Kevin,
I know you are missing the point, so let me spell it out for you. " John is
mocking your standard comment."

By the way, my wife and I (did I tell you we are both Dr. Dr.'s) both think
you are ****ing nuts.


wrote in message
oups.com...

John H. wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 07:10:43 -0700, wrote:


Bill McKee wrote:
"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
Scooby Doo wrote:

As I said, since you can't rationally debate ANWR, you're useless.


Yet another brain-dead reich-winger for rec.boats.

Seems you can't rationally debate either.

BWAAAHAAAAA!!!! Bill has been proven dead wrong AGAIN!!!! You're
bull**** about ANWR, and the caribou herds have been blown totally out
of the water by one single person!!!!!!!

Do you know for a fact he's single, or is that just another wild,
unfounded
allegation?

Damn, you're stupid.

Harry,
Isn't this the point in the conversation where you turn to Bassy and Don and
high 5 each other.


"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
wrote:
It appears that Mr. Kruase is here just to disrupt this forum. He
doesn't want to discuss boats or have a rational debate on any topic. He
is nothing more than a newsgroup troll.


"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
Bill McKee wrote:
"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
Scooby Doo wrote:

As I said, since you can't rationally debate ANWR, you're useless.
Yet another brain-dead reich-winger for rec.boats.
Seems you can't rationally debate either.

Sure I can, but there's no point to doing so in this newsgroup, not with
the current population of right-wing robots.




I don't like arguing with fools. But if I change my mind, I'll contact
you, ok?

Jack Redington wrote:
wrote:

Jack Redington wrote:

wrote:


Jack Redington wrote:


St wrote:



Whhat gas going for on the water throughout the US. $3.98 for premium,
downstate NY. No regular available at my marina





I was charged $2.49 about two weeks ago at Hartwell marina on Lake
Hartwell (Ga side) A marina that was closer wanted $2.79 (89o)

Capt Jack R..


Jack, is that the marina that's close to Tugaloo State Park?



The one nearest Tugaloo State Park is Lighthouse marina (near the I-85
bridge) They are at $2.79


That's the one I was thinking of!

. That is real close ot our place on Gumlog

creek. I fact I can see Tugaloo State park from my dock.


Have a friend that just sold a place in Fair Play, SC, and moved over
to the GA side quite close to there, he's having a new dock put in,
real nice house.

I hope I find myself wandering down by the dam when it comes fill-up
time again :-) Hartwell marina is by Hart State park in Hartwell Ga.


Do you ever go over to "The Island"? Met a lot of interesting folks
there the last time I was there.



This is our first year with a place on Hartwell. We had camped out at
some of the state parks before we got our little "weekender" So we know
we liked the lake and fled Lanier. We use to keep the boat on the
trailer at Starboard Marina.

Anyway I am not sure where "The Island" is. There are a bunch of them as
I am sure you already know. I have not noticed any specific gathering
places. But them again we are just beginning to really get the feel of
this area.

"The Island" is between Lighthouse Marina and I-85, you'll usually see
boats pulled up to it, it on the side of it. If you were leaving
Lighthouse, going toward I85 bridge, it would be on the left. The
people that hang there are very friendly, always cooking something,
etc. Nice natural sand beach to pull the boat up on, swim, relax.

We are finding lots of good food in the area. The T60 and Gumlog BBQ are
both excellent.

I'm a bbq fanatic, and will certainly check them out. Where abouts are
they? By the way, we go to Hendersonville, NC alot, and I often take
the Cherokee Scenic Highway, which is S.C. state route 11. You cross
Lake Keowee, absolutely beautiful. Oh, and the fireworks shop at the
Fair Play exit can't be beat!

DSK,
Why would oil companies invest the billions of dollars in infrastructure,
to extract 6 months usage of oil?


"DSK" wrote in message
...
Scooby Doo wrote:
A "fool" is someone who won't accept a compromise where he gets more than
92% of what he wants. ANWR is 19 million acres. The area identified as
the largest untapped petroleum supply in North America is 1.5 million
acres, or 7.9% of the 19 million.

Uh huh. And if "opening" that 7.9% negates the value of the rest, then
it's not enough, is it?

.. The proposal to open that 1.5 million acres would create about
700,000 jobs, decrease our dependence on Middle Eastern and other
unstable foreign sources of energy, and allow 92.1% of the wildlife
refuge to remain untouched.

No, it will provide approx six months worth of oil at current consumption,
probably less by the time all is said and done, and cut across the entire
wildlife refuge disrupting migration & seasonal habitat.

In other words, for a couple days supply of oil (and huge profits to those
allowed "in"), you want to destroy the refuge. Good idea.

DSK

"51 st" Smithers Inc wrote in message
...
Kevin,
I know you are missing the point, so let me spell it out for you. " John
is
mocking your standard comment."

By the way, my wife and I (did I tell you we are both Dr. Dr.'s) both
think
you are ****ing nuts.

Check with your Dr. Dr. wife......I think kevin is suffering from
BDS..........Bush Derangement Syndrome ;-)



wrote in message
oups.com...

John H. wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 07:10:43 -0700, wrote:


Bill McKee wrote:
"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
Scooby Doo wrote:

As I said, since you can't rationally debate ANWR, you're
useless.


Yet another brain-dead reich-winger for rec.boats.

Seems you can't rationally debate either.

BWAAAHAAAAA!!!! Bill has been proven dead wrong AGAIN!!!! You're
bull**** about ANWR, and the caribou herds have been blown totally out
of the water by one single person!!!!!!!

Do you know for a fact he's single, or is that just another wild,
unfounded
allegation?

Damn, you're stupid.

"52 nd Name" Smithers Inc wrote:
DSK,
Why would oil companies invest the billions of dollars in infrastructure,
to extract 6 months usage of oil?

That's a pretty simple minded question there lad, though I doubt
you exact figures, I can't see how you could miss making a rough
estimate. (3.64 billion barrels of oil sells on today's market
for about $218 billion, which is *clearly* the reason oil
companies would invest a few billions of dollars in
infrastructure to extract it.)

However, lets look at some actual specifics, to nail this down
in more detail. The numbers are from the Anchorage Daily News
of February 5, 2005, and they cite the source as "Global Oil and
Gas Risks and Rewards, 2004" public summary, Wood Mackenzie
consultants. That is commonly referred to as the "Wood
Mackenzie Report", and is widely credited as a reliable source
(which costs an arm and a leg if you want access to the detailed
specifics!).

The US uses 20M barrels of oil per day. A six month supply is
3.64 billion barrels. Take your pick what you think the price
will be, but it typically runs about $4 a barrel less than the
average price of oil on the world market. Which is to say that
with other oil hitting $64 a barrel, right now Alaska North Slope
(ANS) crude is running right at $60 a barrel.

The actual cost of production for ANS is $9.94, according to
the Wood Mackenzie Report.

Hence the investment in infrastructure and operating expenses
for that 3.64 billion barrels would be roughly $36 billion. And
the price received for that oil would be $218.4 billion.

Now, the figures did not specify what the taxes are for oil at
$60/bbl, but did state that at $16/bbl it was 71.7% and at $35/bbl
it was 58.4% (for ANS crude). We can probably assume that there
would be a lower percentage at $60/bbl, but I'm not going to even
try guessing how much lower. Lets error on the conservative side
and assume it is the same.

$218 billions, sale price
- 36 billions, cost of production
---------
$182 billions, before tax profit
- 106 billions, taxes at 58.4%
---------
$ 76 billions, pure profit


I'd like to know where else someone can invest 36 dollars and
get 76 back in profit, and do it billions at a time too!

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

52 nd Name wrote:
DSK,
Why would oil companies invest the billions of dollars in infrastructure,
to extract 6 months usage of oil?


Because they expect to profit very handsomely, especially after all
their investment in infrastructure is huge tax deduction? Oh wait, that
actually makes sense...

And if you do not know my name, it is because you don't read any boating
posts here. So why don't you go away, or have you been chased out of all
the political discussion groups?

DSK

DSK wrote:
52 nd Name wrote:
DSK,
Why would oil companies invest the billions of dollars in
infrastructure, to extract 6 months usage of oil?


Because they expect to profit very handsomely, especially after all
their investment in infrastructure is huge tax deduction? Oh wait, that
actually makes sense...

And if you do not know my name, it is because you don't read any boating
posts here. So why don't you go away, or have you been chased out of all
the political discussion groups?

DSK


You're being "smithered" here, fella. This is just his latest ID.

Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"52 nd Name" Smithers Inc wrote:
DSK,
Why would oil companies invest the billions of dollars in infrastructure,
to extract 6 months usage of oil?

That's a pretty simple minded question there lad


He's just playing you. It's "Smithers," with yet another ID.

Harry Krause wrote:
Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
"52 nd Name" Smithers Inc wrote:
DSK,
Why would oil companies invest the billions of dollars in infrastructure,
to extract 6 months usage of oil?
That's a pretty simple minded question there lad

He's just playing you. It's "Smithers," with yet another ID.

Smithers *is* a simple lad...

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)