Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old August 13th, 2009 #41
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,961
George Witzgall
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Stone View Post
At the risk sounding like I'm copping out, I guess I could say "that depends."
It depends on the adopting parents involved.

I wouldn't have said that a couple decades ago. I would have said unequivocally that being placed in foster care is infinitely preferable to growing up with homos (of either gender), but now I'm not so sure.

Even when I was a ward of the state, there was a lot of corruption, perversion, incompetence, and general mayhem. These days it is tremendously worse. Frankly, if you put a female child in one of these state run homes, she WILL be sexually abused. Boys sometimes as well.

Add to that to the drugs and unsupervised delinquents (they mix in child offenders with normal foster kids because they think it makes everyone feel better) as well the indifferent staff members and it's a wonder any kid makes it out whole.

One of the dirty little secrets of these 'group homes' is that they are run by the lowest common denominators of the "social work" professions (psychology, etc). These jobs pay next to nothing and the people who take those jobs are people who almost flunked out of college. The upshot here is that there is a high percentage of niggers (yes that is the appropriate word in this context).

These cretins are barely literate and often on the prowl. In fact I can say with a great deal of certainty that one of the reasons they take these jobs is for the chance to score some underage ass (male or female).

Anyway, my point here is that a child in these circumstances in going to encounter homos, it's just a matter of how and where. Under those circumstances, being raised by a couple of lesbians my not be the worst choice.

My first choice however would be for a loving and supportive foster home. The first foster home I stayed in (the farm) was mostly like that, except that the foster parents were both in their early 60's by the time I was there. They had kept children for over 30 years and had become very distant and cold toward the kids (I expect as a defense measure).

-Brian

very depressing. sounds like you were one of the lucky few in that at least your situation, while not ideal, wasn't abusive. thanks for your thoughts.
__________________
I understand and do not understand.
 
Old August 14th, 2009 #42
Kievsky
Senior Member
 
Kievsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,229
Kievsky
Default

Brian,

Your post reminded me of a Gary Larson cartoon, "And then a miracle occurs."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Stone View Post
The problem with innovation is that if it were predictable, it wouldn't be innovation. All we can say is that it will happen.
Brian
__________________
Godzilla mit uns!
http://mindweaponsinragnarok.wordpress.com
 
Old August 14th, 2009 #43
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kievsky View Post
Brian,

Your post reminded me of a Gary Larson cartoon, "And then a miracle occurs."
That's more descriptive of your side. All peak oil has is a prediction in chart form. The cornucopian side has pretty much all history on its side. Is there any kind of mineral for which there aren't more proven reserves today than at any point in history?
 
Old August 14th, 2009 #44
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

My point is, I think when you and other anti-cornucopians argue that people ought to live X way instead of Y because it has (A, B, C advantages), you're plausible, on a practice by practice basis. When you argue people ought to live X instead of Y because of (global warming) (peak oil), you're not credible at all.
 
Old August 14th, 2009 #45
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

To rejoin peak oil in a phrase,

Inevitability doesn't need a p.r. firm.
 
Old August 14th, 2009 #46
Steve B
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 6,907
Default

Hey, I got this great idea. Since the oil is running out according to the "peak oil" guys how about we help the oil companies recoup some of their investment for all the oil rigs, tankers and pipelines they paid for. We could call it the Oil Depletion Allowance or something. Give-em a big tax break so they can make even more money and invest it in say..."nukeler" power or perhaps even the purchase of politicians and "experts" so as to help legislate the peak oil and stuff.

Damn, sometimes I amaze myself with my brilliance.

Last edited by Steve B; August 14th, 2009 at 04:10 PM.
 
Old August 14th, 2009 #47
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

The government has ways of lowering the CPI (lying, and removing fast rising items. Housing was replaced with owner's equivalent rent in the early 80's.

Let us use postal rates as a proxy for price rises. In 1958, stamps were three centz. To-day, they are forty-four centz. This is 5.4%/year over 51 years.

Regular gas in 1958 was thirty centz- to keep up with postal rates, to-day is should be $4.40 per gallon. But it'z only $2.63, a mere 60% of the prediction!

If there were a shortage of crude, then. . .

Last edited by Rick Ronsavelle; August 14th, 2009 at 05:14 PM. Reason: fix spacing
 
Old August 14th, 2009 #48
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Discovery backs theory oil not 'fossil fuel'
New evidence supports premise that Earth produces endless supply
Posted: February 01, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily.com


A study published in Science Magazine today presents new evidence supporting the abiotic theory for the origin of oil, which asserts oil is a natural product the Earth generates constantly rather than a "fossil fuel" derived from decaying ancient forests and dead dinosaurs.

The lead scientist on the study ? Giora Proskurowski of the School of Oceanography at the University of Washington in Seattle ? says the hydrogen-rich fluids venting at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean in the Lost City Hydrothermal Field were produced by the abiotic synthesis of hydrocarbons in the mantle of the earth.

The abiotic theory of the origin of oil directly challenges the conventional scientific theory that hydrocarbons are organic in nature, created by the deterioration of biological material deposited millions of years ago in sedimentary rock and converted to hydrocarbons under intense heat and pressure.

While organic theorists have posited that the material required to produce hydrocarbons in sedimentary rock came from dinosaurs and ancient forests, more recent argument have suggested living organisms as small as plankton may have been the origin.

The abiotic theory argues, in contrast, that hydrocarbons are naturally produced on a continual basis throughout the solar system, including within the mantle of the earth. The advocates believe the oil seeps up through bedrock cracks to deposit in sedimentary rock. Traditional petro-geologists, they say, have confused the rock as the originator rather than the depository of the hydrocarbons.


Giora Proskurowski

Lost City is a hypothermal field some 2,100 feet below sea level that sits along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge at the center of the Atlantic Ocean, noted for strange 90 to 200 foot white towers on the sea bottom.

In 2003 and again in 2005, Proskurowski and his team descended in a scientific submarine to collect liquid bubbling up from Lost City sea vents.

Proskurowski found hydrocarbons containing carbon-13 isotopes that appeared to be formed from the mantle of the Earth, rather than from biological material settled on the ocean floor.

Carbon 13 is the carbon isotope scientists associate with abiotic origin, compared to Carbon 12 that scientists typically associate with biological origin.

Lost City Vents

Proskurowski argued that the hydrocarbons found in the natural hydrothermal fluids coming out of the Lost City sea vents is attributable to abiotic production by Fischer-Tropsch, or FTT, reactions.

The Fischer-Tropsch equations were first developed by Nazi scientists who created methodologies for producing synthetic oil from coal.

"Our findings illustrate that the abiotic synthesis of hydrocarbons in nature may occur in the presence of ultramafic rocks, water and moderate amounts of heat," Proskurowski wrote.

The study also confirmed a major argument of Cornell University physicist Thomas Gold, who argued in his book "The Deep Hot Biosphere: The Myth of Fossil Fuels" that micro-organisms found in oil might have come from the mantle of the earth where, absent photosynthesis, the micro-organisms feed on hydrocarbons arising from the earth's mantle in the dark depths of the ocean floors.

Affirming this point, Proskurowski concluded the article by noting, "Hydrocarbon production by FTT could be a common means for producing precursors of life-essential building blocks in ocean-floor environments or wherever warm ultramafic rocks are in contact with water."

Finding abiotic hydrocarbons in the Lost City sea vent fluids is the second discovery in recent years adding weight to the abiotic theory of the origin of oil.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59991
 
Old August 14th, 2009 #49
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

Terms like "fossil fuels" and "non-renewable" always seemed to have more than a whiff of self-serving.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #50
Kievsky
Senior Member
 
Kievsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,229
Kievsky
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
That's more descriptive of your side. All peak oil has is a prediction in chart form. The cornucopian side has pretty much all history on its side. Is there any kind of mineral for which there aren't more proven reserves today than at any point in history?
Alex,

Oil wells have produced and depleted according to Hubbert's Curve. M.K. Hubbert predicted the US oil production would peak in 1971 and it did. Global oil production is likely to follow the same Hubbert curve. What more do you want?

Silver has also peaked, to answer your second question. There's more silver above ground than known reserves. Known reserves of coal

There are two abiotic oil views, strong abioticism, and weak abioticism.

Strong abioticism says that oil will keep gushing up like volcanoes, quickly replenishing depleted oil wells. None of the proponents of abioticism believe in strong abioticism.

Weak abioticism says that oil wells will eventually replenish, in geological time. Too late for us, in other words -- in hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands of years. All proponents of abioticism believe in weak abioticism.

as for coal:

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4061

Three states (Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and West Virginia) produce 52 percent of the higher-quality coal in the US. All three of these states seem to be in decline or plateau. Since the Northeast was the area of the nation earliest settled and was long a primary center for industrial manufacture, it is not surprising that the coal of this region was exploited preferentially. Today, Pennsylvania’s anthracite is almost gone. Mining companies there are now exploiting seams as thin as 28 inches. West Virginia, the second largest coal-producing state (after Wyoming), where much coal is surface mined in an environmentally ruinous practice known as mountaintop removal, is nearing its maximum production rate and will see declines commence within the next few years, according to a recent USGS report. (www.byronwine.com/files/coal.pdf)

The interior region—consisting of Illinois, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Western Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas—is the smallest coal producer of the three main producing regions. The Illinois basin boasts large reserves of bituminous coal, but production has fallen there since the mid-1990s. Its coal generally has a high sulfur content (3 to 7 percent), which runs afoul of US environmental laws, especially the Clean Air Act of 1990. Prior to this legislation, power plants burning high-sulfur coal released emissions resulting in acid rain that decimated forests throughout much of the nation. The lignite steam coal of Louisiana is an exception within the region: its sulfur content is low and so production has risen substantially in recent years. After 2018, sulfur scrubbers will be mandatory for coal-fired power plants in the US, perhaps facilitating a move to increase production of coal from the Illinois Basin.

Wyoming has some bituminous coal, but most of its reserves consist of sub-bituminous and lignite. Production from the state (primarily from the Powder River Basin) has increased sharply since 1970, because its coal is abundant, cheaply surface-mined, and low in sulfur. Wyoming is currently responsible for 80 percent of coal production west of the Mississippi.

Montana also has large deposits of lower-quality coal (sub-bituminous and lignite), but these have not been tapped. The current state governor, Brian Schweitzer, is pushing for development of these resources using gasification and carbon sequestration technologies, but there are reasons to doubt whether this will occur soon or on a meaningful scale. Montana’s coal contains salts that will almost inevitably find their way into the environment if widespread surface mining occurs, contaminating rivers and creating problems for cattle ranching—the state’s economic engine and a locus of considerable political clout.

For the nation as a whole, future supply hinges on the question of how long rising production of lower-quality coal from Wyoming—supplemented in the future perhaps by coal from Montana and the Illinois Basin—can continue to compensate for declining amounts of high-quality coal from the East. Clearly, the US has the potential to produce enormous quantities of coal. But the gradual depletion of coal with higher heating value is already necessitating the mining of larger quantities of lower-quality coal to yield an equivalent amount of energy, and as coal is sourced more from Montana and the Illinois this will require the building of more rail transport infrastructure and the overcoming of environmental problems and regulatory hurdles.

Over sixty percent of coal mined in the US is dug from the surface. This is a higher percentage than in most nations, and it is largely due to the contribution of Wyoming. In the eastern states, most coal still comes from deep mines, which are moving toward the recovery of ever-thinner seams. Highwall mining systems and new technologies for longwall mining may lead, ultimately, to remote-control mining involving few or no personnel working underground. These new and more efficient technologies will enable some coal to be mined that would otherwise be left behind, but they are unlikely to be applied throughout the entire industry due to high up-front investment costs.

In surface mining, the largest extraction cost is often incurred in removing overburden (soil and rock). Over the years, the coal industry has introduced ever-larger earth-moving machines for this purpose. However, truck size has probably reached a practical maximum, as the biggest vehicles cannot be maneuvered on roads.

However coal is mined, the industry must always confront the bottom line: the cost of getting coal out of the ground cannot exceed the market price for produced coal. Thus the current price determines whether marginal coals will be mined profitably, or simply left in the ground. On the other hand, however, as the costs of bringing coal to market rise, this can cause the price of coal to increase—unless and until higher prices suppress demand. Given that demand for electricity continues to expand, and that cheap alternatives to coal for power generation do not exist in sufficient quantity in the short run, there seems to be no near-term cap to coal prices. As a result, marginal coalfields are now more likely to be mined.
__________________
Godzilla mit uns!
http://mindweaponsinragnarok.wordpress.com
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #51
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

How can the "peak-oil" Luddites be so certain that every barrel of oil on Earth is accounted for, every reserve known, no new fields waiting to be discovered, and if found, forever unaccessible?
Why do they insist that all of us be dragged kicking and screaming back to an Amish-like existence?
(Fine for the Amish but I don't like horses, they scare me, they poop too much, and it makes my ass sore to ride them.)
When discussing "peak-oil" I'm always reminded of a line from the movie The Formula when the L.A. detective character played by George C. Scott says to Marlon Brando, portraying the CEO of a multi-national oil conglomerate,:
"You're not in the oil business, you're in the oil shortage business."
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #52
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kievsky View Post
Alex,

Oil wells have produced and depleted according to Hubbert's Curve. M.K. Hubbert predicted the US oil production would peak in 1971 and it did. Global oil production is likely to follow the same Hubbert curve. What more do you want?
So oil peaked here forty years ago, according to one claim,...and might peak globally. What I want is market evidence that we're running out of oil. I don't see that. How many new ways of finding and recovering oil have been developed since 1971? How many new ways will be developed in the future? I'd put my bet on those new ways long before us running out of oil.

Quote:
Silver has also peaked, to answer your second question. There's more silver above ground than known reserves.
And silver's under $15/oz. I don't see a problem.

Quote:
For the nation as a whole, future supply hinges on the question of how long rising production of lower-quality coal from Wyoming—supplemented in the future perhaps by coal from Montana and the Illinois Basin—can continue to compensate for declining amounts of high-quality coal from the East. Clearly, the US has the potential to produce enormous quantities of coal. But the gradual depletion of coal with higher heating value is already necessitating the mining of larger quantities of lower-quality coal to yield an equivalent amount of energy, and as coal is sourced more from Montana and the Illinois this will require the building of more rail transport infrastructure and the overcoming of environmental problems and regulatory hurdles.
If we ever have a real power problem we'll just go nuclear.

If we ever do start running out of coal/oil/whatever, we'll just shift to something else. That's the likeliest outcome in my opinion. It's wiser to let the market drive energy policy rather than religious hysterics. If one resource becomes too expensive, people will develop alternatives. That's the way it always has been. It's the best solution.
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #53
Steve B
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 6,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kievsky View Post
Alex,

Oil wells have produced and depleted according to Hubbert's Curve. M.K. Hubbert predicted the US oil production would peak in 1971 and it did. Global oil production is likely to follow the same Hubbert curve. What more do you want?

Silver has also peaked, to answer your second question. There's more silver above ground than known reserves. Known reserves of coal .
Completely wrong. There is more oil off the coast of California than in Saudi Arabia. It's not pumped because the state won't allow it.I worked for Unocal many years ago when they were ordered to clean up the mess they made off the coast of central Ca. for the last 40 years. I talked to some of the oil workers who had been there for near that long. They told me that all the wells had been capped on orders from the state and that given the word they could begin full production again in a matter of months.

There is a modern refinery at Gaviota Beach just sitting there with a skeleton crew. Three large pipelines connect it to giant oil platforms off the coast that are running at about 5% capacity for the reasons listed above. From what I was told this is the case in many parts the continental US. Plenty of oil but it doesn't get pumped because of politics, environmentalists and deliberate policy of the oil companies not to pump it to maintain the price.


Hubbert just crunches numbers. Sure, he knew oil production would peak in the 70's because that's the way it was planned. Less oil means a higher price and that is what oil companies want. It doesn't have anything to do with the world running out of oil or "peak oil". The supply is limited on purpose. An example would be Iraq. Fedzog didn't go there to steal Iraqi oil for itself and the US market. Fedzog went there to control Iraqi oil and keep it in the ground and not on the market where it would affect the price.

It is the same with silver. To say that there is more silver above ground that below it is utterly absurd. As I have said before in previous posts. Mining companies deliberately don't mine silver so as to maintain the price. I have been told this by people who work in the mining industry. Silver isn't that rare. It might have been in the past when mining was done by men with shovels and mules and was hard to get too but in the modern age with modern mining techniques and equipment it can be got at with ease. But it isn't done because doing so would make the price plummet. And if you're a mining executive....that's bad for business.

Don't buy into the "we're running out of oil bs". We're not, it's a sham by rich people and large corporations designed to maximize profits by scaring the gullible goyim into believing something that isn't true. Kind of like Sadamms WMD. They never existed.

Tomorrows lesson.....alien abductions and why it might be bullshit.
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #54
Mike in Denver
Enkidu
 
Mike in Denver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,171
Mike in Denver
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
...
If we ever have a real power problem we'll just go nuclear.
...
Of the 30 countries with nuclear power, the percentage of electricity supplied by nuclear ranged widely:

78 percent in France
54 percent in Belgium
39 percent in Republic of Korea
37 percent in Switzerland
30 percent in Japan
19 percent in the USA
16 percent in Russia

France’s EDF, their public/private utilities company tried to get permission from the US to build nuclear plants in the US. Nope! No can do. That’s funny. It takes the French about 7 years from decision to on-line plant. In the US—15 years minimum. Toshiba of Japan is building small autonomous nuclear plants the operate without humans. They are essentially huge batteries about 20 feet by 8 feet by 8 feet. They are delivered on flatbed truck, hooked up, and run for twenty years. When they run down, a flatbed truck picks it up, drops another one off, and takes the old one off to be recycled.

But, it doesn’t matter. Steve B. is right. We’ve still got enough oil, that without drilling another well we couldn’t run out if we tried. Google searches are useless. You can prove anything by cherry-picking Google searches. If you don’t have any inside information, it’s hard to come up with anything persuasive. Do I have inside sources? Well, kinda. I know two men who worked at Prudhoe Bay. One, a grunt; the other a metallurgist and professional engineer. Both have told me that there are giant reserves at Prudhoe Bay, already tapped, and capped. They are just sitting there, waiting for…? I’m from the Texas Gulf Coast, and I’ve heard the same for there. I’ve heard it as well about off California. Could all these people I know, be lying? Fuck no. They are just ordinary men. They have no agenda, and they are not dumb or foolish. They just report what they’ve seen.

None of this has anything to do with biotic or abiotic oil. The question is interesting, but the answer is not needed to understand that we are not about to run out of oil. Nor has anyone that I know of on this forum ever suggested that oil is inexhaustible. Maybe someone has, but I can’t recall that. Oil may possibly run out…who knows? But it won’t run out in our lifetimes, or become scarce, or even diminish in any measurable way. Maybe someday, but not for a long time, probably hundreds of years.

Mike

Can someone tell me what font and size to use in Microsoft Word, so that when I compose a post and paste it into the forum, it comes out looking normal. I used to do this, and it worked. Either something has changed, or I've gotten senile. I wonder if there is a cure for that?

__________________
You have to remember I live in Denver and some things are perfectly legal here that aren't where you live.

Last edited by Mike in Denver; August 15th, 2009 at 05:29 PM.
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #55
Kievsky
Senior Member
 
Kievsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,229
Kievsky
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Denver View Post

Of the 30 countries with nuclear power, the percentage of electricity supplied by nuclear ranged widely:

78 percent in France
54 percent in Belgium
39 percent in Republic of Korea
37 percent in Switzerland
30 percent in Japan
19 percent in the USA
16 percent in Russia

France’s EDF, their public/private utilities company tried to get permission from the US to build nuclear plants in the US. Nope! No can do. That’s funny. It takes the French about 7 years from decision to on-line plant. In the US—15 years minimum. Toshiba of Japan is building small autonomous nuclear plants the operate without humans. They are essentially huge batteries about 20 feet by 8 feet by 8 feet. They are delivered on flatbed truck, hooked up, and run for twenty years. When they run down, a flatbed truck picks it up, drops another one off, and takes the old one off to be recycled.

But, it doesn’t matter. Steve B. is right. We’ve still got enough oil, that without drilling another well we couldn’t run out if we tried. Google searches are useless. You can prove anything by cherry-picking Google searches. If you don’t have any inside information, it’s hard to come up with anything persuasive. Do I have inside sources? Well, kinda. I know two men who worked at Prudhoe Bay. One, a grunt; the other a metallurgist and professional engineer. Both have told me that there are giant reserves at Prudhoe Bay, already tapped, and capped. They are just sitting there, waiting for…? I’m from the Texas Gulf Coast, and I’ve heard the same for there. I’ve heard it as well about off California. Could all these people I know, be lying? Fuck no. They are just ordinary men. They have no agenda, and they are not dumb or foolish. They just report what they’ve seen.

None of this has anything to do with biotic or abiotic oil. The question is interesting, but the answer is not needed to understand that we are not about to run out of oil. Nor has anyone that I know of on this forum ever suggested that oil is inexhaustible. Maybe someone has, but I can’t recall that. Oil may possibly run out…who knows? But it won’t run out in our lifetimes, or become scarce, or even diminish in any measurable way. Maybe someday, but not for a long time, probably hundreds of years.

Mike

Can someone tell me what font and size to use in Microsoft Word, so that when I compose a post and paste it into the forum, it comes out looking normal. I used to do this, and it worked. Either something has changed, or I've gotten senile. I wonder if there is a cure for that?

Mike in Denver,

I grant the possibility of a vast conspiracy to hide the real oil reserves. Perhaps manufactured oil shortages will be used as an "artificial famine."

Even if oil is infinite, fresh water and topsoil are also failing. Industrial Agriculture is destined to fail within the next few decades if not sooner. Industrial Ag rests on a tripod of fossil fuels, water, and soil, and if any single one of these resources fails, Industrial Ag fails and we have mass starvation and die-off.
__________________
Godzilla mit uns!
http://mindweaponsinragnarok.wordpress.com
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #56
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Denver View Post
Can someone tell me what font and size to use in Microsoft Word, so that when I compose a post and paste it into the forum, it comes out looking normal. I used to do this, and it worked. Either something has changed, or I've gotten senile. I wonder if there is a cure for that?
About 12 to 14 point type depending on the font use.
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #57
Mike in Denver
Enkidu
 
Mike in Denver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,171
Mike in Denver
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OTPTT View Post
About 12 to 14 point type depending on the font use.
I used Ariel 12, which should have worked, or at least come close. Remember Jimbo, who used to post in a microscopic red font? I gave up trying to read his posts. I'm going to experiment with editing my above post. If I get it right, I'll edit this post and report the change. Kind of important, this.

Mike

Ha! OK, I selected all the text and clicked on the little funny A at the top left of the reply box. I know for a fact that this doesn't always work. I think you may have to create the post, and then re-enter to edit, before this trick works.
__________________
You have to remember I live in Denver and some things are perfectly legal here that aren't where you live.

Last edited by Mike in Denver; August 15th, 2009 at 05:31 PM.
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #58
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

Quote:
Even if oil is infinite, fresh water and topsoil are also failing. Industrial Agriculture is destined to fail within the next few decades if not sooner. Industrial Ag rests on a tripod of fossil fuels, water, and soil, and if any single one of these resources fails, Industrial Ag fails and we have mass starvation and die-off.
__________________
Hey, Kievsky!
Your a wild man, Bro!!
Some day you and me gotta PARTY DOWN!!!
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #59
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kievsky View Post
Mike in Denver,

I grant the possibility of a vast conspiracy to hide the real oil reserves. Perhaps manufactured oil shortages will be used as an "artificial famine."
Vast conspiracy? No, the political forces against nuclear, coal and oil are all too real. I have read about and heard directly from a PhD relative in the business that the continental US in many ways is locked down due to leftist political pressure. It is an undeniable fact that political pressures prevent industry from extracting proven resources.

Quote:
Even if oil is infinite, fresh water and topsoil are also failing. Industrial Agriculture is destined to fail within the next few decades if not sooner. Industrial Ag rests on a tripod of fossil fuels, water, and soil, and if any single one of these resources fails, Industrial Ag fails and we have mass starvation and die-off.
Never happen. Devise a bet, I'll take the other side of it.

There is no global ecological catastrophe. There are specific local or regional problems.

The entire record is of increased extractive know-how and larger yields from crops. That's the way to bet, not on famine and die-offs.
 
Old August 15th, 2009 #60
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Denver View Post
I used Ariel 12, which should have worked, or at least come close. Remember Jimbo, who used to post in a microscopic red font? I gave up trying to read his posts.
Are you trying to say that your eyes are more important than jim's ego? Perish the thought. A secondary reason he was banned.

Same thing with others here. They don't care enough about their fellow White man to make blocked, paragraphed posts so that their brothers most easily can read them. If they're disloyal in small things, if their ego overrides the good of the cause in small things, is it likelier to be true in big things? No. It is not.

Millions of online "warriors" willing to "kill" for the cause...tens willing to post correctly for the cause.

Last edited by Alex Linder; August 15th, 2009 at 08:37 PM.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:53 PM.
Page generated in 0.16321 seconds.