[Gasification] Corrupt government, conspiracy, new world order, no future.

Tue Mar 4 12:00:48 CST 2008

Thank you Kevin for saying what needed to be said.

For those who are continuing, you need to strike from your head the idea
that you can compare the Global Warming debate with the Peak oil debate. GW
is a climate phenomenon and you can argue whether humans are at fault all
you like, on the other hand peak oil is a resource issue and we are
definitely the ones consuming the resource. The next thing you have to know
is that all resources are finite. If we can get enough people consuming
resources we could consume the entire earth from under our feet.

Any farmer can tell you that if you put 100 cows in a in a 5 acre field they
will eventually consume all their resources (the grass) even though the
earth is trying to grow new grass every day. The end result is a lot a dead
cows due to overpopulation. The only way out is to give them a bigger field.
Our field is the earth and we cannot make it larger.

When it comes to the resource of oil, humans, due to population, have grazed
the field pretty short.....some of the cows are getting worried and are
looking for a hole in the fence....some of the cows haven't noticed......and
some are in denial. The bad news is there is no oil or any other resource
outside our fence unless you're heading for another planet. The good news is
that usually only a very large percentage of the cows die before the grass
grows back to feed the remaining few. 

We have bumper stickers here in the great white north that say "earth first;
we'll log the rest of the planets later". While it may be meant as a joke it
will come to pass. 

Phil Marsh
Marsh Bros.
(250) 569-2795

-----Original Message-----
From: gasification-bounces at listserv.repp.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Chisholm
Sent: March 4, 2008 6:51 AM
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Corrupt government, conspiracy, new world order,
no future.

Dear Kenn

I think you shot yourself in the foot, big time, in a most 
unprofessional and amateurish manner.

"Consensus Science" was employed to conclude that Global Warming was 
real, yet you are implying that Global Warming is a scam.

Then, "...with almost all knowledgeable people...", you are drawing upon 
a "Consensus Science" format to conclude that Peak Oil is a scam also. 
You can't have it both ways. Is Consensus Science valid or not??? You 
are inferring that Consensus Science was wrong in the case of Global 
Warming, yet, in the very same breath,  you are inferring that Consensus 
Science is right in the case of Peak Oil.

(I think that even you will have to admit that the calibre of the 
Consensus Science employed  in the IPCC Report is very much more 
credible than an unknown body of "...almost all knowledgeable people..")

Making definite, strong, somewhat demeaning, hurtful and insulting 
statements based on mere inference, and an evaluation protocol that is 
internally flawed, is not Professional, is not Scientific, and is 
neither polite nor gentlemanly.

What it is, is ignorant, boorish, and incompetent behaviour.

Kevin Chisholm

Kenn Johnsen wrote:
> Almost all knowledgeable people........just like the global warming  
> scam......there is a consensus, the debate is over.......
>
>
> Den 04/03/2008 kl. 12.28 skrev MMBTUPR at aol.com:
>
>   
>>          from          Lewis L Smith
>>
>> The debate over peak oil is about geology and engineering ; it is  
>> not about
>> demand.
>>
>> Almost all knowledgeable people agree that an all-time physical peak  
>> is
>> coming. They just disagree about when. Some say it has already  
>> occurred, as in
>> 2004. Others             [ Exxon/Mobil ] say that it wont come until  
>> 2032.
>>
>> If great enough, a fall in demand [ or the rate of growth of  
>> demand ] for any
>> reason which you might imagine, could slow up the rate of extraction  
>> of crude
>> oil and hence postpone the date of the peak, but such a fall is not  
>> going to
>> eliminate the peak or affect the probability that it will arrive  
>> someday
>> within somebody's planning horizon.
>>
>> Because of the lead-times characteristic of the energy sector of the  
>> World's
>> economy, these differences of opinion are important, especially to  
>> people who
>> have to plan, permit, build and put into operation projects for  
>> exploration
>> and development, fossil fuels, renewable energy et cetera.
>>
>> At least, that is the way it looks to most of the disputants.
>>
>> Cordially ###
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> **************
>> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money &amp;
>> Finance.
>>      (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gasification mailing list
>> Gasification at listserv.repp.org
>> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
>> http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org
>> http://info.bioenergylists.org
>>     
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gasification mailing list
> Gasification at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
> http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org
> http://info.bioenergylists.org
>
>   

_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list
Gasification at listserv.repp.org
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org
http://info.bioenergylists.org