When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
46 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Palooza
15 years ago
So despite every expert to the contrary, its your content that drilling ANWR makes the U.S. energy indpendent. I mean, it appears you are making that claim with a straight face… please clarify.
Drilling in ANWR would likely produce only 3.2 billion barrels of oil, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, not even enough to satisfy six months’ demand; oil would not begin to reach the market for another 10 years; and it would take 50 years to extract the full amount.
Where did you get the idea that drilling in ANWR will make us energy independent Palooza? Show me the quote and give me a link.
ANWR is just one place of many that we should be drilling. There’s plenty of oil RIGHT HERE in the good ole USA:
There is just NO valid excuse not to drill here and drill now!!!
Scrapiron
15 years ago
Drilling ANWR, Off shore, and inside the country will drive the price of oil down as we continue to develop other types of fuel. I guess the fact that for every barrel produced in the U.S. is one barrel not produced by out enemies, and on top of that it ‘keeps $135.00 home’ and Americans employed. It seems the one track minds of the left are set on destroying the country with no thought that the left will be in the death toll. Actually I think the Red states are more equipped to feed themselves and care for themselves than the blue states. As a fact we won’t be selling any feed this year but will save it to feed the locally raised cattle which are traditionally sold to individuals and slaughtered in the area. Country folks have rather large gardens this year. being prepared is a part of survival. City slickers are putting themselves in deep doo doo. With Hussein O’s Mugabe style of government you may not starve to death, but be lucky? and killed by his government troops. Hope and change was stolen from Mugabe by Hussein. Everyone should ask, ‘how many days can I feed my family with what supplies I have on hand’? I’ll bet most people in the cities will be out after breakfast in the A.M.
kathie
15 years ago
If we don’t do something in a hurry there really will be two Americas. Those who can afford to buy groceries and those who can’t. Those who can afford to fly and those who can’t. Those who can heat their homes and those who can’t. Those who can use an air-conditioner and those who swelter. Those who have a job and those who have been laid off. Those who can use their car to have a normal life and those who stay at home. Those who manufacture thousands of things we use every day, by products of the oil industry, and a population who buys them no more. Those who supported a comprehensive energy plan in 2001 using oil, gas, wind, solar, water, batteries and more and those who didn’t. Those who want to bring the western world to their knees by using oil as a weapon and those who think we deserve it. When we have an economy that depends on the use of oil the dems sound criminal.
The Democrats used to be the champions of the poor. With the rise in fuel costs they seem to be more the champions of the “screw you I’ve got mine” crowd.
Dave Noble
15 years ago
Let’s assume for the sake of argument that we begin the process of drilling in ANWR and in all the currently prohibited off-shore areas today. A reasonable estimate (50-50 chance of being correct) of the reserves in ANWR is 11 Bbl. A reasonable estimate of the available reserves in the currently prohibited off-shore drilling areas is 18 Bbl. That makes 29 Bbl total available in ANWR and off-shore. America’s oil consumption in 2005 was 7.6 Bbl. If you do the math our ANWR and off-shore reserves give us less than 4 years worth of oil to meet our 2005 annual consumption rate. Since it is reasonable to assume our consumption will go up in the approximately 10 years it will take to get that oil to the pumps, we actually have much ess than 4 years. We cannot drill our way to the energy independence.
Why not conserve NOW, subsidize alternative energy development NOW? Drilling in ANWR and drilling in currently prohibited off-shore areas can be debated.
Please note the following observation from our own DOE:
“Additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR would be only a small portion of total world oil production, and would likely be offset in part by somewhat lower production outside the United States.”
(http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/introduction.html)
Even if you add in the prohibited off-shore reserves and get three times what’s in ANWR alone, you still get three times a “small portion”
How does sending less money to the Middle East dictatorships sound as a policy?
Or how about this: Why don’t we just stop drilling for oil any where in the world. Since there is obviously not enough oil. All efforts to increase the supply are useless.
Waht about the huge, bigger than all ofthe ME oil that is underthe Rockies. that will getus off od foreign oil.
Or I know let’s just send all of our money to the Saudis so they can train more terrorists and build more Madrassas. That sounds better, then in 20 years we can all bow 5 times to Mecca. And screw trying to keep oil prices down to help the poor and middle class. We can have the ultra rich and measly poor.
Have you also noticed that we are still getting oil from Prudo Bay. And it does not seem like that is going to run out any time soon. See with estimates, it could be right on or totally below what is actually there. The estimates you are talking about are conservative estimates. there are many places where the oil was suppose to have run out long ago, but they are still pumping the oil out of them.
Also we need to make a few more refineries and get rid of the idiotic boutique blends.
Jarhead68
15 years ago
I love how some of the people who post here focus on ANWR and/or off-shore drilling as the ONLY drilling we can do, thus it’s not really going to have an impact. There are billions of barrels of oil in Colorado and the Dakotas…estimates in the hundreds of billions…to go and get. Does anyone really believe that the country that put a man on the moon within a decade of JFK’s famous speech about doing so can’t get oil out of the ground in less than 10 years? When are we going to wake up and stop listening to the negative nay-sayers on the left, push them aside and just do what needs to be done. THAT’s the American Way; not this limp-wristed, hand-wringing, white wine-drinking, gnashing-of-teeth idiocy that the democRats have adopted to subvert our Constitution and bring America to its knees.
Dave Noble shows up just to prove that the Democrats have no other strategy than conservation.
Well Dave…. If Democrats say we can’t drill our way out of this problem we sure as hell can’t conserve our way out.
What amounts to a conservation only policy is a train wreck waiting to happen.
President Bush’s energy plan included conservation as well as developing alternatives and new supplies. And yet, Democrats have blocked the new supplies of oil in this country, alternatives are years away and conservation won’t work.
As Coulter says: “airplanes that run on woodchips, which should be up and running any moment now.”
That’s pretty much the Democrat plan: pie in the sky but pain at the pump.
Rod Stanton
15 years ago
How come the liberal/progressive/lefty on the GOP ticket can not understand this and Ann and everyone else who has an IQ over 80 and is honest does? No wonder the GOP got crushed in 06 and will be mauled in 08! Is the entire GOP leadershio a group of morons?
Explore ANWR, drill and stop buying oil from terrorists and those who support them! How can we *honestly* say we’re against terrorists when we go out of our way to support them?!@#%! Someone is telling lies.
Why don’t we just continue to let China drill off our coasts and take ALL the oil that is rightfully ours? Also China doesn’t worry about the environment. Why should they? Its’s not close to their country. And what happens when they decide to drill off the coast of Alaska? Oops, there goes our oil again while we still plod on giving money to our enemies and being held hostage to the terrorists who are funded with this money. And where does the above poster get a50year production idea? Liberals/socialists/communists have the weakest statistics.
Dave Noble
15 years ago
Mike,
As usual you jump to conclusions, ignoring what was actually said:
“Drilling in ANWR and drilling in currently prohibited off-shore areas can be debated.”
I left that option open.
Why is reducing consumption off the table? If you have a finite resource, why burn through it as fast as you can, while expending all your efforts to acquire the last small bits of it?
I’m surprised you didn’t talk about the wonders of oil shale. We do have a lot of it. But where will we get the water, another constrained resource, to process it?
missy
15 years ago
Cost will reduce consumption, but it will hit the industries that have to depend on gas/oil/diesel hard thus raising the cost of everything that has to be shipped, trucked or flown. As some like to say, we can’t drill our way out of this, we can’t conserve our way out of it either.
Then, what about the water it takes to produce ethanol?
1988 House Merchant Marine & Fisheries Committee approves an open ANWR Bill
Early 1989 House Merchant Marine & Fisheries Committee again approves an ANWR Bill
1991 Congress debates National Energy Policy Act, Title 9 of which allowed for development of the Coastal Plain.
Nov. 1991 Senate Roll-call vote on Sen. Wellstone amendment to cut off debate on ANWR, 50 to 44. (60 votes needed to defeat filibuster)
1995 ANWR resurrected as part of the Balanced Budget Bill.
May 24, 1995 Senator Roth amendment to table ANWR from the Budget Resolution defeated 56 to 44 votes
Sept., 1995 President Clinton tried to create a National Monument of ANWR under the Antiquities Act- this was prevented
Sept. 19, 1995 Cong. Veto motion to strike ANWR form the Budget reconciliation bill in the House Resources Committee, defeated 27 to 14
Oct. , 1995 House vote on Budget Reconciliation plan including ANWR passed 227-203 votes.
Oct. 25, 1995 Sen. Bumpers asset sale amendment (which would drop ANWR from the Reconciliation bill), defeated
Oct. 26, 1995 Sen. Baucus anti-ANWR amendment defeated 51 to 48 votes.
Dec. 6, 1995 President Clinton vetoed the Balanced Budget Act which it included a provision to open ANWR.
May 24, 1996 Sen. Bumpers again tried an asset sale amendment on the floor of the Senate as a way of killing ANWR. The first amendment was modified and defeated 98 to 0, but a second attempt aimed directly at ANWT was defeated 52 to 46
June 13, 2001 A motion to limit the funds for activities related to oil and gas exploration in ANWR, brought up by Rep. Obey was rejected in the House Committee on Appropriations by a vote of 38 to 21
July 17, 2001 House Committee on Resources votes 30 to 19 against an Amendment to strike ANWR provision from Energy Security Act.
July 17, 2001 House Committee on Resources passes Energy Security Act with a vote of 26 to 17.
Aug. 1, 2001 Rep. Markey’s amendment to strike ANWR from HR 4 is defeated by a vote of 223 to 206
Aug. 2, 2001 HR-4 is passed through the house with a vote 240 to 189
April 2, 2003 House Committee on Resources votes 27-17 against an Amendment to strike the ANWR provision from the Energy Bill.
April 10, 2003 Rep. Markey’s amendment to strike ANWR from HR 6 is defeated by a vote of 228 to 197
April 11, 2003 HR 6 is passed through the house with a vote of 247 to 175
March 15, 2005 United States Senate Sen. Maria Cantwell’s (D-WA) amendment to strike the ANWR provision [Section 201(a)(4)] from the Budget Resolution is defeated 51-49
April 13, 2005 House Committee on Resources votes 30 to 13 against an Amendment to strike the ANWR provision from HR 6
April 21, 2005 Rep. Markey’s amendment to strike ANWR from HR 6 on the house floor is defeated by a vote of 231 to 200
The time for debate is OVER! There is no sound environmental reason not to drill in ANWR, offshore or on land. Democrat’s continuing obstruction is causing intense financial hardship for millions of Americans. We can’t conserve our way out of this problem.
DW 5000
15 years ago
There is no sound environmental reason not to drill in ANWR, offshore or on land.
“There is about a spill a day at Prudhoe Bay. The Prudhoe Bay oil fields and Trans-Alaska Pipeline have caused an average of 409 spills annually on the North Slope since 1996 (Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation spill database 1996-1999). Roughly 40 different substances from acid to waste oil are spilled during routine operations. Over 1.3 million gallons spilled between 1996 and 1999, most commonly diesel and crude oil. Diesel fuel is acutely toxic to plant life.”
“A study of diesel spills in Alaska’s arctic found that 28 years later there were still substantial hydrocarbons in the soil and little vegetation recovery.”
“At Endicott, contractors for British Petroleum illegally disposed of hazardous drilling wastes containing benzene and other toxics for at least three years until a whistleblower came forward. Some of the waste reached the surface and workers were exposed to hazardous fumes. In February 2000, BP was ordered to pay $15.5 million in criminal fines and to implement a new environmental management program, and to serve 5-years probation for its failure in reporting the dumping. BP also paid $6.5 million in civil penalties. Its contractor pled guilty to 15 counts of violating the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and paid a $3 million fine. A huge cleanup job remains across the North Slope.”
“ANCHORAGE – An estimated 1.4 million cubic feetof natural gas and an unknown quantity of crude oil spewed from a leak in a pipeline at the Prudhoe Bay oil field on Alaska’s North Slope, state environmental regulators said Tuesday.
The resulting mist of crude oil coated an area nearly a mile long and averaged about 300 feet wide, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation said in a statement.”
MataHarley has made a particular point of saying that there has been no pollution from the Prudhoe Bay facilities. You’re parroting her points. I grabbed these facts from a cursory search of “prudhoe + pollution.”
No environmental reason not to drill? Wrong again.
Common industrial accidents are MINOR and certainly not threatening to the environment Dim Wit.
Nearly 100 oil and gas platforms were damaged or destroyed by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and there was not one oil stained beach.
As for Prudhoe Bay, all that spilled diesel seems to be attracting more caribou than ever:
I bet they would roll in diesel to get rid of the mosquitoes.
As I said “no sound environmental reason ” not to drill in ANWR or anywhere else. And let me me add no credible environmental reason either.
DW 5000
15 years ago
Common industrial accidents are MINOR and certainly not threatening to the environment Dim Wit.
Nearly 100 oil and gas platforms were damaged or destroyed by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and there was not one oil stained beach.
Mike: I can’t tell whether you a) simply don’t know what you’re talking about, or b) think that you’re doing some clever Bill Clintonesque parsing of the language. Either way, it’s laughable.
—–
AS KATRINA OIL SPILLS MOUNT, CONGRESS CALLS FOR MORE COASTAL DRILLING
NEW YORK (September 15, 2005) — Nearly six million gallons of oil pouring out of seven pipelines and coastal storage tanks ruptured by Hurricane Katrina amount to one of the largest U.S. oil spills in history.
Two oil storage tanks are thought to be leaking there. How much is also unknown, but Kelly said a working estimate right now is 78,000 barrels might have spilled.
A 250,000 barrel above ground storage tank (tank # 250-2) was dislodged, lifted and damaged in flooding associated with Hurricane Katrina. At the time, the tank contained 65,000 barrels of mixed crude oil, and released approximately 25,110 barrels (1,050,000 gallons). The released oil has impacted approximately 1700 homes in an adjacent residential neighborhood; an area of about one square mile. Several canals have also been impacted: the 20 Arpent; the 40 Arpent; the Meraux; the Corinnes; the Delarond; and, various unnamed interceptor canals.
Oil Pollution containment and recovery operations are in full swing in southeast Louisiana, where Katrina caused nearly 50 oil spills. Four spills are considered major, over 100,000 gals., and five are classified as medium sized, between 10,000 and 100,000 gals. There were also about 35 minor spills as of Sept. 18.
—–
Would you care to produce some sort of proof to back up your claims? I’ve provided quotes and links in my last two posts, while you have really done nothing except contradict me. (And speaking of the valuelessness of simple contradiction: nice job with the disappeared Qadaffi post.)
Diw Wit: There is a difference between “spills” resulting from leaking oil storage containers or undeground storage which has become overrun with water and spills from drilling.
If you had read the sources you linked more carefully, you might have avoided making such a glaring error.
Perhaps you are unaware that oil is lighter than water and if water were to flood an area where gasoline tanks are located, such as neighborhoods in New Orleans, the water will displace the oil or gas.
You might know that I worked for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Washington. We have an office there called “Underground Storage Tanks” or UST which has a division called “LUST” for Leaking Underground Storage Tanks.
These are problems wholly unassociated with drilling. One of the news stories you cited is a refinery flooding, which again, is not related to drilling. New refineries, with new technology, might do a better job of addressing such issues. President Bush has proposed this, Democrats, as always, have opposed it.
Your continuing efforts to provide misleading or inaccurate information only bolster the case I have been making: There is no sound or credible environmental reason not to drill for more supplies of oil!
Nice try though. I’m sure you think yourself very clever. I do not share your view.
DW 5000
15 years ago
Perhaps you are unaware that oil is lighter than water and if water were to flood an area where gasoline tanks are located, such as neighborhoods in New Orleans, the water will displace the oil or gas.
Ah, so it’s the “Clintonesque word-parsing” strategy. Got it.
Good news, everyone! There will apparently be no oil transport or storage if drilling occurs in ANWR.
So, Mike, are you saying that the oil will be teleported immediately from the oil derrick to some other place for refining?
By the way, can you point me toward that Qadaffi post? I wanted to read your enlightening and edifying response on that topic.
Again, your efforts to mislead are glaringly evident.
Go back and read your own source material Dim Wit. The source of pollution you cited is from underground storage tanks and one refinery. You want to shut down the neighborhood gas stations in lowlying areas nationwide?
We have the most stringent environmental regulations addressing these concerns. Though I don’t suppose that will be good enough for you.
Let me know when you find some photos of oil soaked beaches as a result of damaged or destroyed oil platforms.
Despite your best efforts to mislead, there is simply no sound or credible environmental reason not to produce more oil here in the U.S.
Uddercha0s
15 years ago
Let me know when you find some photos of oil soaked beaches
Sorry MikesA I’m taking you out of context here… Here in N. Myrtle Beach, SC we have oil soaked beaches…Our beaches are covered with women in bikinis covered in oil… pictures to follow.. God bless America!
Same thing happened when I was in Tampa. No Caribou, but lots of drunken college students and strippers.
Uddercha0s
15 years ago
I’m straying way from the topic here but one that has me hot. They are trying to raise our property taxes by 1 mil to advertise to the “locals” to eliminate the bike rallies in May. So, let me get this straight, they want me to pay them, to tell me that they don’t want tourists to come here and spend money? Then, are they going to remove that tax after they have done that? Haha!
DW 5000
15 years ago
Let me know when you find some photos of oil soaked beaches as a result of damaged or destroyed oil platforms.
Like I said: word parsing. You act as if the actual drilling platform were the only component of a drilling operation. Again, your efforts to mislead are glaringly obvious.
Also: you brought up Katrina, not I, and when I called you on it with facts, you moved the goalposts. Nice.
This is the kind of thing that makes you such low-hanging fruit.
Uddercha0s
15 years ago
DW,
WTF are you smoking? Can I get some? Are you freaking kidding me? There are more spills at Jiffy Lube than there are at Prudhoe bay, the platforms in the Gulf. Do you ride a freaking horse? My Harley spilled more oil than ALL of the oil platforms in the gulf during Katrina.
(ed. Sorry, I’m part of the problem. Where can I buy my carbon credits? I must make amends. /sarcasm God, don’t get me on a rant you panty waste apologist)
My original statement regarding the destroyed and damaged oil platforms due to hurricanes Katrina and Rita was clear. There was no widespread environmental damage.
It’s also clear from the carefully cherry picked reports that Dim Wit cited, that oil exploration, recovery, refinement and distribution is on the whole environmentally safe.
Screed-like attempts to deny that reality simply confirm what I have said.
P.S. Stix: Do you think the strippers on the beach in Tampa are scaring the Caribou? Is that why they are all hiding up around oil platforms in Alaska despite the oil?
DW 5000
15 years ago
There are more spills at Jiffy Lube than there are at Prudhoe bay, the platforms in the Gulf.
Seeing as how Dim Wit has made false and misleading statements linking stories that were unrelated to the subject, I would say he is the last person to demand proof from anyone.
And aside from the specific example of Jiffy Lube, I would be willing to bet that the combined amounts of pollution from Non Point sources far exceeds that of occasional industrial accidents in oil drilling, refining or transportation.
Well, I was making a point that how the “common” person and industries handle oil and it’s byproducts is much more loose than those who actually drill it. Sorry if that flew over your head. Since you asked,
Jiffy Lube pays $35,000 fine in Santa Clara County case
Jiffy Lube International, the largest oil-changing service company in Santa Clara County has paid $35,000 in fines after admitting to improper disposal of hazardous waste.
It is estimated that nationally about 180 million gallons of used motor oil – the equivalent of 16 Exxon Valdez oil spills – is poured down storm drains or sent to landfills by do-it-yourself auto mechanics.
There’s plenty more. Google is your friend. The point is, it is not the drilling that is hazardous to the environment.
That must be why there are no caribou right?
I have spotted what appeared to be a few oil soaked caribou on the beach as well. There really should be a law against that!
DW 5000
15 years ago
Jiffy Lube pays $35,000 fine in Santa Clara County case
You forgot this part:
For release: January 14, 1997
You had to go back quite a way to find that one.
There’s plenty more. Google is your friend.
Heh. Indeed. I’m not going to do your research for you, my friend.
A) One eleven-year-old article? Talk about cherrypicking…
B) What you’re really doing here is arguing for tighter control of oil disposal. I love how you can’t even focus your own rant in the proper direction.
And I wonder if all our lib buddies who park their cars in their driveways, in parking lots and on the street are aware that they are contributing to oil pollution with every drip, drip, drip from their crankcase? Where do they suppose all that oil ends up?
No wonder we don’t see any Caribou in the parking lots of Wal-Marts!
Aye Chihuahua
15 years ago
Jiffy Lube pays $35,000 fine in Santa Clara County case
You forgot this part:
For release: January 14, 1997
Sorry DW, you’re wrong on that one.
The date line on the other article was from Jan 1997.
Nearly 100 oil and gas platforms were damaged or destroyed by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and there was not one oil stained beach.
You posted some nonsense about storage tanks and such that were damaged during Katrina. You don’t realize that storage tanks are not the same as “oil and gas platforms”?
Can you provide for us, DW, something, anything which shows that there were oil spills during Katrina or Rita as a result of damage to “oil and gas platforms”?
Also, could you point me in the direction of information regarding the last Category 3, 4, or 5 hurricane that has struck Alaska because, you know, if there’s gonna be a storm of that consequence then perhaps we should look at the storage tank issue.
Oh, almost forgot. While you’re searching for the Alaskan hurricane info, find for me the last time they had a storm surge, 20″ of rain, and a levee failure all at the same time will ya?
What you’re really doing here is arguing for tighter control of oil disposal. I love how you can’t even focus your own rant in the proper direction.
Stay with the conversation DW. I said that Jiffy Lube caused more spills than the oil platforms. You said prove it. I post links on Jiffy Lube known spills. Now you claim I’m arguing for tighter restrictions? You’re not the sharpest stone in the knife drawer are you?
Aye Chihuahua
15 years ago
Udder,
Glad to help.
As a side note, if you see my 17 year old 6’4″ son on the beach this weekend please remind him to wear sunscreen.
MataHarley has made a particular point of saying that there has been no pollution from the Prudhoe Bay facilities.
I have said no such thing, and never will. And I suggest that if DW charges me with that, he’d better provide a full quote and link. I know of no possible way that pollution can be completely eliminated from any type of industrial facility, thus these words would never be uttered or typed by me. DW has chosen to embellish, at my expense, for his point.
What I have said is that our technology and drilling production is cleaner and faster today than earlier endeavors. Disregard the man behind the curtain, attempting to manipulate my words. I am no one’s ventroliquist dummy.
Dave Noble… conservation is being preached, and yet the preachers ignoring that the US is conserving. You state the US consumption was 7.6bbl in 2005. In 2007, our consumption of all petroleums fuels was 7.55bbl annually, or 20.7 mil bbl/d. Over two years, our annual consumption has gone down. This per EIA stats. US consumption over the past decade has only risen about 3%.
Also via same EIA link, 2008 is anticipated to be a year of decline in consumption based on 1st quarter estimates.
World oil consumption is projected to grow by 1 million barrels per day (bbl/d) in 2008. U.S. consumption of liquid fuels and other petroleum is expected to decline by about 290,000 bbl/d in 2008 because of higher petroleum product prices and slower economic growth. Adjusting for increased ethanol use, U.S. petroleum consumption is projected to fall by 440,000 bbl/d in 2008.
snip
Based on prospects for a weak economy and record high crude oil and product prices extending into next year, consumption is projected to shrink by 290,000 bbl/d in 2008, a sharper drop than the nearly 200,000 bbl/d projected in the previous Outlook. In 2009, total consumption is projected to rise by 140,000 bbl/d, somewhat less than the nearly 200,000 bbl/d increase projected in the previous Outlook.
In fact, it is the Americans that seem to be doing the bulk of the “conservation”..
Most of this downward revision occurred in the OECD countries. With this revision, OECD consumption during the first quarter is estimated to have fallen by 460,000 bbl/d from year-earlier levels, with the declines concentrated in the United States. Consumption in the other OECD regions was flat during the first quarter, with European consumption increasing relative to year-earlier levels only because warmer-than-normal weather led to unseasonably low consumption in first quarter of 2007.
If you’re a conspiracy sort, of which I’m not, one would have to observe that the speculators, supposedly to blame for the price of oil, are actually acting on behalf of the environmentalists… driving down demand via astronomical prices. Odd how that works out, eh?
DW 5000
15 years ago
Can you provide for us, DW, something, anything which shows that there were oil spills during Katrina or Rita as a result of damage to “oil and gas platforms”?
No, I can’t. Nor do I have to. Hurricane Katrina was a MikesAmerica red herring. The comments in this thread kicked off with a discussion of ANWR, and I regret that I responded to Mike’s distraction.
I’m not saying that we should not drill in the Gulf of Mexico, and you look like an ass when you pretend that I am saying that.
Also: the emphasis on “oil and gas platforms” is dishonest. You’re pretending that the actual drilling platform is the only component of a drilling operation. I guess you could take it even further if you’d like, by asking, “Can you provide us any proof that there has ever been an oil spill on account of an oilworker’s hard hat?” The answer to that would be, “Well, no, but that doesn’t mean that oil spills are unrelated to oil extraction.”
On the other hand, in another thread I provided several links’ worth of proof that the oil extraction process–including storage and transport–causes pollution in the Alaska oilfields.
Also, could you point me in the direction of information regarding the last Category 3, 4, or 5 hurricane that has struck Alaska because, you know, if there’s gonna be a storm of that consequence then perhaps we should look at the storage tank issue.
Oh, almost forgot. While you’re searching for the Alaskan hurricane info, find for me the last time they had a storm surge, 20″ of rain, and a levee failure all at the same time will ya?
Why should I? Now I’m supposed to provide proof of some dumb idea that you made up? You’re barking up the wrong tree, buddy. Nobody is saying that ANWR should be off limits because of hurricanes. That is your own invention.
Please don’t be sad because I kicked down your strawman. You’ll build another, I’m sure.
Can you provide for us, DW, something, anything which shows that there were oil spills during Katrina or Rita as a result of damage to “oil and gas platforms”?
No, I can’t. Nor do I have to.
That’s right. Dim Wit, or Doc as he used to be called, is constantly demanding full and complete up to date documentation of EVERY claim or assertion that ANYONE ELSE wants to make and he simply cannot live by that same standard.
It has been shown above where he used misleading information to try and make a claim that the statements I made in the post were false. Instead, it is he who consistently demonstrates a total lack of any intellectual integrity on this issue as well as many others.
This is further proof, not that any were needed, of the derangement which comes from investing in a delusional ideology of hate for the last 7 years.
It is really a sad sight to behold, but in Dim Wit’s case and in so many others, they have only themselves to blame.
DW 5000
15 years ago
That’s right. Dim Wit, or Doc as he used to be called, is constantly demanding full and complete up to date documentation of EVERY claim or assertion that ANYONE ELSE wants to make and he simply cannot live by that same standard.
You’re asking me to provide proof for an assertion that I never made. I’ll do my level best to provide proof for the assertions I do make, but history has shown that you will disregard those proofs simply because you feel like it.
You are the one who has insisted on restricting me to “oil and gas platforms.” It’s a dishonest and pointless restriction for this discussion.
DW 5000
15 years ago
It’s interesting how messages I post that A) take you down on the facts, B) take you down on the logic, or C) explicate in a step-by-step fashion precisely how your latest series of posts makes you look like a deceitful fool seem to get disappeared.
This most recent instance was certainly not because I made fun of your handle, of course. Of course not, because you’re all about the namecalling, right? Right? Are you about ready to start thinking about truly unleashing the full fury of your namecalling yet?
If you were half as smart as you seem to think you are, you might be nearly an eighth as smart as you’d need to be to perform this task well.
Dim Wit: We are overquota for more of your bile laced rants devoid of content or meaning today. Pass it along on another thread if you want, but this one is closed to any more of your buffoonery for at least 24 hours.
You’ve been proven WRONG so many times I don’t see the point in continuing.
So despite every expert to the contrary, its your content that drilling ANWR makes the U.S. energy indpendent. I mean, it appears you are making that claim with a straight face… please clarify.
Drilling in ANWR would likely produce only 3.2 billion barrels of oil, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, not even enough to satisfy six months’ demand; oil would not begin to reach the market for another 10 years; and it would take 50 years to extract the full amount.
Where did you get the idea that drilling in ANWR will make us energy independent Palooza? Show me the quote and give me a link.
ANWR is just one place of many that we should be drilling. There’s plenty of oil RIGHT HERE in the good ole USA:
There is just NO valid excuse not to drill here and drill now!!!
Drilling ANWR, Off shore, and inside the country will drive the price of oil down as we continue to develop other types of fuel. I guess the fact that for every barrel produced in the U.S. is one barrel not produced by out enemies, and on top of that it ‘keeps $135.00 home’ and Americans employed. It seems the one track minds of the left are set on destroying the country with no thought that the left will be in the death toll. Actually I think the Red states are more equipped to feed themselves and care for themselves than the blue states. As a fact we won’t be selling any feed this year but will save it to feed the locally raised cattle which are traditionally sold to individuals and slaughtered in the area. Country folks have rather large gardens this year. being prepared is a part of survival. City slickers are putting themselves in deep doo doo. With Hussein O’s Mugabe style of government you may not starve to death, but be lucky? and killed by his government troops. Hope and change was stolen from Mugabe by Hussein. Everyone should ask, ‘how many days can I feed my family with what supplies I have on hand’? I’ll bet most people in the cities will be out after breakfast in the A.M.
If we don’t do something in a hurry there really will be two Americas. Those who can afford to buy groceries and those who can’t. Those who can afford to fly and those who can’t. Those who can heat their homes and those who can’t. Those who can use an air-conditioner and those who swelter. Those who have a job and those who have been laid off. Those who can use their car to have a normal life and those who stay at home. Those who manufacture thousands of things we use every day, by products of the oil industry, and a population who buys them no more. Those who supported a comprehensive energy plan in 2001 using oil, gas, wind, solar, water, batteries and more and those who didn’t. Those who want to bring the western world to their knees by using oil as a weapon and those who think we deserve it. When we have an economy that depends on the use of oil the dems sound criminal.
Thanks for reminding me of this Kathie:
I posted a few days ago a photo report showing some of the efforts President Bush has been making FOR YEARS to try and focus attention on this issue:
The answer from the Democrats has always been a resounding NO!
So you have to ask yourself: Is it possible that the enviros are the cause of the oil war?
No Blood For Oil or No Drilling For Oil?
===
The Democrats used to be the champions of the poor. With the rise in fuel costs they seem to be more the champions of the “screw you I’ve got mine” crowd.
Let’s assume for the sake of argument that we begin the process of drilling in ANWR and in all the currently prohibited off-shore areas today. A reasonable estimate (50-50 chance of being correct) of the reserves in ANWR is 11 Bbl. A reasonable estimate of the available reserves in the currently prohibited off-shore drilling areas is 18 Bbl. That makes 29 Bbl total available in ANWR and off-shore. America’s oil consumption in 2005 was 7.6 Bbl. If you do the math our ANWR and off-shore reserves give us less than 4 years worth of oil to meet our 2005 annual consumption rate. Since it is reasonable to assume our consumption will go up in the approximately 10 years it will take to get that oil to the pumps, we actually have much ess than 4 years. We cannot drill our way to the energy independence.
Why not conserve NOW, subsidize alternative energy development NOW? Drilling in ANWR and drilling in currently prohibited off-shore areas can be debated.
Please note the following observation from our own DOE:
“Additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR would be only a small portion of total world oil production, and would likely be offset in part by somewhat lower production outside the United States.”
(http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/introduction.html)
Even if you add in the prohibited off-shore reserves and get three times what’s in ANWR alone, you still get three times a “small portion”
Dave,
How does sending less money to the Middle East dictatorships sound as a policy?
Or how about this: Why don’t we just stop drilling for oil any where in the world. Since there is obviously not enough oil. All efforts to increase the supply are useless.
Waht about the huge, bigger than all ofthe ME oil that is underthe Rockies. that will getus off od foreign oil.
Or I know let’s just send all of our money to the Saudis so they can train more terrorists and build more Madrassas. That sounds better, then in 20 years we can all bow 5 times to Mecca. And screw trying to keep oil prices down to help the poor and middle class. We can have the ultra rich and measly poor.
Have you also noticed that we are still getting oil from Prudo Bay. And it does not seem like that is going to run out any time soon. See with estimates, it could be right on or totally below what is actually there. The estimates you are talking about are conservative estimates. there are many places where the oil was suppose to have run out long ago, but they are still pumping the oil out of them.
Also we need to make a few more refineries and get rid of the idiotic boutique blends.
I love how some of the people who post here focus on ANWR and/or off-shore drilling as the ONLY drilling we can do, thus it’s not really going to have an impact. There are billions of barrels of oil in Colorado and the Dakotas…estimates in the hundreds of billions…to go and get. Does anyone really believe that the country that put a man on the moon within a decade of JFK’s famous speech about doing so can’t get oil out of the ground in less than 10 years? When are we going to wake up and stop listening to the negative nay-sayers on the left, push them aside and just do what needs to be done. THAT’s the American Way; not this limp-wristed, hand-wringing, white wine-drinking, gnashing-of-teeth idiocy that the democRats have adopted to subvert our Constitution and bring America to its knees.
Vote Conservative…to hell with the RINO’s, too.
Dave Noble shows up just to prove that the Democrats have no other strategy than conservation.
Well Dave…. If Democrats say we can’t drill our way out of this problem we sure as hell can’t conserve our way out.
What amounts to a conservation only policy is a train wreck waiting to happen.
President Bush’s energy plan included conservation as well as developing alternatives and new supplies. And yet, Democrats have blocked the new supplies of oil in this country, alternatives are years away and conservation won’t work.
As Coulter says: “airplanes that run on woodchips, which should be up and running any moment now.”
That’s pretty much the Democrat plan: pie in the sky but pain at the pump.
How come the liberal/progressive/lefty on the GOP ticket can not understand this and Ann and everyone else who has an IQ over 80 and is honest does? No wonder the GOP got crushed in 06 and will be mauled in 08! Is the entire GOP leadershio a group of morons?
Explore ANWR, drill and stop buying oil from terrorists and those who support them! How can we *honestly* say we’re against terrorists when we go out of our way to support them?!@#%! Someone is telling lies.
M. Simon… Thanks for sharing the bumper sticker:
Why don’t we just continue to let China drill off our coasts and take ALL the oil that is rightfully ours? Also China doesn’t worry about the environment. Why should they? Its’s not close to their country. And what happens when they decide to drill off the coast of Alaska? Oops, there goes our oil again while we still plod on giving money to our enemies and being held hostage to the terrorists who are funded with this money. And where does the above poster get a50year production idea? Liberals/socialists/communists have the weakest statistics.
Mike,
As usual you jump to conclusions, ignoring what was actually said:
“Drilling in ANWR and drilling in currently prohibited off-shore areas can be debated.”
I left that option open.
Why is reducing consumption off the table? If you have a finite resource, why burn through it as fast as you can, while expending all your efforts to acquire the last small bits of it?
I’m surprised you didn’t talk about the wonders of oil shale. We do have a lot of it. But where will we get the water, another constrained resource, to process it?
Cost will reduce consumption, but it will hit the industries that have to depend on gas/oil/diesel hard thus raising the cost of everything that has to be shipped, trucked or flown. As some like to say, we can’t drill our way out of this, we can’t conserve our way out of it either.
Then, what about the water it takes to produce ethanol?
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/06/news/economy/birger_shale.fortune/?postversion=2008060617#
Dave Noble: Drilling in ANWR HAS been debated:
The time for debate is OVER! There is no sound environmental reason not to drill in ANWR, offshore or on land. Democrat’s continuing obstruction is causing intense financial hardship for millions of Americans. We can’t conserve our way out of this problem.
Really? Well, maybe not so much:
“There is about a spill a day at Prudhoe Bay. The Prudhoe Bay oil fields and Trans-Alaska Pipeline have caused an average of 409 spills annually on the North Slope since 1996 (Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation spill database 1996-1999). Roughly 40 different substances from acid to waste oil are spilled during routine operations. Over 1.3 million gallons spilled between 1996 and 1999, most commonly diesel and crude oil. Diesel fuel is acutely toxic to plant life.”
“A study of diesel spills in Alaska’s arctic found that 28 years later there were still substantial hydrocarbons in the soil and little vegetation recovery.”
“At Endicott, contractors for British Petroleum illegally disposed of hazardous drilling wastes containing benzene and other toxics for at least three years until a whistleblower came forward. Some of the waste reached the surface and workers were exposed to hazardous fumes. In February 2000, BP was ordered to pay $15.5 million in criminal fines and to implement a new environmental management program, and to serve 5-years probation for its failure in reporting the dumping. BP also paid $6.5 million in civil penalties. Its contractor pled guilty to 15 counts of violating the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and paid a $3 million fine. A huge cleanup job remains across the North Slope.”
Or how about this:
“ANCHORAGE – An estimated 1.4 million cubic feetof natural gas and an unknown quantity of crude oil spewed from a leak in a pipeline at the Prudhoe Bay oil field on Alaska’s North Slope, state environmental regulators said Tuesday.
The resulting mist of crude oil coated an area nearly a mile long and averaged about 300 feet wide, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation said in a statement.”
MataHarley has made a particular point of saying that there has been no pollution from the Prudhoe Bay facilities. You’re parroting her points. I grabbed these facts from a cursory search of “prudhoe + pollution.”
No environmental reason not to drill? Wrong again.
Common industrial accidents are MINOR and certainly not threatening to the environment Dim Wit.
Nearly 100 oil and gas platforms were damaged or destroyed by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and there was not one oil stained beach.
As for Prudhoe Bay, all that spilled diesel seems to be attracting more caribou than ever:
I bet they would roll in diesel to get rid of the mosquitoes.
As I said “no sound environmental reason ” not to drill in ANWR or anywhere else. And let me me add no credible environmental reason either.
Mike: I can’t tell whether you a) simply don’t know what you’re talking about, or b) think that you’re doing some clever Bill Clintonesque parsing of the language. Either way, it’s laughable.
—–
AS KATRINA OIL SPILLS MOUNT, CONGRESS CALLS FOR MORE COASTAL DRILLING
NEW YORK (September 15, 2005) — Nearly six million gallons of oil pouring out of seven pipelines and coastal storage tanks ruptured by Hurricane Katrina amount to one of the largest U.S. oil spills in history.
You guys won’t let me link to the article, but here’s the url:http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/050915.asp
Second oil spill feared on Mississippi River
Two oil storage tanks are thought to be leaking there. How much is also unknown, but Kelly said a working estimate right now is 78,000 barrels might have spilled.
Murphy Oil Spill
A 250,000 barrel above ground storage tank (tank # 250-2) was dislodged, lifted and damaged in flooding associated with Hurricane Katrina. At the time, the tank contained 65,000 barrels of mixed crude oil, and released approximately 25,110 barrels (1,050,000 gallons). The released oil has impacted approximately 1700 homes in an adjacent residential neighborhood; an area of about one square mile. Several canals have also been impacted: the 20 Arpent; the 40 Arpent; the Meraux; the Corinnes; the Delarond; and, various unnamed interceptor canals.
Officials tackle multiple oil spills after Katrina.(NEWS LOG)
Oil Pollution containment and recovery operations are in full swing in southeast Louisiana, where Katrina caused nearly 50 oil spills. Four spills are considered major, over 100,000 gals., and five are classified as medium sized, between 10,000 and 100,000 gals. There were also about 35 minor spills as of Sept. 18.
—–
Would you care to produce some sort of proof to back up your claims? I’ve provided quotes and links in my last two posts, while you have really done nothing except contradict me. (And speaking of the valuelessness of simple contradiction: nice job with the disappeared Qadaffi post.)
Mike,
Glad you liked it. It was done by the guy who did the porkbusters logo.
Diw Wit: There is a difference between “spills” resulting from leaking oil storage containers or undeground storage which has become overrun with water and spills from drilling.
If you had read the sources you linked more carefully, you might have avoided making such a glaring error.
Perhaps you are unaware that oil is lighter than water and if water were to flood an area where gasoline tanks are located, such as neighborhoods in New Orleans, the water will displace the oil or gas.
You might know that I worked for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Washington. We have an office there called “Underground Storage Tanks” or UST which has a division called “LUST” for Leaking Underground Storage Tanks.
These are problems wholly unassociated with drilling. One of the news stories you cited is a refinery flooding, which again, is not related to drilling. New refineries, with new technology, might do a better job of addressing such issues. President Bush has proposed this, Democrats, as always, have opposed it.
Your continuing efforts to provide misleading or inaccurate information only bolster the case I have been making: There is no sound or credible environmental reason not to drill for more supplies of oil!
Nice try though. I’m sure you think yourself very clever. I do not share your view.
Ah, so it’s the “Clintonesque word-parsing” strategy. Got it.
Good news, everyone! There will apparently be no oil transport or storage if drilling occurs in ANWR.
So, Mike, are you saying that the oil will be teleported immediately from the oil derrick to some other place for refining?
By the way, can you point me toward that Qadaffi post? I wanted to read your enlightening and edifying response on that topic.
Again, your efforts to mislead are glaringly evident.
Go back and read your own source material Dim Wit. The source of pollution you cited is from underground storage tanks and one refinery. You want to shut down the neighborhood gas stations in lowlying areas nationwide?
We have the most stringent environmental regulations addressing these concerns. Though I don’t suppose that will be good enough for you.
Let me know when you find some photos of oil soaked beaches as a result of damaged or destroyed oil platforms.
Despite your best efforts to mislead, there is simply no sound or credible environmental reason not to produce more oil here in the U.S.
Sorry MikesA I’m taking you out of context here… Here in N. Myrtle Beach, SC we have oil soaked beaches…Our beaches are covered with women in bikinis covered in oil… pictures to follow.. God bless America!
Funny Udder! We have the same problem here on Hilton Head. That must be why there are no caribou right?
Same thing happened when I was in Tampa. No Caribou, but lots of drunken college students and strippers.
I’m straying way from the topic here but one that has me hot. They are trying to raise our property taxes by 1 mil to advertise to the “locals” to eliminate the bike rallies in May. So, let me get this straight, they want me to pay them, to tell me that they don’t want tourists to come here and spend money? Then, are they going to remove that tax after they have done that? Haha!
Like I said: word parsing. You act as if the actual drilling platform were the only component of a drilling operation. Again, your efforts to mislead are glaringly obvious.
Also: you brought up Katrina, not I, and when I called you on it with facts, you moved the goalposts. Nice.
This is the kind of thing that makes you such low-hanging fruit.
DW,
WTF are you smoking? Can I get some? Are you freaking kidding me? There are more spills at Jiffy Lube than there are at Prudhoe bay, the platforms in the Gulf. Do you ride a freaking horse? My Harley spilled more oil than ALL of the oil platforms in the gulf during Katrina.
(ed. Sorry, I’m part of the problem. Where can I buy my carbon credits? I must make amends. /sarcasm God, don’t get me on a rant you panty waste apologist)
My original statement regarding the destroyed and damaged oil platforms due to hurricanes Katrina and Rita was clear. There was no widespread environmental damage.
It’s also clear from the carefully cherry picked reports that Dim Wit cited, that oil exploration, recovery, refinement and distribution is on the whole environmentally safe.
Screed-like attempts to deny that reality simply confirm what I have said.
P.S. Stix: Do you think the strippers on the beach in Tampa are scaring the Caribou? Is that why they are all hiding up around oil platforms in Alaska despite the oil?
Interesting. Prove it.
Seeing as how Dim Wit has made false and misleading statements linking stories that were unrelated to the subject, I would say he is the last person to demand proof from anyone.
And aside from the specific example of Jiffy Lube, I would be willing to bet that the combined amounts of pollution from Non Point sources far exceeds that of occasional industrial accidents in oil drilling, refining or transportation.
Non point source is another of those EPA terms:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/qa.html
Well, I was making a point that how the “common” person and industries handle oil and it’s byproducts is much more loose than those who actually drill it. Sorry if that flew over your head. Since you asked,
Jiffy Lube pays $35,000 fine in Santa Clara County case
Jiffy Lube International, the largest oil-changing service company in Santa Clara County has paid $35,000 in fines after admitting to improper disposal of hazardous waste.
Jiffy Lube Fined $5,400 For Polluting Beaverton Creek
There’s plenty more. Google is your friend. The point is, it is not the drilling that is hazardous to the environment.
I have spotted what appeared to be a few oil soaked caribou on the beach as well. There really should be a law against that!
You forgot this part:
You had to go back quite a way to find that one.
Heh. Indeed. I’m not going to do your research for you, my friend.
A) One eleven-year-old article? Talk about cherrypicking…
B) What you’re really doing here is arguing for tighter control of oil disposal. I love how you can’t even focus your own rant in the proper direction.
Udder: You didn’t really think that Dim Wit would find your examples compelling?
Of course not… He’s stuck on stupid!
In any case, your example is totally appropriate, even if the link you cited is dated.
I cited the EPA office of non point source for more information:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/qa.html
And I wonder if all our lib buddies who park their cars in their driveways, in parking lots and on the street are aware that they are contributing to oil pollution with every drip, drip, drip from their crankcase? Where do they suppose all that oil ends up?
No wonder we don’t see any Caribou in the parking lots of Wal-Marts!
Sorry DW, you’re wrong on that one.
The date line on the other article was from Jan 1997.
The date line on the Santa Clara case is Aug 25, 2006.
Here is an article about JL paying a $500,000 fine. Sacramento, CA (May 9, 2008)
Now DW,
Let’s get back to what Mike originally said:
You posted some nonsense about storage tanks and such that were damaged during Katrina. You don’t realize that storage tanks are not the same as “oil and gas platforms”?
Can you provide for us, DW, something, anything which shows that there were oil spills during Katrina or Rita as a result of damage to “oil and gas platforms”?
Also, could you point me in the direction of information regarding the last Category 3, 4, or 5 hurricane that has struck Alaska because, you know, if there’s gonna be a storm of that consequence then perhaps we should look at the storage tank issue.
Oh, almost forgot. While you’re searching for the Alaskan hurricane info, find for me the last time they had a storm surge, 20″ of rain, and a levee failure all at the same time will ya?
Thanks Aye Chi. I had a reply to DW typed out and when I posted it, I received a server error and lost it. District Attorney Santa Clara County
Stay with the conversation DW. I said that Jiffy Lube caused more spills than the oil platforms. You said prove it. I post links on Jiffy Lube known spills. Now you claim I’m arguing for tighter restrictions? You’re not the sharpest stone in the knife drawer are you?
Udder,
Glad to help.
As a side note, if you see my 17 year old 6’4″ son on the beach this weekend please remind him to wear sunscreen.
DW is putting words in my mouth, ala
I have said no such thing, and never will. And I suggest that if DW charges me with that, he’d better provide a full quote and link. I know of no possible way that pollution can be completely eliminated from any type of industrial facility, thus these words would never be uttered or typed by me. DW has chosen to embellish, at my expense, for his point.
What I have said is that our technology and drilling production is cleaner and faster today than earlier endeavors. Disregard the man behind the curtain, attempting to manipulate my words. I am no one’s ventroliquist dummy.
Dave Noble… conservation is being preached, and yet the preachers ignoring that the US is conserving. You state the US consumption was 7.6bbl in 2005. In 2007, our consumption of all petroleums fuels was 7.55bbl annually, or 20.7 mil bbl/d. Over two years, our annual consumption has gone down. This per EIA stats. US consumption over the past decade has only risen about 3%.
Also via same EIA link, 2008 is anticipated to be a year of decline in consumption based on 1st quarter estimates.
In fact, it is the Americans that seem to be doing the bulk of the “conservation”..
If you’re a conspiracy sort, of which I’m not, one would have to observe that the speculators, supposedly to blame for the price of oil, are actually acting on behalf of the environmentalists… driving down demand via astronomical prices. Odd how that works out, eh?
No, I can’t. Nor do I have to. Hurricane Katrina was a MikesAmerica red herring. The comments in this thread kicked off with a discussion of ANWR, and I regret that I responded to Mike’s distraction.
I’m not saying that we should not drill in the Gulf of Mexico, and you look like an ass when you pretend that I am saying that.
Also: the emphasis on “oil and gas platforms” is dishonest. You’re pretending that the actual drilling platform is the only component of a drilling operation. I guess you could take it even further if you’d like, by asking, “Can you provide us any proof that there has ever been an oil spill on account of an oilworker’s hard hat?” The answer to that would be, “Well, no, but that doesn’t mean that oil spills are unrelated to oil extraction.”
On the other hand, in another thread I provided several links’ worth of proof that the oil extraction process–including storage and transport–causes pollution in the Alaska oilfields.
Why should I? Now I’m supposed to provide proof of some dumb idea that you made up? You’re barking up the wrong tree, buddy. Nobody is saying that ANWR should be off limits because of hurricanes. That is your own invention.
Please don’t be sad because I kicked down your strawman. You’ll build another, I’m sure.
That’s right. Dim Wit, or Doc as he used to be called, is constantly demanding full and complete up to date documentation of EVERY claim or assertion that ANYONE ELSE wants to make and he simply cannot live by that same standard.
It has been shown above where he used misleading information to try and make a claim that the statements I made in the post were false. Instead, it is he who consistently demonstrates a total lack of any intellectual integrity on this issue as well as many others.
This is further proof, not that any were needed, of the derangement which comes from investing in a delusional ideology of hate for the last 7 years.
It is really a sad sight to behold, but in Dim Wit’s case and in so many others, they have only themselves to blame.
You’re asking me to provide proof for an assertion that I never made. I’ll do my level best to provide proof for the assertions I do make, but history has shown that you will disregard those proofs simply because you feel like it.
You are the one who has insisted on restricting me to “oil and gas platforms.” It’s a dishonest and pointless restriction for this discussion.
It’s interesting how messages I post that A) take you down on the facts, B) take you down on the logic, or C) explicate in a step-by-step fashion precisely how your latest series of posts makes you look like a deceitful fool seem to get disappeared.
This most recent instance was certainly not because I made fun of your handle, of course. Of course not, because you’re all about the namecalling, right? Right? Are you about ready to start thinking about truly unleashing the full fury of your namecalling yet?
If you were half as smart as you seem to think you are, you might be nearly an eighth as smart as you’d need to be to perform this task well.
Like I said earlier: low-hanging fruit.
Dim Wit: We are overquota for more of your bile laced rants devoid of content or meaning today. Pass it along on another thread if you want, but this one is closed to any more of your buffoonery for at least 24 hours.
You’ve been proven WRONG so many times I don’t see the point in continuing.
Yes, I think we can all agree on that.
Mike,
You know DW reminds me of an equally obnoxious chap named Doc Washboard who once posted here and a couple of other places I frequented.
I wonder if they’re related.