I am Giant. If you disagree with me you are stupid.
Giant, I am not for or against getting oil from shale. My point is, if enough people put enough meny into figuring it out, it could become a feasible energy source. I am not saying that it should replace future sources. Fuel Cells, hydrogen power, solar power and such are truly some very interesting and compelling options. However, right now the world runs on oil. The switch is not going to happen overnight, no matter how good the idea is and no matter how ba dyou want it to. So you would be really short-sighted to believe that nobody will spend effort and time trying to figure out how to get Oil from Oil shale economically.
Not that it is inherantly smart or stupid for them to do it. It is just going to happen. Meanwhile, other companies will figure out how to make a more efficient fuel cell, or solar cell to make the need for fossil fuels much smaller.
This technology you speak of that will handle that amount of waste and enable proper and enviromentally sound mining is at least 150-200 years off, when petroleum fuel will have gone the way of the horse and buggy.
Quote:
Why do you have to be such a jerk about it?
I have no pity for people who don't bother to inform their opinions. I have even less patience for people that don't bother to inform their opinions and are advocates of war. It's the same problem as the one with the death penalty: you could easily find out later you were wrong. I think it's telling that both you and alcimedes have attacked others (including me) before and advocated war when you can't even do the smallest amount of fact-checking.
Now here you are in multiple threads showing how little you know about your world, your government and the most basic of basic global issues and yet you still don't have the courage to admit that you don't know enough to advocate such a major action that is killing thousands of humans and will have repercussions neither of us can predict. That is nothing less than ignorant and arrogant.
The two of you, along with most anti-peace posters here, have demonstrated that you are so committed to arguing with me that you ignore the most overt of facts. I think you will find few people in the real world that won't agree that uninformed opinions are useless and down-right dangerous.
This technology you speak of that will handle that amount of waste and enable proper and enviromentally sound mining is at least 150-200 years off, when petroleum fuel will have gone the way of the horse and buggy.
Maybe. Maybe not. Still doesn't give you license to be a jerk about it. The tech could be closer than you know as well. Does that make you stupid if it is?
Quote:
I have no pity for people who don't bother to inform their opinions. I have even less patience for people that don't bother to inform their opinions and are advocates of war. It's the same problem as the one with the death penalty: you could easily find out later you were wrong. I think it's telling that both you and alcimedes have attacked others (including me) before and advocated war when you can't even do the smallest amount of fact-checking.[
Not even the smallest amount? Can you please show me where I do not even the smallest amount of fact checking please? Oil shale has nothing to do with war, this was a completely side issue that you are trying to drag into a war debate. Why the narrow focus?
Quote:
Now here you are in multiple threads showing how little you know about your world, your government and the most basic of basic global issues and yet you still don't have the courage to admit that you don't know enough to advocate such a major action that is killing thousands of humans and will have repercussions neither of us can predict. That is nothing less than ignorant and arrogant.
Those must be multiple threads where I disagree with your viewpoint and are therefore small-minded and stupid. And you say I am arrogant? Look in a mirror lately?
Quote:
The two of you, along with most anti-peace posters here, have demonstrated that you are so committed to arguing with me that you ignore the most overt of facts. I think you will find few people in the real world that won't agree that uninformed opinions are useless and down-right dangerous.
I am not committed to arguing with you. If you ask me a question or post something that I care to comment on I will. What causes the arguments are the caustic flaming responses you give about how stupid anyone is who disagrees with you. Like this one. You mihg know a few things, but how to be civil is obviously beyond your skill set. Pity is not required, patience is. I have been very patient as you flame me, post after post. Even when I agree with you I get flamed by you. You are bringing these arguments on yourself and then wondering why people are arguing with you. Once more, look in a mirror. The problem will be looking back at you. Deal with it.
Oil shale has nothing to do with war, this was a completely side issue that you are trying to drag into a war debate.
Actually, this thread is specifically about oil, and not about war, at least according to the thread starter. I'm inclined to believe him/her since he/she is a moderator.
Unless you're saying that the thread was a discreet attempt to undermine the 'war for oil' argument....
Actually, this thread is specifically about oil, and not about war, at least according to the thread starter. I'm inclined to believe him/her since he/she is a moderator.
Unless you're saying that the thread was a discreet attempt to undermine the 'war for oil' argument....
(smiley for anyone who cares to give a chuckle)
Try re-reading the thread. That was my point when I posted what you just quoted. But then, reading comp has not been your strong suit lately. Nor has humor. You should be directing this post at Giant...
I have been very patient as you flame me, post after post
And I will continue to point out the flaws in your ideas as long as they exist and you still think you know enough to advocate the deaths of thousands.
The only disagreement in this thread is the one between reality and fantasy-land.
Anti-peace folks on AI are constantly demonstrating their incompetence, yet not one of them has the balls to say that they just don't know enough about their government structure (such as what the hell rumsfeld does all day), the oil industry (as demonstrated in this thread), their own government's policies (even though many of their papers have been posted by 'liberals' as they are called), Iraqi WMD status (as evidenced by an eagerness to consume shitty and disproven admin "intelligence"***) or the importance of international cooperation and institutions (if the knowledge of the UN is on par with the knowledge of our own government, then it's not surprising) to be able to support a war that they obviously know nothing about.
This thread started by someone (who has a long history of ignoring basic fact) posting false information as if it were fact.
So let's stay on topic.
Quote:
it's a simple game.
guess which country has the most oil reserves in the entire world.
Oooh! I'll play. Saudi Arabia!
Quote:
most common answer? Saudia Arabia with 261 Billion barrels.
Because it's the right one. End of story. Move along.
***10 of the Admin's top Iraqi WMD sites turn up nothing That's not to say Iraq doesn't have *something,* but it shows further that you can't accept a damn thing the Bush Admin ever says about Iraqi WMD. So what else is new?
And I will continue to point out the flaws in your ideas as long as they exist and you still think you know enough to advocate the deaths of thousands.
The only disagreement in this thread is the one between reality and fantasy-land.
Anti-peace folks on AI are constantly demonstrating their incompetence, yet not one of them has the balls to say that they just don't know enough about their government structure (such as what the hell rumsfeld does all day), the oil industry (as demonstrated in this thread), their own government's policies (even though many of their papers have been posted by 'liberals' as they are called), Iraqi WMD status (as evidenced by an eagerness to consume shitty and disproven admin "intelligence"***) or the importance of international cooperation and institutions (if the knowledge of the UN is on par with the knowledge of our own government, then it's not surprising) to be able to support a war that they obviously know nothing about.
This thread started by someone (who has a long history of ignoring basic fact) posting false information as if it were fact.
So let's stay on topic.
Oooh! I'll play. Saudi Arabia!
Because it's the right one. End of story. Move along.
***10 of the Admin's top Iraqi WMD sites turn up nothing That's not to say Iraq doesn't have *something,* but it shows further that you can't accept a damn thing the Bush Admin ever says about Iraqi WMD. So what else is new?
Thanks for proving my point so caustically. I am done speaking with you, massochism is not in my nature.
PS, your last part is seriously off topic. Go jump in one of the war threads and post away.
But then, reading comp has not been your strong suit lately. Nor has humor.
Ouch? Nah...
Sorry for misreading your post.
I mean, I'm NOT sorry becauase I didn't misread your post. Because if I did misread your post and apologized for it (like I've done plenty of other times for other people in other threads) I'd be admitting I made a mistake. But that would undermine a lot of arguments/personal attacks that people and moderators make about me 'round these parts.
I mean, I'm NOT sorry becauase I didn't misread your post. Because if I did misread your post and apologized for it (like I've done plenty of other times for other people in other threads) I'd be admitting I made a mistake. But that would undermine a lot of arguments/personal attacks that people and moderators make about me 'round these parts.
I haven't been posting humor lately actually.
I'm sorry? Are you saying that I was saying that this thread is all about war for oil? Because if you are you are incorrect sir. If not, then you need to work on sentance structure and sarcasm. Both really sucked in this post.
And your smiley saying
" (smiley for anyone who cares to give a chuckle)"
Before someone tells us to go get a hotel room, I'll say it again: I misread your post. Sorry.
If you're having trouble with that sentence, go pick up a grammer book.
No, that part was easy to understand, it was this part that confused the issue beyond recognition:
I mean, I'm NOT sorry becauase I didn't misread your post. Because if I did misread your post and apologized for it (like I've done plenty of other times for other people in other threads) I'd be admitting I made a mistake. But that would undermine a lot of arguments/personal attacks that people and moderators make about me 'round these parts.
so are you saying it's not possible to extract oil from oil shale, or it's not economically viable to do so?
don't even try to post some article about estonia and how we need to learn from them. Reasearch it before you make yourself look like more of a fool. Then accept the fact that oil shale is not going to happen.
Of course, you are free to believe what you want. Maybe you can go ride a unicorn to roswell and sell your idea to your fellow fantasy-land buddies who want to use it to power their spaceships.
Is it me, or has Giant just been trying to get others to disagree with him for the express point that he can then bash them and try to make them look stupid?
Is it me, or has Giant just been trying to get others to disagree with him for the express point that he can then bash them and try to make them look stupid?
I can't force anyone to say anything they don't want to.
Comments
Originally posted by NoahJ
I am Giant. If you disagree with me you are stupid.
Giant, I am not for or against getting oil from shale. My point is, if enough people put enough meny into figuring it out, it could become a feasible energy source. I am not saying that it should replace future sources. Fuel Cells, hydrogen power, solar power and such are truly some very interesting and compelling options. However, right now the world runs on oil. The switch is not going to happen overnight, no matter how good the idea is and no matter how ba dyou want it to. So you would be really short-sighted to believe that nobody will spend effort and time trying to figure out how to get Oil from Oil shale economically.
Not that it is inherantly smart or stupid for them to do it. It is just going to happen. Meanwhile, other companies will figure out how to make a more efficient fuel cell, or solar cell to make the need for fossil fuels much smaller.
This technology you speak of that will handle that amount of waste and enable proper and enviromentally sound mining is at least 150-200 years off, when petroleum fuel will have gone the way of the horse and buggy.
Why do you have to be such a jerk about it?
I have no pity for people who don't bother to inform their opinions. I have even less patience for people that don't bother to inform their opinions and are advocates of war. It's the same problem as the one with the death penalty: you could easily find out later you were wrong. I think it's telling that both you and alcimedes have attacked others (including me) before and advocated war when you can't even do the smallest amount of fact-checking.
Now here you are in multiple threads showing how little you know about your world, your government and the most basic of basic global issues and yet you still don't have the courage to admit that you don't know enough to advocate such a major action that is killing thousands of humans and will have repercussions neither of us can predict. That is nothing less than ignorant and arrogant.
The two of you, along with most anti-peace posters here, have demonstrated that you are so committed to arguing with me that you ignore the most overt of facts. I think you will find few people in the real world that won't agree that uninformed opinions are useless and down-right dangerous.
Originally posted by giant
This technology you speak of that will handle that amount of waste and enable proper and enviromentally sound mining is at least 150-200 years off, when petroleum fuel will have gone the way of the horse and buggy.
Maybe. Maybe not. Still doesn't give you license to be a jerk about it. The tech could be closer than you know as well. Does that make you stupid if it is?
I have no pity for people who don't bother to inform their opinions. I have even less patience for people that don't bother to inform their opinions and are advocates of war. It's the same problem as the one with the death penalty: you could easily find out later you were wrong. I think it's telling that both you and alcimedes have attacked others (including me) before and advocated war when you can't even do the smallest amount of fact-checking.[
Not even the smallest amount? Can you please show me where I do not even the smallest amount of fact checking please? Oil shale has nothing to do with war, this was a completely side issue that you are trying to drag into a war debate. Why the narrow focus?
Now here you are in multiple threads showing how little you know about your world, your government and the most basic of basic global issues and yet you still don't have the courage to admit that you don't know enough to advocate such a major action that is killing thousands of humans and will have repercussions neither of us can predict. That is nothing less than ignorant and arrogant.
Those must be multiple threads where I disagree with your viewpoint and are therefore small-minded and stupid. And you say I am arrogant? Look in a mirror lately?
The two of you, along with most anti-peace posters here, have demonstrated that you are so committed to arguing with me that you ignore the most overt of facts. I think you will find few people in the real world that won't agree that uninformed opinions are useless and down-right dangerous.
I am not committed to arguing with you. If you ask me a question or post something that I care to comment on I will. What causes the arguments are the caustic flaming responses you give about how stupid anyone is who disagrees with you. Like this one. You mihg know a few things, but how to be civil is obviously beyond your skill set. Pity is not required, patience is. I have been very patient as you flame me, post after post. Even when I agree with you I get flamed by you. You are bringing these arguments on yourself and then wondering why people are arguing with you. Once more, look in a mirror. The problem will be looking back at you. Deal with it.
Originally posted by NoahJ
Oil shale has nothing to do with war, this was a completely side issue that you are trying to drag into a war debate.
Actually, this thread is specifically about oil, and not about war, at least according to the thread starter. I'm inclined to believe him/her since he/she is a moderator.
Unless you're saying that the thread was a discreet attempt to undermine the 'war for oil' argument....
Originally posted by bunge
Actually, this thread is specifically about oil, and not about war, at least according to the thread starter. I'm inclined to believe him/her since he/she is a moderator.
Unless you're saying that the thread was a discreet attempt to undermine the 'war for oil' argument....
Try re-reading the thread. That was my point when I posted what you just quoted. But then, reading comp has not been your strong suit lately. Nor has humor. You should be directing this post at Giant...
Originally posted by NoahJ
I have been very patient as you flame me, post after post
And I will continue to point out the flaws in your ideas as long as they exist and you still think you know enough to advocate the deaths of thousands.
The only disagreement in this thread is the one between reality and fantasy-land.
Anti-peace folks on AI are constantly demonstrating their incompetence, yet not one of them has the balls to say that they just don't know enough about their government structure (such as what the hell rumsfeld does all day), the oil industry (as demonstrated in this thread), their own government's policies (even though many of their papers have been posted by 'liberals' as they are called), Iraqi WMD status (as evidenced by an eagerness to consume shitty and disproven admin "intelligence"***) or the importance of international cooperation and institutions (if the knowledge of the UN is on par with the knowledge of our own government, then it's not surprising) to be able to support a war that they obviously know nothing about.
This thread started by someone (who has a long history of ignoring basic fact) posting false information as if it were fact.
So let's stay on topic.
it's a simple game.
guess which country has the most oil reserves in the entire world.
Oooh! I'll play. Saudi Arabia!
most common answer? Saudia Arabia with 261 Billion barrels.
Because it's the right one. End of story. Move along.
***10 of the Admin's top Iraqi WMD sites turn up nothing That's not to say Iraq doesn't have *something,* but it shows further that you can't accept a damn thing the Bush Admin ever says about Iraqi WMD. So what else is new?
Originally posted by giant
And I will continue to point out the flaws in your ideas as long as they exist and you still think you know enough to advocate the deaths of thousands.
The only disagreement in this thread is the one between reality and fantasy-land.
Anti-peace folks on AI are constantly demonstrating their incompetence, yet not one of them has the balls to say that they just don't know enough about their government structure (such as what the hell rumsfeld does all day), the oil industry (as demonstrated in this thread), their own government's policies (even though many of their papers have been posted by 'liberals' as they are called), Iraqi WMD status (as evidenced by an eagerness to consume shitty and disproven admin "intelligence"***) or the importance of international cooperation and institutions (if the knowledge of the UN is on par with the knowledge of our own government, then it's not surprising) to be able to support a war that they obviously know nothing about.
This thread started by someone (who has a long history of ignoring basic fact) posting false information as if it were fact.
So let's stay on topic.
Oooh! I'll play. Saudi Arabia!
Because it's the right one. End of story. Move along.
***10 of the Admin's top Iraqi WMD sites turn up nothing That's not to say Iraq doesn't have *something,* but it shows further that you can't accept a damn thing the Bush Admin ever says about Iraqi WMD. So what else is new?
Thanks for proving my point so caustically. I am done speaking with you, massochism is not in my nature.
PS, your last part is seriously off topic. Go jump in one of the war threads and post away.
Originally posted by NoahJ
But then, reading comp has not been your strong suit lately. Nor has humor.
Ouch? Nah...
Sorry for misreading your post.
I mean, I'm NOT sorry becauase I didn't misread your post. Because if I did misread your post and apologized for it (like I've done plenty of other times for other people in other threads) I'd be admitting I made a mistake. But that would undermine a lot of arguments/personal attacks that people and moderators make about me 'round these parts.
I haven't been posting humor lately actually.
Originally posted by bunge
Ouch? Nah...
Sorry for misreading your post.
I mean, I'm NOT sorry becauase I didn't misread your post. Because if I did misread your post and apologized for it (like I've done plenty of other times for other people in other threads) I'd be admitting I made a mistake. But that would undermine a lot of arguments/personal attacks that people and moderators make about me 'round these parts.
I haven't been posting humor lately actually.
I'm sorry? Are you saying that I was saying that this thread is all about war for oil? Because if you are you are incorrect sir. If not, then you need to work on sentance structure and sarcasm. Both really sucked in this post.
And your smiley saying
"
was a weak attempt at humor. Strike 2?
Originally posted by NoahJ
I'm sorry? Are you saying that I was saying that this thread is all about war for oil?
Before someone tells us to go get a hotel room, I'll say it again: I misread your post. Sorry.
If you're having trouble with that sentence, go pick up a grammer book.
Originally posted by bunge
Before someone tells us to go get a hotel room, I'll say it again: I misread your post. Sorry.
If you're having trouble with that sentence, go pick up a grammer book.
No, that part was easy to understand, it was this part that confused the issue beyond recognition:
I mean, I'm NOT sorry becauase I didn't misread your post. Because if I did misread your post and apologized for it (like I've done plenty of other times for other people in other threads) I'd be admitting I made a mistake. But that would undermine a lot of arguments/personal attacks that people and moderators make about me 'round these parts.
Once again, a poor attempt at sarcasm and humor.
Originally posted by alcimedes
so are you saying it's not possible to extract oil from oil shale, or it's not economically viable to do so?
don't even try to post some article about estonia and how we need to learn from them. Reasearch it before you make yourself look like more of a fool. Then accept the fact that oil shale is not going to happen.
Of course, you are free to believe what you want. Maybe you can go ride a unicorn to roswell and sell your idea to your fellow fantasy-land buddies who want to use it to power their spaceships.
Originally posted by bunge
Before someone tells us to go get a hotel room, I'll say it again: I misread your post. Sorry.
If you're having trouble with that sentence, go pick up a grammer book.
Bunge is the man.
Originally posted by bunge
....
Chuckle I want my smiley!!!
Is it me, or has Giant just been trying to get others to disagree with him for the express point that he can then bash them and try to make them look stupid?
Originally posted by Argento
Chuckle I want my smiley!!!
Is it me, or has Giant just been trying to get others to disagree with him for the express point that he can then bash them and try to make them look stupid?
I can't force anyone to say anything they don't want to.
Or maybe I can!
Originally posted by NoahJ
Once again, a poor attempt at sarcasm and humor.
Truth hurts?