are going to say OMG RACISSS EUGENICIST and I am going to, what?  I'm gonna fuckin deny it when I JUST SUGGESTED IT?

Does it occur to you that east asians have the HIGHEST average score on these exams?  WTF, reality shits on you again.  I am not east asian, btw.  But it doesn't matter, as a general case does not speak to a specific one. 

Besides, the low IQ races underperform in every test of cognition, not just SB.  Pick a test.  The reality of subsaharan Africa is that intelligence there is exceptionally low, which is why people walk miles for water instead of building pipes and why it has no history of even the indigenous written word.

My race or sex has nothing to do with me; I am an individual.  It is a matter of fact that whites and males have substantially higher sigmas to their IQ distributions than other groups...so what?  You may be a white male and you are still an idiot.  Being a white male doesn't endow you with the genius IQ of other white males by the virtue of the irrelevant color of your skin.  That skin covers an idiot.

NO race norming would be performed for a reproduction threshold; the tests are race-blind.  The reason africans average lower scores is because africans have lower average cognitive capacity.  This is just simply the way it is.

Math and abstract reasoning are not racist, you sniveling idiot, and IQ tests are not crafted to reflect memorization.  JFC, they give these tests the world over.  Do the world a favor and attempt to become educated.

For you to claim that there is a "white" and "european" intelligence is utterly absurd.

reply flag as junk (0) 

by trav7777 

on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 22:25

#1024972

the vast majority of people cannot understand geometric compounding.

So maybe we need to set the bar at 140; whatever.

The population needs to decrease and get smarter.  If at that point, we have to craft a BNW type outcome, fine.

Grow OR die leads to death because growth CANNOT continue forever.  I am a bacteria at 10 minutes to midnight sounding an alarm.

link: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guest-post-there-are-no-good-outcomes

___

Now, he brings up the fact that blacks have low IQs.  Funny, considering that was the explicit distinction he picked for forced sterilization.

by trav7777 

on Thu, 12/30/2010 - 23:52

#839016

YES, some races are BETTER than others, if you want advanced medicine, electricity, the written word, the computer, the lightbulb and all the rest of that shit.

WTF is wrong with you people?  Especially that uncle tom apologist with his "RACISSSSS" epithet in the previous post?  I mean what.tha.fuck??

Look at HISTORY.  Which race is it that the people who invented EVERYTHING AROUND YOU came from?  And in the sickest of ironies, people from that race actually feel GUILT over the fact that it wasn't brown people who did everything!

They welcome multiculturalism...wtf?  ALL cultures are NOT EQUAL.  I don't LIKE cultures of destruction and misery, of primitivity, like all throughout the brown world.  I don't WANT the ghetto culture of murder and criminality.  I don't WANT african culture that didn't possess the written word until it was oppressed by white people with it or the native american culture that ALSO lacked the written word and the fucking wheel.

WTF is the matter with people these days that they think all cultures are equivalent?  Multiculturalism is a SICK JOKE and a crime against human progress.

The more mexicans we get, the more we are like mexico.  The more the diversity, the lower the average IQ.  DO THE MATH, shit just keeps getting worse.  Diversity is a FRAUD and pretending that all races are equal is a crime.  For example, we continuously hear how bad the US is globally in terms of aptitude tests, but if you examine AT ALL the demographics breakdowns, you see that the bad aggregate score we have as a nation is ENTIRELY DUE to hispanics and blacks!  Yet NOBODY can mention these "hate facts" without having a white uncle tom condemn him as a RACIST.

People who refuse to accept reality as it IS are suicidal fools.

Thu, 12/30/2010 - 22:44 | trav7777 (Total Score:1)

AWSUMZ...I mean taking philosophy and guidance from a fucking wal mart cashier.

I truly WANT genes in my bloodline with average IQs of 85, I mean who wouldn't?

99/100 would choose to have sex, wtf?  And get knocked up by some ghetto thug who will end up in prison and pass on his criminal and idiot genes to the little mulatto offspring who then grow up with a trash mom and no dad?  Sounds like a recipe for technological progress to me, right?  I mean, think of ALL THE INVENTIONS by the brown people over the centuries...all one of them.

WOW...great advice wal mart.  99/100 would choose to doom their kids because they are incapable of constraining their sexual urges; what a fucking catastrophe.  Bunch of freakin whores.  When they can't throw on a pantsuit and go sit behind a desk and pretend to work but still get paid, more selectivity will be employed in mating patterns.

Login or register to post comments

link: http://188.126.66.67/article/guest-post-if-we-close-our-eyes-monster-wil...

___

More racism: 

by trav7777 

on Wed, 03/02/2011 - 14:09

#1012036

huh?  Average brain size of blacks IS smaller.

This is what we call a "hate fact."

Oh and while I'm up, STFU you uncle tom racebaiting fuckstick

reply flag as junk (3) 

link:http://www.zerohedge.com/article/and-defense-secretary-gates-just-uttere...

___

So, basically, this sociopath's whole thesis is "kill the darkies, and anyone I don't like because anyone who disagrees with me is clearly stupid".  He wants to sterilize/murder between 50 and 97% of the population, with the explicit goal of exterminating all blacks.  

Can anyone really take this guy seriously with all the shit he has posted?  All he is doing is presenting a one sided argument to try to stir up sentiment in his favor so he can exterminate a bunch of people.  Basically, the guy is a petite Hitler, a fucking monster, waiting for an audience.

 So now the mystery as to why this guy so aggressively attacks anyone who denies peak oil, or indeed any of the garbage he spouts, is attacked VICIOUSLY, and without relent.  He will say literally ANYTHING, whether slight fudging of the truth, a half truth, outright lie that seems plausible, or a lie completely out of left field.  I have never seen such a dark purpose behind a series of posts, and the fact that these posts have been made over the course of more than a year is absolutely CHILLING.  This guy is a mass murderer looking for a victim.

And Trav, so you know, I will post this response to every post I see from you from now on.  You're fucking dead to me, save for this post.

[DaveyJones]

uh, trav's point was dead on

[-273]

in regards to your comment about the world community not embracing Peak oil, the IMF wrote a report a couple of months back about oil scarcity which shows a solid level of awareness about the situation

IMF World Economic Outlook, April 2011, “Oil Scarcity, Growth, and Global Imbalances”

I read the full chapter of the WEO report and pulled out some excerpts for you. They try to put a positive spin on it somewhat, but clearly acknowledge for the first time the serious nature of peak oil on the global economy. This fact alone is fairly significant:

The persistent increase in oil prices over the past decade suggests that global oil markets have entered a period of increased scarcity. Given the expected rapid growth in oil demand in emerging market economies and a downshift in the trend growth of oil supply, a return to abundance is unlikely in the near term.

Consumption levels of many natural resources, including crude oil, have already risen above precrisis peaks, largely reflecting robust demand in emerging and developing economies.

There is considerable uncertainty about how strong the tension will be between rapid growth in oil demand in emerging market economies and the downshift in oil supply trends.

The key question for the future is how the larger and likely growing number of maturing oil fields will affect the global oil supply outlook. In particular, is the broad stagnation in oil production over the past five years temporary or more permanent?

The reduced availability of oil and the resulting higher oil prices lead to a reduction in GDP levels in oil importers in the longer term.

The most striking aspect of this scenario is, however, that supply reductions of this magnitude would require an increase of more than 200 percent in the oil price on impact and an 800 percent increase over 20 years. Relative price changes of this magnitude would be unprecedented and would likely have nonlinear effects on activity that the model does not adequately capture.

if the reductions in oil output were in line with the more pessimistic studies of peak oil proponents or if the contribution of oil to output proved much larger than its cost share, the effects could be dramatic, suggesting a need for urgent policy action. In the longer term, the worst effects would be experienced by regions whose production is highly oil intensive, such as emerging Asia, and/or with weak export links to oil exporters, such as the United States.

the simulations do not consider the possibility that some oil exporters might reserve an increasing share of their stagnating or decreasing oil output for domestic use, for example through fuel subsidies, in order to support energy-intensive industries (for example, petrochemicals) and also to forestall domestic unrest. If this were to happen, the amount of oil available to oil importers could shrink much faster than world oil output, with obvious negative consequences for growth in those regions.

Industries and firms that produce oil-intensive goods or use them as inputs are particularly vulnerable to oil price increases. Some of these industries and firms may no longer be profitable if oil prices stay high for long…. The adverse effects of large-scale bankruptcies in hard-hit industries can spread to the rest of the economy…

Regarding policies aimed at lowering the worst case risks of oil scarcity, a widely debated issue is whether to preemptively reduce oil consumption— through taxes or support for the development and deployment of new, oil-saving technologies.

lowering oil consumption through higher taxes could reduce growth and welfare during the period before serious scarcity has emerged.

Finally, the model simulations indicate that persistent oil supply shocks would imply a surge in global capital flows and a widening of current account imbalances.

Full .PDF here.

[samsara]

...Relative price changes of this magnitude would be unprecedented and would likely have nonlinear effects on activity that the model does not adequately capture.

Ah, that's why they Know it's the End Game.

They are all heading to the cash out window.

[Jim in MN]

Abiotic methane does exist and can be made via the Sabatier reaction, in Sabatier reactors.  So one can synthesize methane, the simplest hydrocarbon, CH4. In fact it is made from water and...CO2.  Hmmm.

Biomass gasification goes the other way, breaking down complex cellulose hydrocarbons into simpler ones.

In either case one can then use the existing pipeline and storage infrastructure, and most importantly combined cycle electric power generation, twice as efficient as standard thermal steam generation.  New natural gas power plants are often 65% efficient.  This is normal, everyday stuff in the electric power sector.  But cheap natural gas has demotivated the research, for now. 

CH4 is the...OK a way to go.  Now the cars could be electric or something else, but it will in the end need to be derived from biomass or synthetic gas.  In large part.  Not a silver bullet, but an indispensible part of the portfolio.  Push as much as possible through the gas system.

[rdenner]

Pro-Liberty I junked your post because I cannot believe that someone who believes in free markets cannot understand what is happening. Sure Methane Hydrates may be a huge resource. In the 5 years of non-stop research, I have found methane hydrates to be THE ONLY potential replacement for hydro-carbons(the one's we currently use).

As stated by Crash, the problem IS TIMING!! My guess is that Deep Water Horizon was a first attempt at unlocking Methane Hydrates. The resulting catastrophe has set back the Methane Hydrate hunt YEARS... I don't think people understand just how disastrous the Deep Water Horizon accident really was. Not only did they foul the GOM, but they fucked over all the potential investment that was moving towards deep water Gas.

So you really believe that we can move from our current Liquid Oil economy, given the problems we are already facing, to a Methane Hydrate economy in a time frame that will somehow preclude MASSIVE economic and societal dislocation?  Will humanity end, NO.. Will it be "and most importantly were accomplished peacefully " to quote your post. You are seriously deluded and are an insult to REAL free market believers such as myself... I understand all too clearly that the time for the free market to have done something about this problem was 40 years ago...

Since we DO NOT have a free market, what makes you POSSIBLY think that it will somehow assert itself and then in turn will move us towards the logical use of HYDRATES and NOT FREAKING ALGAE(Or corn or solar or wind???) in a time frame that will make our transition PEACEFUL!! You sir are a stark raving mad IDIOT..... 

Robert

[George Orwell]

@rdenner, I was going to post something similar but you got it before me.  You are 100% right.  It is not about transitioning to solar or wind or methane, it is about PEACEFUL transition to another energy source.

And given that we can't even fix medicare, medicaid, and social security, where do you think the money is going to come from to transition to a new energy source?  By the federal reserve printing?

The truth is that there will not be a peaceful transition.  The transition will involve major wars.  Gulf War I, Gulf War II, Iraq, Libya.  Don't you know what will follow?  It's very clear that the transition will be paved with WAR.  The next big war we fight will be with Iran.  And after that it will be with our biggest competitor for oil instead of a producer of oil.

To transition out of peak oil, China and India will have to be nuked.  Genecidal nuclear war is our only hope of survival.  By destroying other big consumers of oil, we will have more of it to ourselves.  And a nuclear war is cheap too since it's already paid for.  Our nukes are armed and ready.  All it takes is a president with balls to push the button.  That president will come when gasoline is at $10 a gallon and people are hungry and rioting on the streets demanding action.

George Orwell

[americanspirit]

Not exactly on topic, but a good friend of mine in China who along with many millions of others rides an electric bicycle, has just emailed me that electric bike riding ( and charging them at night) is now going to be forrbidden beginning at once through the fall. Seems there's such a mega-severe drought downstream of the Three Gorges dam that the government is having to let huge amounts of water out of the reservoir rather than generating electricity with it. So, its back to pedal power or just walk. I guess electric cars aren't in the picture either.

[Seer]

Obviously they haven't thought positively enough, as all they need to do is believe in the Chinese Dream and all will be fixed!

[gdogus erectus]

Peak oil is the biggest scam every foisted upon mankind.  Oh, it's real because they are making sure it's in short supply.  Dead dinosaurs, ocean plankton.  Good god, man.  Think for a second.  Does that ring true?

Want proof that 'Peak Oil' is a man made disaster?  Google Titan's methane ocean.  Methane.  The shortest hydrocarbon molecule.  Occurs naturally by some method that I'm pretty sure does not involve living things.  Or do 10 minutes research on the methane ice that sits at the bottom of the ocean.  Do the rough calcs on how much of that shit is just laying there.

Ok, here's another one for you - ever heard of Tesla?  Or his Wardenclyffe tower?  Yeah, and don't stop at the fucking Wiki entry on that free energy solution that was discovered over 100 fucking years ago! 

Wake the fuck up, people.  Peak oil IS real.  By not tapping massive reserves that have been found and by suppressing alternative supplies we now have a real problem.  I'm sure 'Peak Oil' will get the blame for the economic collapse that is about to get started again real soon.

[AsIseeIt]

Nikola Tesla may have been mad, but utimately he may be proven right.

[Nikola Tesla]

Perhaps.

[fiona]

Wholesale Gucci Handbags
Wholesale Chanel Handbags
Wholesale D&G Handbags
Wholesale Coach Wallets
Wholesale LV Wallets
Wholesale Gucci Wallets
Wholesale Chanel Wallets
Wholesale LV Sunglasses
Wholesale Gucci Sunglasses
Wholesale Chanel Sunglasses
Wholesale D&G Sunglasses
Wholesale Oakley Sunglasses
Oakley Sunglasses
Ray.Ban Sunglasses
LV Sunglasses
Gucci Sunglasses
Chanel Sunglasses
Wholesale nfl jerseys
wholesale jerseys
wholesale football jerseys
authentic jerseys
Wholesale nfl jersey
wholesale nhl jerseys
wholesale hockey jerseys
discount nhl jerseys
Wholesale nba jerseys
wholesale basketball jerseys
discount nba jerseys
Wholesale mlb jerseys
wholesale baseball jerseys
discount mlb jerseys
Wholesale NCAA Jerseys
Wholesale Custom Jersey
Air Max 2010
Air Max 95
Femme Nike Air Max 95
Air Max 90
Femme Nike Air Max 90
Air Max LTD
Air Max LTD II
Femme Nike Air Max LTD
Air Max TN
Femme Nike Air Max TN
Nike Air Max Skyline
Air Max Skyline
Femme Air Max Skyline
Air Max
Nike Air Max
Air Max pas cher
Kobe Bryant Jersey
Air Jordan Shoes
Wholesale air jordans
Replica Air Jordan
Cheap Air Jordan

[DaveyJones]

are these energy alternatives?

[bigwavedave]

"past performance is no guarantee of future failure"

is that yours? have your TM it yet? I want to use that one myself if you dont mind.

[CEOoftheSOFA]

Believe it or not, I believe this article is optimistic concerning the production potential of Saudi Arabia.  I think KSA is currently experiencing very high decline rates in several giant fields, which they cannot completely match with increases from new projects.  They are currently producing near capacity, and are struggling to maintain the current level of production.  Their announcement that they were reducing production by 850,000 BPD was due to their recognition of their production limits.

CEO of the Sofa

Writing from Dubai   

[DaveyJones]

the quality of life and average income for the average Sauid has been dropping right along. These leaders are too scared to tell their own the truth let alone the rest of us. Hey wait a minute, that sounds a little like this place 

[The Navigator]

Location, location, location.

SoCal would be the best place but taxes make it irrelevant. You gotta find a place where the weather can let you use (1) wind, (2) solar and (3) ethanol/alcohol and minimize your need for oil/gas. There are alternative methods/fuels of farming, fishing, employment - and I think we're going to be looking at those very soon, otherwise our living options will be severely restrained.

If you make a shit load of money and can afford a 9,000 SF home and the electric bill to keep it at 68 degrees F, god bless you and the good luck and effort it took to get there. On the other hand, most of us could get by with a 1,500SF home with a little land to grow our food and power most of our household needs with a couple of solar panels and a couple of wind turbines.

Our problem is not peak oil. Our problem is governments that don't allow us to (1) put up wind turbines in the city, (2) have solar panels in the city without $$Permits, (3) raise chickens in the cities, (4) grow food in our backyards. The problem is governments that restrict our self reliance through regulation, costly permits, and laws/codes that make us city folk when we were country folk.

When TSHTF, the on-line knowledge won't be available re alternative energies, bee keeping, animal husbandry, or crop management. In addition to stocking up on PMs and lead, I'd suggest stocking up on some alternative knowledge. Nuff said, I just hit my 2 drink limit.

[Not For Reuse]

lol, this is the first time I've ever seen a nervous breakdown acted out on a blog. bravo to all cast members!

[JW n FL]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYuLjGQQ-jg

The Business of Climate Change Conference 2009

[bugs_]

thanks for the great article chris

[Flakmeister]

Seems I missed a fun one....Guess I should check with Tyler about when he is going to post on PO so I can plan ahead

All the cornucopians were out in full form, along with the abiotic wing nuts...I didn't catch anyone trying to sell Green River as our salvation. Gull Island was also missed....

It is amazing that so many otherwise intelligent people cannot grasp EROEI... Their counter arguments are manifest expressions of denial at best, pure ignorance at worse....

PS: TM, graphene was first investigated from a theoretical perspective in the 1940s...

Here is a nice chart of Russian production

http://www.wtrg.com/oil_graphs/USSR90.gif

[trav7777]

lol...that's what you get for sleepin

[DaveyJones]

Was looking for you. And where's Hulk?  

[samsara]

All the cornucopians were out in full form, along with the abiotic wing nuts...

Mental Vomit.  I think Tyler should limit some people to at least triple digit number of posts.  and Delete dup posts of the same bs.

Anyone who posts on the PO subject and doesn't restrict their points to Flow Rate per day, (instead of reserve size) should be ignored.

The PO subject allows many to speak so much on something that evidently they know so little.

I was waiting for someone trying to prove Abiotic Passenger Pigeons coming back.

Missed you Flak

[SWRichmond]

EROEI...is that reflected in price?  If not, why not?

Is someone lying?

[Flakmeister]

It is reflected in the cost of a new barrel of supply. $80-95 for DW GOM, $65 for the Bakken... etc.... 

[Always Positive]

Allow me the final word: Trav is right...sort of..but he's wrong.

Eugenics, if at-all and I'm in two minds about that,  should be based not on iq, but on behaviour.

I've lived in SE Asia and knew some fine, simple people: fishermen who lived quiet, good lives - took care of their families, provided as best they could etc etc. But many probably with iq's under 100. Sterilisation for them? Totally unfair!

But we all know of banksters, pollies, elites, movers & shakers, mobsters, drug lords, murderers etc  with high iq's but who act like vermin - and maybe should be treated as such with sterilisation: cut them off at their roots lest their bloodlines infest the earth. Color/race doesn't come into it.

But who is to decide on which behaviours warrant such drastic action (apart from myself - and I do know- but no-one listens, are you surprised)?

As Plato said, sort of...'Let Philosophers be Kings, or Kings Philosophers'.

So Truth should be your measure but very few know Truth anymore, such is the warped world in which we live. I mean, look at the net, look at ZH....Jeez!

But don't worry, Truth  judges us all in the end, whether we like it or not and we return (maybe, if we're lucky) according to our previous actions, to try again. What goes around....How else do you explain birth in a squalid hut in Africa to being born with the proverbial silver spoon? Accident? Ha!

So, on reflection Trav, stop worrying. It's all taken care of in ways that you as yet don't comprehend.

PS I do find the math q quite hard.

[Use of Weapons]

Given my drunken ranting abilities, I am in awe of this Saturday night bender thread.

Coffee time:

A barrel of oil has the energy equivalent of 20,000 man hours of labour (I believe) and can be extracted in Iraq for around $2. That's so cheap its basically free energy. Without that, and the other issues facing us we don't have a very bright decade ahead imo.

Adjunct to the psycho cat fight (bikinis & jello next time please), everyone missed this little gem.

Someone point out to the limey that approx (2005) 2.6 billion people on the planet exist on less than $2 a day. More pertinent, 80% (5.15 billion) live off $10 or less. That's a mean salary of $3,650. That's what TPTB are looking at. 80% of you living on $3,650, and 0.01% living off infinity.

http://cdn1.globalissues.org/i/poverty/wdi-2008/2005-poverty-levels-bar.png

I urge people (including Mr Mosley, as his services are required in the thread, evil eugenicists to battle) to go to http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/4315

A Human Being may have around 45 useful working years. From Luis' calculation detailed above, this computes to around 4 barrels of oil equivalent which at today's price equates to a value of $540 for lifetime human slave labour.

However, in today's oil slave wealth inflated economy a healthy human body sold as spare parts may fetch up to $45 million.

The not so healthy human body rendered into constituent compounds is worth only $4.50.

Somewhere between these extremes lies true worth based on human intellect, ingenuity and compassion on the one hand and the enormous chemical potential energy of oil on the other. Survival of humanity must lie in Mankind using the second half of Earth's oil endowment more wisely than the first.

Points to the first person who points out that Chinese prisoners compete against Indian slum-dwellers vrs the altruism of liberal non-Christian-fundy types who drink & drive on the 'voluntary' global organ donation market.

A lot of people in this thread seem to be suffering from problems grasping scale. Here's someone who can help - http://math.temple.edu/~paulos

In case you missed it, this isn't an episode of Star Trek. We do not possess dilithium (well, we do, but it is a little less exciting) or replicators. We won't in the next 20 years. In the next 20 years, China, India and South America, not to mention resource rich ex-colonial places tired of their own dictators want to join the party the 'golden billion' have been throwing. The world does not have the resources for 2.6 billion to use 1/10th of the average American's energy intake, let alone equivalence, even if we had spent the last 50 years on building civilisation instead building ways to eradicate it in extremely short periods of time, of you FUCKING MONKEYS.

EVEN WITHOUT PEAK OIL EXISTING THIS WOULD STILL BE TRUE.

EVEN WITH BERNANKE PRINTING OVERTIME, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH DOLLARS FOR EVERYONE.

The USA used (2008) 87,216 kWh/capita. Europe 27 used 40,821 (bear in mind Greek usage barring Molotov's will be less than German, so it is an average). China used 18,608. India 6,280. To build enough nuclear reactors to supply energy for Europe, you're looking at about a ten year build time. If it was started tomorrow, and done at maximum drive. For the American readers: the sooner you realise the vastly disparate energy consumption and own up to the fact (looking at you Mr Mosley) that you're all genocidal maniacs at this point, the better. There is no way, even with cold fusion (infrastructure costs, bitches), that the world's population can all consume 87,216 kWh/Capita. The reason?

The world would literally enter global warming, due to energy dissipating as heat. USA = 305,000,000. World = 6,500,000,000. SCALE BITCHES. YOU FUCKING MONKEYS.

As we're discussing energy, let's not forget the other elephant in the room -

http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archive/nucweapons/weapons.aspx

http://www.nti.org/e_research/e3_atomic_audit.html

USA expenditure on nuclear weapons - approx $5.6 trillion [1998 dollars, not 2012 dollars] - double that at the very least for USSR's contribution, add some more for NATO states & China, let's approx $14 trillion dollars global total, shall we, for ironies sake. That's $14 trillion (when a dollar was a dollar, almost) that's never coming back, and is in fact costing vast sums to keep stable, keep out of 'the wrong hands' and keep from becoming a (glowing hole) environmental concern.

There are currently 12000 plutonium pits stored at Pantex. Five-thousand are to remain as they are and are
considered vital to national security. The remaining 7000 are to be converted to mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel.22 Plutonium pits thus continue to pile up at Pantex. Because the rate of disassembly exceeds the capacity of the NWC to effectively manage the warhead components, many of the plutonium pits currently stored at Pantex may remain in storage for some 15 years.23

http://www.clarku.edu/mtafund/prodlib/global_green/Death_of_a_Warhead.pd...

The plant is managed and operated for the United States Department of Energy by BWXT Pantex and Sandia National Laboratories. BWXT Pantex is a limited liability enterprise of BWX Technologies, Honeywell and Bechtel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantex - Yes, that's right. Your nukes are held by private Corporations, OOPS. And those Corporations are the old time hustlers, the CIA making, WWII profiteering gangsters of Capone's time. Thought it was just the Fed that was privately owned, making the dollars at the general expense? Tsk tsk!

If (big if) humans had spent that $14 trillion on infrastructure, education, fundamentals [clean water without fucking poisoning everyone a la Bangladesh & arsenic, well done TPTB there for some ace eugenics http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/252308.stm where's Mosely's outrage over this one - they already DID KILL THE BROWNIES 'tard and they did it 'in the name of charity'] and energy efficiency / production, then we might have had a shot at the 21st century.

Humans didn't. Which means Cthulhu (who is this Baal fellow? Chemist geek watching too much Stargate or Jewish bogey man?) gets to eat everyone, and what GS hasn't worked out is that the lead acolytes and worshipers get eaten first.

tldr;

Tree (peak oil) <----------------- 23,375 current Nukes in the world down from 70,000 in 1986----------------> Forest

(reality of 3+ billion people asking for the resources 1 billion currently consume, like NOW)

Star Trek <------------------------------------------Too many John Wayne films------------------------------>Mad Max

(for Americans - "The Road Warrior", but please obtain Australian sound track version, it is much better)

[Rusty Shorts]

 - that's one HELL of a rant, more please.

[brand shoes]

Designer Shoes - Brand Shoes - Shoes Online - sale designer shoes - men designer shoes - dsw shoes - Designer Shoes Warehouse - name brand shoes - factory brand shoes - brands of shoes - wholesale designer shoes - discount designer shoes - cheap designers shoes - designer jewelry - designer clothing - designer handbags - designer sunglasses

[DaveyJones]

Entropy, Peak Oil and Stoic Philosophy

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7924