Oil
 

The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we may
be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

Eisboch

Oil
 

Eisboch wrote:
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we may
be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.


We may be right to prevent drilling in the locations within the US
territorial boundaries. Saving our own oil for our selves.

Oil
 

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.


We may be right to prevent drilling in the locations within the US
territorial boundaries. Saving our own oil for our selves.



Can you imagine if every country in the world had that selfish
attitude................

Oil
 

Don White wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

We may be right to prevent drilling in the locations within the US
territorial boundaries. Saving our own oil for our selves.



Can you imagine if every country in the world had that selfish
attitude................




It's BAR's "Christian approach" to life.

Oil
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.


We may be right to prevent drilling in the locations within the US
territorial boundaries. Saving our own oil for our selves.



Can you imagine if every country in the world had that selfish
attitude................


I've got news for you. If the History Channel info is anywhere near being
correct, *every* country in the world will be quickly adopting a selfish
attitude. Makes you wonder about what's going on behind the scenes.

Eisboch

Oil
 

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:14:48 -0500, "John" wrote:

I strongly believe that the way to tackle the energy problem is to put solar
collectors on every building in the country

HERE HERE!!!

~~ saying that after buying a ton of solar fund stocks ~~

Oil
 

"John" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

Eisboch


They also ran a show on global warming, it is global warming in the past
that created the oil in the first place.
But the basic tenant is that the more green house gases mankind spews, the
warmer the earth gets, the more melting that creates releases more
greenhouse gases, etc, etc, etc until the whole planet is too warm
everywhere but the artic.

And yes the earth goes through warming and cooling periods caused by the
sun - but this time mankind is a huge contributing factor.



I've resisted the temptation to jump on the "man is the cause of global
warming" bandwagon precisely because the earth has gone through these cycles
naturally for 10's of thousands of years. However, one thing caught my
attention while watching the HC documentary on global warming. Apparently
the earth is in a natural warming trend to begin with and the contributions
of mankind may influence the natural cycle back to cooling that would
otherwise occur. The issue of frozen methane being released from the ocean
floor due to the extra degree or two of water temp is scary. It could throw
the whole system, normally naturally regulated, out of control.

If it's true, it's too late. There's no way to stop it now, with the
dependence on oil that most developed nations have and particularly with the
newfound personal wealth in China causing the Chinese to hang up the
bicycles and buy their first auto.

Oh, well. Something else to worry about.

Eisboch

Oil
 

Eisboch wrote:
"John" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

Eisboch

They also ran a show on global warming, it is global warming in the past
that created the oil in the first place.
But the basic tenant is that the more green house gases mankind spews, the
warmer the earth gets, the more melting that creates releases more
greenhouse gases, etc, etc, etc until the whole planet is too warm
everywhere but the artic.

And yes the earth goes through warming and cooling periods caused by the
sun - but this time mankind is a huge contributing factor.



I've resisted the temptation to jump on the "man is the cause of global
warming" bandwagon precisely because the earth has gone through these cycles
naturally for 10's of thousands of years. However, one thing caught my
attention while watching the HC documentary on global warming. Apparently
the earth is in a natural warming trend to begin with and the contributions
of mankind may influence the natural cycle back to cooling that would
otherwise occur. The issue of frozen methane being released from the ocean
floor due to the extra degree or two of water temp is scary. It could throw
the whole system, normally naturally regulated, out of control.

If it's true, it's too late. There's no way to stop it now, with the
dependence on oil that most developed nations have and particularly with the
newfound personal wealth in China causing the Chinese to hang up the
bicycles and buy their first auto.

Oh, well. Something else to worry about.

What about the asteroid that is predicted to "near miss" the Earth in
2028(http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9803/1...id/index.html).

Oil
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message ...

"John" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

Eisboch


They also ran a show on global warming, it is global warming in the past
that created the oil in the first place.
But the basic tenant is that the more green house gases mankind spews, the
warmer the earth gets, the more melting that creates releases more
greenhouse gases, etc, etc, etc until the whole planet is too warm
everywhere but the artic.

And yes the earth goes through warming and cooling periods caused by the
sun - but this time mankind is a huge contributing factor.



I've resisted the temptation to jump on the "man is the cause of global
warming" bandwagon precisely because the earth has gone through these cycles
naturally for 10's of thousands of years.

10's or thousands?

The earth is over 4 billion years old. Its gone through cycles
before and will again whether CO2 emissions are the cause or not.
Sooner or later we're going to have to learn to live with
whatever comes. Im not going to go out a buy an electric car just yet.

We have yet to find a suitable energy replacement for petrolium.
Somebody needs to get to work on this pretty soon.

db

Oil
 

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:15:03 -0500, BAR wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
"John" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

Eisboch

They also ran a show on global warming, it is global warming in the past
that created the oil in the first place.
But the basic tenant is that the more green house gases mankind spews, the
warmer the earth gets, the more melting that creates releases more
greenhouse gases, etc, etc, etc until the whole planet is too warm
everywhere but the artic.

And yes the earth goes through warming and cooling periods caused by the
sun - but this time mankind is a huge contributing factor.



I've resisted the temptation to jump on the "man is the cause of global
warming" bandwagon precisely because the earth has gone through these cycles
naturally for 10's of thousands of years. However, one thing caught my
attention while watching the HC documentary on global warming. Apparently
the earth is in a natural warming trend to begin with and the contributions
of mankind may influence the natural cycle back to cooling that would
otherwise occur. The issue of frozen methane being released from the ocean
floor due to the extra degree or two of water temp is scary. It could throw
the whole system, normally naturally regulated, out of control.

If it's true, it's too late. There's no way to stop it now, with the
dependence on oil that most developed nations have and particularly with the
newfound personal wealth in China causing the Chinese to hang up the
bicycles and buy their first auto.

Oh, well. Something else to worry about.

What about the asteroid that is predicted to "near miss" the Earth in
2028(http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9803/1...id/index.html).

Tom's got us covered.
--
John H

Oil
 

On Jan 28, 10:29*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"John" wrote in message

...







"Eisboch" wrote in message
m...
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. *It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. * It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, *we looks like we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

Eisboch

They also ran a show on global warming, it is global warming in the past
that created the oil in the first place.
But the basic tenant is that the more green house gases mankind spews, the
warmer the earth gets, the more melting that creates releases more
greenhouse gases, etc, etc, etc until the whole planet is too warm
everywhere but the artic.

And yes the earth goes through warming and cooling periods caused by the
sun - but this time mankind is a huge contributing factor.

I've resisted the temptation to jump on the "man is the cause of global
warming" bandwagon precisely because the earth has gone through these cycles
naturally for 10's of thousands of years. * However, one thing caught my
attention while watching the HC documentary on global warming. *Apparently
the earth is in a natural warming trend to begin with and the contributions
of mankind may influence the natural cycle back to cooling that would
otherwise occur. * The issue of frozen methane being released from the ocean
floor due to the extra degree or two of water temp is scary. *It could throw
the whole system, normally naturally regulated, out of control.

If it's true, it's too late. *There's no way to stop it now, with the
dependence on oil that most developed nations have and particularly with the
newfound personal wealth in China causing the Chinese to hang up the
bicycles and buy their first auto.

Oh, well. *Something else to worry about.

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That is EXACTLY what the right wingers are missing.

Oil
 

On Jan 28, 5:25�am, BAR wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. �It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. � It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, �we looks like we may
be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

We may be right to prevent drilling in the locations within the US
territorial boundaries. Saving our own oil for our selves.

There is very little untapped oil that can be recovered efficiently in
the US. All the oilco's want to drill up ANWR, and maybe we will
someday.
I hear there's about a 90-day supply of oil up there.

We are one of the last generations of recreational power boaters,
recreational aviators, and private automobile travellers. Enjoy.

If we don't figure out a feasible alternative, our grandkids not only
won't be boaters, they will witness some bloody global conflicts over
the remaining puddles of crude oil, and the dawn of a new dark age.

Oil
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 5:25�am, BAR wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. �It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. � It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, �we looks like we may
be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.
We may be right to prevent drilling in the locations within the US
territorial boundaries. Saving our own oil for our selves.

There is very little untapped oil that can be recovered efficiently in
the US. All the oilco's want to drill up ANWR, and maybe we will
someday.
I hear there's about a 90-day supply of oil up there.

We are one of the last generations of recreational power boaters,
recreational aviators, and private automobile travellers. Enjoy.

If we don't figure out a feasible alternative, our grandkids not only
won't be boaters, they will witness some bloody global conflicts over
the remaining puddles of crude oil, and the dawn of a new dark age.


We won't even be in that game.

Oil
 

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:30 -0500, "D-unit" cof42_AT_embarqmail.com
wrote:


"Eisboch" wrote in message ...



I've resisted the temptation to jump on the "man is the cause of global
warming" bandwagon precisely because the earth has gone through these cycles
naturally for 10's of thousands of years.

10's or thousands?

The earth is over 4 billion years old. Its gone through cycles
before and will again whether CO2 emissions are the cause or not.
Sooner or later we're going to have to learn to live with
whatever comes. Im not going to go out a buy an electric car just yet.

We have yet to find a suitable energy replacement for petrolium.
Somebody needs to get to work on this pretty soon.

What I found striking about the show was the emphasis on - I think the
term was "captured sunlight."
A well-made argument that the oil we are burning and the carbon we are
releasing was millennia in the gathering.
We have released much of that concentrated carbon energy in a very
short time, and continue to do so.
To my mind that is a compelling argument in the man vs nature
squabble, since it quite clearly shows the modern era is radically
different than any "natural" warming cycle seen before.
Nukes. Nukes. Nukes. Until another energy source is found, anyway.
The anti-nuke crowd will come around when the power goes off.

--Vic

Oil
 

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:


If it's true, it's too late. There's no way to stop it now, with the
dependence on oil that most developed nations have and particularly with
the newfound personal wealth in China causing the Chinese to hang up the
bicycles and buy their first auto.

Oh, well. Something else to worry about.

What about the asteroid that is predicted to "near miss" the Earth in
2028(http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9803/1...id/index.html).


I am afraid we would stand a better chance of surviving that. Besides, it
only comes close in 2029. It's the return 7 years later that has some
people concerned.

Eisboch

Oil
 

"D-unit" cof42_AT_embarqmail.com wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"John" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend.
It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and
I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a
bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence
of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like
we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

Eisboch


They also ran a show on global warming, it is global warming in the
past
that created the oil in the first place.
But the basic tenant is that the more green house gases mankind spews,
the
warmer the earth gets, the more melting that creates releases more
greenhouse gases, etc, etc, etc until the whole planet is too warm
everywhere but the artic.

And yes the earth goes through warming and cooling periods caused by
the
sun - but this time mankind is a huge contributing factor.



I've resisted the temptation to jump on the "man is the cause of global
warming" bandwagon precisely because the earth has gone through these
cycles
naturally for 10's of thousands of years.

10's or thousands?

The earth is over 4 billion years old. Its gone through cycles
before and will again whether CO2 emissions are the cause or not.
Sooner or later we're going to have to learn to live with
whatever comes. Im not going to go out a buy an electric car just yet.

We have yet to find a suitable energy replacement for petrolium.
Somebody needs to get to work on this pretty soon.

db


Do you have any idea of the world's dependence on oil? I am not talking
about gas for your car.
Virtually anything you use or touch everyday most likely had it's origin in
oil.

Eisboch

Oil
 

"HK" wrote in message
...


We won't even be in that game.

Makes you think about the recent, but under-reported military alliance that
we just signed up to with Iraq.
It has nothing to do with the current activities and assures military bases
for the US in Iraq for years to come.

If the HC documentary has any truth to it, it will be every nation for
themselves. There's no other way.


Eisboch

Oil
 

HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 5:25�am, BAR wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend.
�It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. � It also opened my eyes a
bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise
emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, �we looks like
we may
be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.
We may be right to prevent drilling in the locations within the US
territorial boundaries. Saving our own oil for our selves.

There is very little untapped oil that can be recovered efficiently in
the US. All the oilco's want to drill up ANWR, and maybe we will
someday.
I hear there's about a 90-day supply of oil up there.

We are one of the last generations of recreational power boaters,
recreational aviators, and private automobile travellers. Enjoy.

If we don't figure out a feasible alternative, our grandkids not only
won't be boaters, they will witness some bloody global conflicts over
the remaining puddles of crude oil, and the dawn of a new dark age.


We won't even be in that game.

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

Oil
 

Eisboch wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:

If it's true, it's too late. There's no way to stop it now, with the
dependence on oil that most developed nations have and particularly with
the newfound personal wealth in China causing the Chinese to hang up the
bicycles and buy their first auto.

Oh, well. Something else to worry about.
What about the asteroid that is predicted to "near miss" the Earth in
2028(http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9803/1...id/index.html).


I am afraid we would stand a better chance of surviving that. Besides, it
only comes close in 2029. It's the return 7 years later that has some
people concerned.

I don't think I am going to be around for the return so, I am not going
to worry about that leg of the flight.

Oil
 

On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:


What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

You're not serious, I hope.

Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?

We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)

Oil
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

You're not serious, I hope.

Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?

We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)


But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?

Oil
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message ...

"D-unit" cof42_AT_embarqmail.com wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"John" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend.
It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and
I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a
bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence
of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like
we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

Eisboch


They also ran a show on global warming, it is global warming in the
past
that created the oil in the first place.
But the basic tenant is that the more green house gases mankind spews,
the
warmer the earth gets, the more melting that creates releases more
greenhouse gases, etc, etc, etc until the whole planet is too warm
everywhere but the artic.

And yes the earth goes through warming and cooling periods caused by
the
sun - but this time mankind is a huge contributing factor.



I've resisted the temptation to jump on the "man is the cause of global
warming" bandwagon precisely because the earth has gone through these
cycles
naturally for 10's of thousands of years.

10's or thousands?

The earth is over 4 billion years old. Its gone through cycles
before and will again whether CO2 emissions are the cause or not.
Sooner or later we're going to have to learn to live with
whatever comes. Im not going to go out a buy an electric car just yet.

We have yet to find a suitable energy replacement for petrolium.
Somebody needs to get to work on this pretty soon.

db


Do you have any idea of the world's dependence on oil? I am not talking
about gas for your car.
Virtually anything you use or touch everyday most likely had it's origin in
oil.

Eisboch



Absolutely,

The problem as it stands now is there is no other energy source that
provides as much "bang for the buck" as petroleum and is so easy
to transport.

I think we need to invest in methane. There's an abundant source of it.

db

Oil
 

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:29:59 -0500, "John" wrote:


"Eisboch" wrote in message
m...

"John" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend. It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. It also opened my eyes a bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, we looks like we
may be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.

Eisboch


They also ran a show on global warming, it is global warming in the past
that created the oil in the first place.
But the basic tenant is that the more green house gases mankind spews,
the warmer the earth gets, the more melting that creates releases more
greenhouse gases, etc, etc, etc until the whole planet is too warm
everywhere but the artic.

And yes the earth goes through warming and cooling periods caused by the
sun - but this time mankind is a huge contributing factor.



I've resisted the temptation to jump on the "man is the cause of global
warming" bandwagon precisely because the earth has gone through these
cycles naturally for 10's of thousands of years.

Very true and the first time that someone raised the "global warming" flag
and they actually started getting data to prove it, there was volcanic
eruption which spew dust into the startustphere and caused gloabvl cooling.
Kind of shed doubt on the environmental scietists.


However, one thing caught my
attention while watching the HC documentary on global warming. Apparently
the earth is in a natural warming trend to begin with and the
contributions of mankind may influence the natural cycle back to cooling
that would otherwise occur. The issue of frozen methane being released
from the ocean floor due to the extra degree or two of water temp is
scary. It could throw the whole system, normally naturally regulated, out
of control.

If it's true, it's too late.

again very true the whole stituation has been ignored for too long, maybe if
Bush had not blown it off, we would be one step closer to a solution.

There's no way to stop it now, with the
dependence on oil that most developed nations have and particularly with
the newfound personal wealth in China causing the Chinese to hang up the
bicycles and buy their first auto.

Oh, well. Something else to worry about.

Eisboch


and then there is this.....
http://www.spaceandscience.net/id16.html

Changes in the Sun's Surface to Bring Next Climate Change



January 2, 2008



Today, the Space and Science Research Center, (SSRC) in Orlando, Florida
announces that it has confirmed the recent web announcement of NASA solar
physicists that there are substantial changes occurring in the sun's
surface. The SSRC has further researched these changes and has concluded
they will bring about the next climate change to one of a long lasting cold
era.



Today, Director of the SSRC, John Casey has reaffirmed earlier research he
led that independently discovered the sun's changes are the result of a
family of cycles that bring about climate shifts from cold climate to warm
and back again.



"We today confirm the recent announcement by NASA that there are historic
and important changes taking place on the sun's surface. This will have only
one outcome - a new climate change is coming that will bring an extended
period of deep cold to the planet. This is not however a unique event for
the planet although it is critically important news to this and the next
generations. It is but the normal sequence of alternating climate changes
that has been going on for thousands of years. Further according to our
research, this series of solar cycles are so predictable that they can be
used to roughly forecast the next series of climate changes many decades in
advance. I have verified the accuracy of these cycles' behavior over the
last 1,100 years relative to temperatures on Earth, to well over 90%."



As to what these changes are Casey says, "The sun's surface flows have
slowed dramatically as NASA has indicated. This process of surface movement,
what NASA calls the "conveyor belt" essentially sweeps up old sunspots and
deposits new ones. NASA's studies have found that when the surface movement
slows down, sunspot counts drop significantly. All records of sunspot counts
and other proxies of solar activity going back 6,000 years clearly validates
our own findings that when we have sunspot counts lower then 50 it means
only one thing - an intense cold climate, globally. NASA says the solar
cycle 25, the one after the next that starts this spring will be at 50 or
lower. The general opinion of the SSRC scientists is that it could begin
even sooner within 3 years with the next solar cycle 24. What we are saying
today is that my own research and that of the other scientists at the SSRC
verifies that NASA is right about one thing - a solar cycle of 50 or lower
is headed our way. With this next solar minimum predicted by NASA, what I
call a "solar hibernation," the SSRC forecasts a much colder Earth just as
it has transpired before for thousands of years. If NASA is the more
accurate on the schedule, then we may see even warmer temperatures before
the bottom falls out. If the SSRC and other scientists around the world are
correct then we have only a few years to prepare before 20-30 years of
lasting and possibly dangerous cold arrive."



When asked about what this will mean to the average person on the street,
Casey was firm. "The last time this particular cycle regenerated was over
200 years ago. I call it the "Bi-Centennial Cycle" solar cycle. It took
place between 1793 and 1830, the so-called Dalton Minimum, a period of
extreme cold that resulted in what historian John D. Post called the 'last
great subsistence crisis.' With that cold came massive crops losses, food
riots, famine and disease. I believe this next climate change will be much
stronger and has the potential to once more cause widespread crop losses
globally with the resultant ill effects. The key difference for this next
Bi-Centennial Cycle's impact versus the last is that we will have over 8
billion mouths to feed in the next coldest years where as we had only 1
billion the last time. Among other effects like social and economic
disruption, we are facing the real prospect of the 'perfect storm of global
food shortages' in the next climate change. In answer to the question,
everyone on the street will be affected."



Given the importance of the next climate change Casey was asked whether the
government has been notified. "Yes, as soon as my research revealed these
solar cycles and the prediction of the coming cold era with the next climate
change, I notified all the key offices in the Bush administration including
both parties in the Senate and House science committees as well as most of
the nation's media outlets. Unfortunately, because of the intensity of
coverage of the UN IPCC and man made global warming during 2007, the full
story about climate change is very slow in getting told. These changes in
the sun have begun. They are unstoppable. With the word finally starting to
get out about the next climate change, hopefully we will have time to
prepare. Right now, the newly organized SSRC is the leading independent
research center in the US and possibly worldwide, that is focused on the
next climate change. Some of the world's brightest scientists, also experts
in solar physics and the next climate change have joined with me. In the
meantime we will do our best to spread the word along with NASA and others
who can see what is about to take place for the Earth's climate. Soon, I
believe this will be recognized as the most important climate story of this
century."



More information on the Space and Science Research Center is available at:
www.spaceandscience.net



The previous NASA announcement was made at:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2..._longrange.htm



January 7 Update: Responses to Press Release. Please accept our thanks for
the many who have responded to the company's first release of 2008. The
first ten replies strongly endorsed (9 to 1 in favor) of what the SSRC is
trying to do. For those who have sent in questions about the web site and
the newly started SSRC we have taken those comments and where appropirate
made immediate changes to improve the web site. Everyone's assistance in
making the SSRC web site better is appreciated. Keep it up!



Maybe we should be praying for Global Warming. It will definitely save
resources used for heating.
--
John H

Oil
 

BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

You're not serious, I hope.

Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?

We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)


But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?

No need to worry; Bush has done that.

Oil
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:30 -0500, "D-unit" cof42_AT_embarqmail.com
wrote:

Im not going to go out a buy an electric car just yet.

Actually this is probably the golden age of the electric car. "Fuel"
is very cheap.
Once they actually get a significant number on the road they will be
separately metering your charger for the road tax and adding a
surcharge for the added electrical infrastructure they need to charge
millions of cars every night.


I still don't get it though. The energy to charge the batteries in an
electric car has to come from somewhere.
Hybrids are charged by the gas (oil) powered engine, along with supplements
of "regenerative braking", etc.

Plug in (to charge) electrics still derive their power from oil, as do
hybrids. So, where's the "green" thing?

Answer: Nuclear. But first we have to convert all the tree huggers.

Eisboch

Oil
 

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:29:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

Oh, well. Something else to worry about.

Don't worry - be happy.

Oil
 

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:29:36 -0500, BAR wrote:

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

It's called nuclear power.

As in bombs.

BIG bombs. :)

Oil
 

On Jan 28, 7:35*pm, Duke Nukem wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:29:36 -0500, BAR wrote:
What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

It's called nuclear power.

As in bombs.

BIG bombs. *:)

with a name like Duke Nukem, I would expect nothing less...

Oil
 

Oil
 

Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:30 -0500, "D-unit" cof42_AT_embarqmail.com
wrote:

Im not going to go out a buy an electric car just yet.
Actually this is probably the golden age of the electric car. "Fuel"
is very cheap.
Once they actually get a significant number on the road they will be
separately metering your charger for the road tax and adding a
surcharge for the added electrical infrastructure they need to charge
millions of cars every night.


I still don't get it though. The energy to charge the batteries in an
electric car has to come from somewhere.
Hybrids are charged by the gas (oil) powered engine, along with supplements
of "regenerative braking", etc.

Plug in (to charge) electrics still derive their power from oil, as do
hybrids. So, where's the "green" thing?

Answer: Nuclear. But first we have to convert all the tree huggers.

You are getting a little to complicated for the tree huggers to
understand. Thinking in more than one dimension makes them fall over
like the pygmy goats.

Oil
 

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:05:16 -0500, BAR wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:30 -0500, "D-unit" cof42_AT_embarqmail.com
wrote:

Im not going to go out a buy an electric car just yet.
Actually this is probably the golden age of the electric car. "Fuel"
is very cheap.
Once they actually get a significant number on the road they will be
separately metering your charger for the road tax and adding a
surcharge for the added electrical infrastructure they need to charge
millions of cars every night.


I still don't get it though. The energy to charge the batteries in an
electric car has to come from somewhere.
Hybrids are charged by the gas (oil) powered engine, along with supplements
of "regenerative braking", etc.

Plug in (to charge) electrics still derive their power from oil, as do
hybrids. So, where's the "green" thing?

Answer: Nuclear. But first we have to convert all the tree huggers.

You are getting a little to complicated for the tree huggers to
understand. Thinking in more than one dimension makes them fall over
like the pygmy goats.

Pygmy goats don't fall over.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmy_goat

You are thinking of fainting goats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fainting_goat

Damn - I am full of useless knowledge. :)

Oil
 

On Jan 28, 11:22Â*am, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

You're not serious, I hope.

Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?

We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)

But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, but I didn't see anybody recommending that. I was inquiring
about the statement "What are you doing to keep the Chinese and
Indians from burning all the oil".

I repeat my question: Isn't this a situation where free market
capitalism should prevail? (Let the country most willing to pay the
oilcos the most money get the oil). That would make Americans holding
stock in the oilcos very happy. Maybe some of that wealth will then
trickle down *to* those of us who are used to normally being trickled
*on*.

Oil
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:05:16 -0500, BAR wrote:

Eisboch wrote:

Answer: Nuclear. But first we have to convert all the tree huggers.
You are getting a little to complicated for the tree huggers to
understand. Thinking in more than one dimension makes them fall over
like the pygmy goats.

Pygmy goats don't fall over.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmy_goat

You are thinking of fainting goats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fainting_goat

Damn - I am full of useless knowledge. :)

That was a funny episode of Dirty Jobs!

Oil
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 11:22 am, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:
What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?
You're not serious, I hope.
Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?
We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)
But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, but I didn't see anybody recommending that. I was inquiring
about the statement "What are you doing to keep the Chinese and
Indians from burning all the oil".

I repeat my question: Isn't this a situation where free market
capitalism should prevail? (Let the country most willing to pay the
oilcos the most money get the oil). That would make Americans holding
stock in the oilcos very happy. Maybe some of that wealth will then
trickle down *to* those of us who are used to normally being trickled
*on*.

Yes, it is. And, when we have all of the oil left we can sell it for
$100 per bbl.

Oil
 

John wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:30 -0500, "D-unit" cof42_AT_embarqmail.com
wrote:

Im not going to go out a buy an electric car just yet.
Actually this is probably the golden age of the electric car. "Fuel"
is very cheap.
Once they actually get a significant number on the road they will be
separately metering your charger for the road tax and adding a
surcharge for the added electrical infrastructure they need to charge
millions of cars every night.

I still don't get it though. The energy to charge the batteries in an
electric car has to come from somewhere.
Hybrids are charged by the gas (oil) powered engine, along with
supplements of "regenerative braking", etc.

Plug in (to charge) electrics still derive their power from oil, as do
hybrids. So, where's the "green" thing?

Answer: Nuclear. But first we have to convert all the tree huggers.

Eisboch


LOL It is not the tree hugger that have a problem with nuclear, it is the
general population and the NIMBY attitude. Nobody wants a nuke generator
built in their county or on their lake. Nobody wants a used nuclear fuel
dump in their state. Now if you could convince your next door neighbor that
you should store spent nuclear rods in your city - maybe we could push
nuclear forward.




I live, oh, 25-30 miles, I would guess, from a nuclear powerplant. I
fish near it when I can. Other than the fact that my dick has grown
another six inches and its tip now glows in the dark, I haven't noticed
anything unusual.

Seriously, there is talk about building a second reactor on the site,
which I favor. It is good, clean power, and so long as the spent fuel
rods are stored in Texas, Alabama, and Mississippi, it is ok with me.
The local unions also favor it because they, of course, will get the work.

Oil
 

"HK" wrote in message ...
John wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:30 -0500, "D-unit" cof42_AT_embarqmail.com
wrote:

Im not going to go out a buy an electric car just yet.
Actually this is probably the golden age of the electric car. "Fuel"
is very cheap.
Once they actually get a significant number on the road they will be
separately metering your charger for the road tax and adding a
surcharge for the added electrical infrastructure they need to charge
millions of cars every night.

I still don't get it though. The energy to charge the batteries in an
electric car has to come from somewhere.
Hybrids are charged by the gas (oil) powered engine, along with
supplements of "regenerative braking", etc.

Plug in (to charge) electrics still derive their power from oil, as do
hybrids. So, where's the "green" thing?

Answer: Nuclear. But first we have to convert all the tree huggers.

Eisboch


LOL It is not the tree hugger that have a problem with nuclear, it is the
general population and the NIMBY attitude. Nobody wants a nuke generator
built in their county or on their lake. Nobody wants a used nuclear fuel
dump in their state. Now if you could convince your next door neighbor that
you should store spent nuclear rods in your city - maybe we could push
nuclear forward.




I live, oh, 25-30 miles, I would guess, from a nuclear powerplant. I
fish near it when I can. Other than the fact that my dick has grown
another six inches and its tip now glows in the dark, I haven't noticed
anything unusual.

Seriously, there is talk about building a second reactor on the site,
which I favor. It is good, clean power, and so long as the spent fuel
rods are stored in Texas, Alabama, and Mississippi, it is ok with me.
The local unions also favor it because they, of course, will get the work.


Its probably stored at the Harris plant. -like 10 miles from *my* back yard.
Progress Energy now has approval/permit to build another reactor with plans
to raise the lake level another 15 feet or so. (Don't know how they're
going to pull that one off, not alot of water around these days.)


We fish/boat/ski/swim in that lake. Hydrilla has taken over and keeps
the water quite clear.

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/pl.../hydrilla.html


Lots of big bass too. Some with extra tails..but hey who's counting? ;-)



db

Oil
 

On Jan 28, 7:29Â*pm, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 11:22 am, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:
What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?
You're not serious, I hope.
Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?
We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)
But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, but I didn't see anybody recommending that. I was inquiring
about the statement "What are you doing to keep the Chinese and
Indians from burning all the oil".

I repeat my question: Isn't this a situation where free market
capitalism should prevail? (Let the country most willing to pay the
oilcos the most money get the oil). That would make Americans holding
stock in the oilcos very happy. Maybe some of that wealth will then
trickle down *to* those of us who are used to normally being trickled
*on*.

Yes, it is. And, when we have all of the oil left we can sell it for
$100 per bbl.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If taking control of "all the oil" means invading and occupying a
greater number of oil-producing countries I think that's simply a pipe
dream.
We've got our hands pretty well full with just one of those countries
now.
We don't have the troops, the budget, or the moral authority to
conquer the world just so we can continue putting relatively cheap gas
into decidedly inefficient personal transportation.

If we ever do get any oil out of Iraq, it should sell for about $500
bbl.
That would more closely approximate the actual cost of the occupation
required to "secure" the oil fields there.

Oil
 

"HK" wrote in message
...

John wrote:

LOL It is not the tree hugger that have a problem with nuclear, it is the
general population and the NIMBY attitude. Nobody wants a nuke generator
built in their county or on their lake. Nobody wants a used nuclear fuel
dump in their state. Now if you could convince your next door neighbor
that you should store spent nuclear rods in your city - maybe we could
push nuclear forward.



I live, oh, 25-30 miles, I would guess, from a nuclear powerplant. I fish
near it when I can. Other than the fact that my dick has grown another six
inches and its tip now glows in the dark, I haven't noticed anything
unusual.

Seriously, there is talk about building a second reactor on the site,
which I favor. It is good, clean power, and so long as the spent fuel rods
are stored in Texas, Alabama, and Mississippi, it is ok with me. The local
unions also favor it because they, of course, will get the work.


We live within 14 miles of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant (not a typo ...
that's how they spell it). The Pilgrim Plant, located in Plymouth is one of
the oldest, if not *the* oldest, continuously operating nuclear plant in the
US. Before 9/11 they maintained nice public walkways and grounds, including
fishing spots from the breakwater. Obviously they are now all closed. The
operating license expires in 2012 and an application to extend the license
until 2032 has been submitted but is being opposed, as usual, by the regular
group of anti-nuke activists. You know the type. Mostly women who wear
their hair in long braids, never shave their legs and make their own dresses
dyed with cranberry juice or squished blueberries.

All the spent fuel rods used since it began operation in 1972 remain stored
on site. There has never been a serious accident or event.

Eisboch

Oil
 

"John" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message



I live, oh, 25-30 miles, I would guess, from a nuclear powerplant. I fish
near it when I can. Other than the fact that my dick has grown another
six inches and its tip now glows in the dark, I haven't noticed anything
unusual.


LOL - send me some of that fish will ya?


Seriously, there is talk about building a second reactor on the site,
which I favor. It is good, clean power, and so long as the spent fuel
rods are stored in Texas, Alabama, and Mississippi, it is ok with me.


THAT IS the problem - nobody wants the old rods, they remain radioactive
for 200,000 years and would make a dandy terrorist dirty bomb.

Typical humanitarian response from Harry. "Not in my back yard" and "I got
mine, screw you" are examples of the poo that oozes uncontrollably from the
mind of Harry Krause.

Oil
 

"John" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...

John wrote:

LOL It is not the tree hugger that have a problem with nuclear, it is
the general population and the NIMBY attitude. Nobody wants a nuke
generator built in their county or on their lake. Nobody wants a used
nuclear fuel dump in their state. Now if you could convince your next
door neighbor that you should store spent nuclear rods in your city -
maybe we could push nuclear forward.



I live, oh, 25-30 miles, I would guess, from a nuclear powerplant. I
fish near it when I can. Other than the fact that my dick has grown
another six inches and its tip now glows in the dark, I haven't noticed
anything unusual.

Seriously, there is talk about building a second reactor on the site,
which I favor. It is good, clean power, and so long as the spent fuel
rods are stored in Texas, Alabama, and Mississippi, it is ok with me.
The local unions also favor it because they, of course, will get the
work.


We live within 14 miles of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant (not a typo
... that's how they spell it). The Pilgrim Plant, located in Plymouth is
one of the oldest, if not *the* oldest, continuously operating nuclear
plant in the US. Before 9/11 they maintained nice public walkways and
grounds, including fishing spots from the breakwater. Obviously they are
now all closed. The operating license expires in 2012 and an application
to extend the license until 2032 has been submitted but is being opposed,
as usual, by the regular group of anti-nuke activists. You know the
type. Mostly women who wear their hair in long braids, never shave their
legs and make their own dresses dyed with cranberry juice or squished
blueberries.


Ya the ones that I went to elementary school with, back when they made us
practice air raid drills weekly - and made you say the pledge of
allegiance daily....
Funny how when you are taught as a child to be afraid of nukes - it sticks
with you.


All the spent fuel rods used since it began operation in 1972 remain
stored on site. There has never been a serious accident or event.

Eisboch


Thank God.
Read the book "We almost lost Detroit" True story of a near meltdown at
the Fermi plant. That tower is now a monument to how close a nuclear melt
down came, it is now completely filled with concrete to contain it.

http://www.amazon.com/Almost-Lost-De.../dp/0425067009



Fortunately, that accident was related to one, unique and obsolete design
that is not used anywhere else in the US, as I understand it.

Eisboch