Boy, big oil really got you bamboozled.

Show me how

I'll have Ms. Anne Korin call you.

Is there a problem with you articulating your own views? Do you have any views of your own?

If you recall I commented on what you posted of her work.

Wait a minute, you never answered this question. Why?

I have tried to explain to you again and again how big oil is taken us for a ride, but you either refuse to accept the truth, don’t believe me, or don’t understand. Therefore, I thought, maybe, Ms. Anne Korin could do it, if not her, maybe Mr. Pickens.

My friend the same can be said of you. No matter what proof I provide you ignore it and continue to spout talking points. Not once can I remember you refuting what I posted, instead you dig up another persons words without any context and call that an answer. You may have connected the dots in your mind but you have yet to put them on the screen for me to see.

I and the good doctor have shown you how drilling for oil will bring down the price. You reject that with no evidence to back it up. You simply refused to address what was written and I know you think you are witty with your retorts but they fall short of making a point or addressing the topic. Mr. Pickens is one of those not in my back yard people. He refuses to put up wind turbines on his land. So much for him. Oh, yeah he also says you can’t drill your way out of this crisis but he still drills and pumps oil. Why is that? Once again I will tell you that wind power is not the answer by its self. And once again I will ask you what alternative fuel source is there that we can use to stop using oil? will you answer that question? Because without an alternative fuel all this crap about getting off of oil is a waste of time. You can’t get rid of the thing that runs our economy and not replace it. Without the replacement we will still have to use oil.
Here is a hint, you will know you found the fuel alternative when the price of a barrel of oil drops to about five cents. The price of oil will always drop to remain competitive so when there is competition the price will drop.

Why must it be either/or? We have enough inventiveness to do all.

I don't think anyone is saying that it has to be either/or, Palidin77, the good doc and myself are merely stating that until an alternative fuel is viable we need to drill for oil so that we can bridge the gap. If we were to say tomorrow that all gas stations had to shut down because we were switching over to hydrogen fuel cell cars only people in Southern Califonia could get around, and only within a couple hundred miles of home (assuming they had a hydrogen car). If we were to all of the sudden stop running the fossil fuel power plants most of the US would be in an indefinite blackout. I know I am all for alternative energies, I want them as soon as possible the problem is that they just aren't ready yet. So while they are being researched and developed we need to increase our domestic supply of oil.

The big question is, why is it ok for every country to drill off our shores but the US?

Yeah, what he said.



Because like all liberal ideas, America has to set the example and others will follow and we can save the planet. Just like during the cold war when the liberals said we should get rid of our nuclear arms to prove to the Soviet Union that we really were not a threat. These are the same people that foolishly believe that poverty causes terrorism, and since America is a rich nation we must be the cause of terrorism so we deserve what we get.

Fairly big flaw in this argument. You're essentially saying that increasing the supply won't decrease prices because you'll have an increase in demand (in the future). However, even if you do have such an increase in demand, prices will still be lower as a result of the increase in supply than if you had no such increase. That is, prices may rise, but they won't be as high if you had no such drilling at all.


It's simple supply and demand; If demand is held constant, and supply is increased, then the price will fall. Equally, if you have two situations, in one demand increases by 50% and supply by 10%, and the other where demand increases by 50% and supply is unchanged, the first one will have lower prices than the second.

Now the actual difference in prices might be small (depending no the amount of oil being talked about), but it will still have an affect.

If you continually stress the immediate need of oil exploration, it inevitably will and deliberately upstage the alternatives.

What alternatives???? You keep on saying that we need to switch to alternative yet you don't ever offer up what alternatives are ready to step up to the plate. As of today there simply aren't any that can step up and replace oil. Maybe there will be in 10-40 years, but they just aren't there yet so we need to exploit the oil that we have on our shores to bide our time until the alternative energies are ready. Obviously we need to switch to alternatives as soon as we can, but doing so too soon will do much more harm than good.

We have been searching for alternative fuels since WWII, Germany and they untied states both invented a synthetic gasoline but it is too expensive to put on the market then and now. We have been improving solar power since the 70’s, I wrote on using sea currents as a generation source in 1975 they are doing it today but it can’t hope to replace petro generation. Wind power is also way short of doing anything useful. What alternative fuels are there? None! The oil companies screamed we need nuclear power plants back in the 70’s, to free up oil to keep it cheap and affordable. Our politicians at the time ignored this and their predictions came true. The oil companies did not build or own any nuclear power plants they make no money from them. They looked at what was happening and said this was what was best for the nation.