RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


DomKen -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 10:03:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


You dont understand that farming and ranching and property development, and even airborne pollution from California and Washington State, and even places like Japan and China etc has affected the Yellowstone river previously?

You dont realize that trappers and miners from days long past had some serious impact?

By your standards (for lack of a better term) there is no "environment" remaining, for it has all been destroyed already.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

It may return to some semblance of what it should be, in several thousand years maybe, or it may be that it will never return to the original state.


So because it is already degraded doing more damage is ok? Is that really your argument?




Hillwilliam -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 10:06:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


You dont understand that farming and ranching and property development, and even airborne pollution from California and Washington State, and even places like Japan and China etc has affected the Yellowstone river previously?

You dont realize that trappers and miners from days long past had some serious impact?

By your standards (for lack of a better term) there is no "environment" remaining, for it has all been destroyed already.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

It may return to some semblance of what it should be, in several thousand years maybe, or it may be that it will never return to the original state.



It's interesting, sanity, sanity that you use this argument (others did it first so mineral extraction today doesn't matter).

How many times have you ridiculed people who used the argument "Bush did it first so Obama doing it doesn't matter"

FFS be consistent.




Sanity -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 10:13:31 AM)


Follow the thread back, my argument is that the mere act of drilling for oil does not "destroy the environment forever" as you claimed. My argument has been that we need affordable energy and that environmental concerns arent casually disregarded as you would like us to believe.

From the Wall Street Journal this morning:

quote:

Exxon said ongoing air-quality tests haven't detected any danger to public health. No reports of damage to water quality in municipal water systems have been received, according to the company. There are no indications that oil is still leaking out of the line, Mr. Pruessing said.


The leak stemmed from a 12-inch Silvertip crude-oil pipeline that runs from Silver Tip, Mont., to Billings, and usually moves about 40,000 barrels of oil a day. The incident comes amid heightened concerns about pipeline safety stemming from natural-gas pipeline explosions across the U.S., and from a major spill in July 2010, in which 20,000 barrels of oil escaped from an Enbridge Energy Partnersp LP pipeline in Michigan. The cause of the spill remains a mystery.


Exxon said its pipeline met "all regulatory requirements" and was inspected in December. The U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration audited the pipeline's integrity management program in June, Exxon added.


In May, Exxon briefly shut down the pipeline, which is buried under the Yellowstone riverbed, because it was concerned about heavy rains occurring at the time, Mr. Pruessing said. In 2009, the company had run a "smart pig"--a cylinder-like robot that travels through the length of a pipeline looking for indications of weakness—and found no issues, Mr. Pruessing said. "This is a very unusual event."


On Saturday, an official with the state said that while no reason for the spill has been found, floods affecting the region could have played a part in the incident.


Exxon is bringing crews from across the country for the cleanup effort. "We will stay with the cleanup until it is complete, and we sincerely apologize to the people of Montana for any inconvenience the incident is creating," Mr. Pruessing said in a statement.


The Silvertip crude-oil pipeline originates in the Wyoming-Montana border and delivers oil to Exxon's 60,000 barrel-a-day Billings refinery, which sits adjacent to the Yellowstone River.


The facility processes crude oil from Wyoming and Alberta, Canada, into gasoline and ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel, according to Exxon's website.


In other words everything that can be done (while still maintaining the flow of affordable fuel) was done to prevent this, the company had acted in a very responsible manner, and no costs are being spared in the cleanup effort.

Leftist environmental extremist policies would cause people to starve by the millions, quite literally. They would throw the entire worlds economy into chaos...

This is the kind of thread that makes me laugh whenever some ignorant poster tries to claim that the left is not against affordable energy, especially carbon fuels recovery








Sanity -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 10:17:35 AM)


No, the argument I am making escapes you...

ken is trying to say that the world is pristine and that a single drop of oil in the Yellowstone river (or whatever) destroys it forever.

I am simply calling ken on his bullshit, pointing out how his logic lacks any kind of gravitas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


You dont understand that farming and ranching and property development, and even airborne pollution from California and Washington State, and even places like Japan and China etc has affected the Yellowstone river previously?

You dont realize that trappers and miners from days long past had some serious impact?

By your standards (for lack of a better term) there is no "environment" remaining, for it has all been destroyed already.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

It may return to some semblance of what it should be, in several thousand years maybe, or it may be that it will never return to the original state.



It's interesting, sanity, sanity that you use this argument (others did it first so mineral extraction today doesn't matter).

How many times have you ridiculed people who used the argument "Bush did it first so Obama doing it doesn't matter"

FFS be consistent.




mnottertail -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 10:28:50 AM)

Please, everyone.  When you go to fill up your tank, ask for oil from the Bakken fields.





Hillwilliam -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 10:33:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


No, the argument I am making escapes you...

ken is trying to say that the world is pristine and that a single drop of oil in the Yellowstone river (or whatever) destroys it forever.

I am simply calling ken on his bullshit, pointing out how his logic lacks any kind of gravitas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam



It's interesting, sanity, sanity that you use this argument (others did it first so mineral extraction today doesn't matter).

How many times have you ridiculed people who used the argument "Bush did it first so Obama doing it doesn't matter"

FFS be consistent.



Sorry if I was too subtle for you.

"If you ridicule a certain logic structure, you should not use it youself."

There.




DomKen -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 1:47:10 PM)

So Exxon's PR department pats Sanity on the head and told him it will be all right and he believes them. I presented a well researched journal article showing that the LA etlands have been nearly destroyed by drilling without any major accidents and he handwaves away the facts.

Hypocrisy of this sort is almost funny.




Sanity -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 3:11:41 PM)


You presented a college paper so one sided and biased as to render it and your pathetic line of reason completely laughable.

Really, the petroleum industry single handedly drained or polluted the wetlands... development for farming and home building and other industry etc had nothing to do with it, oil companies "destroyed" them all.

You are myopic, energy baaaad

Let grandma freeze in winter or die of heat stroke in summer.. let the world poor starve because of ever increasing cost of bringing food to market... you will never address those aspects of environmental extremist (Obama) policy, you just keep repeating your lies and exaggerations and falling back on your bullshit sources

And again, something else you continue to ignore, the discussion is about the here and now, not ancient history, not the 1600s 1700s 1800s 1900s when the wetlands were seen as a wasteland




DomKen -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 8:08:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


You presented a college paper so one sided and biased as to render it and your pathetic line of reason completely laughable.

Really, the petroleum industry single handedly drained or polluted the wetlands... development for farming and home building and other industry etc had nothing to do with it, oil companies "destroyed" them all.

So you didn't actually read the journal article at all. The loss of the 4000 km^2 of wetlands was due to subsidence which was caused by pumping the oil out. There is no other reason.




Sanity -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/4/2011 9:15:52 PM)


I didnt have to read all of it to see how biased it is.

Where is the reporting of the good that came from pumping that oil? There was a lot of good that came from it. For example, some wetlands had to have been created if so much ground sank as you claim... and that environment that did sink wasnt "destroyed"  as you claim, it simply changed. Cant you understand that the "environment" is still there?  That it wasnt "destroyed forever" at all?

How much food was raised and transported, how many families were supported from the jobs the petroleum industry created over all the years? What about all the tax revenues generated and regenerated? All that energy production fueled a generation. All the grants the petroleum industry has handed out to all the various causes?





Hillwilliam -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 5:20:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


I didnt have to read all of it to see how biased it is.




That pretty much says it all right there.




Sanity -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 6:25:23 AM)


You think a biased college paper is somehow relevant to the conversation?

If so, why?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


I didnt have to read all of it to see how biased it is.




That pretty much says it all right there.




Hillwilliam -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 6:29:49 AM)

Once again, sanity, you totally missed the point of My post.

You said "I don't have to read all of it to know how biased it is".

That is the problem with people on the right AND the left.  They DONT read the articles.  They DONT look at the data.  They DONT think for themselves.  They just sit around with their eyes stuck to the square box in the living room or talk radio blaring in their ears and do, think and say whatever their favorite pundit tells them to.


Buncha fuckin puppets.

ETA.  You admit you didn't read it all.  How do you know it's biased? [:D]




Sanity -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 6:56:12 AM)


Again, I read the article, skimmed through it enough to understand that it is a hack job.

Do you routinely eat feces offered up as caviar, Hill? That paper is bogus. Wallow in it to your hearts content, but you are crazy to insist everyone else do the same.






DomKen -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 6:56:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


I didnt have to read all of it to see how biased it is.

I see. You have some sort of mystical ability to detect bias. Or more likely you think dismissing a study by highly credentialed scientists as "biased" is your only option for defending your absurd position. I recomend you go back to ad hominen as you are at least sort of competent at that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity
How much food was raised and transported, how many families were supported from the jobs the petroleum industry created over all the years? What about all the tax revenues generated and regenerated? All that energy production fueled a generation. All the grants the petroleum industry has handed out to all the various causes?


This paper was on the "Impacts of Energy Development" on the wetlands of the Mississippi delta. Why should it mention anything not on topic?




Sanity -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 7:00:47 AM)


That kind of blatant bias doesnt require magic nor genius nor psychic ability to detect, just one pair of open eyes and a sound questioning mind. Your paper is clearly a fraud ken, just deal with the fact.

Present honest sources and you wont have to deal with this kind of embarrassment, its as easy as that

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I see. You have some sort of mystical ability to detect bias. Or more likely you think dismissing a study by highly credentialed scientists as "biased" is your only option for defending your absurd position. I recomend you go back to ad hominen as you are at least sort of competent at that.




DomKen -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 7:05:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


That kind of blatant bias doesnt require magic nor genius nor psychic ability to detect, just one pair of open eyes and a sound questioning mind. Your paper is clearly a fraud ken, just deal with the fact.

Clearly a fraud? Did you follow all the references to verify they all didn't say what the paper reported? Are you saying the wetlands didn't disappear?




Hillwilliam -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 7:18:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Again, I read the article, skimmed through it enough to understand that it is a hack job.

Do you routinely eat feces offered up as caviar, Hill? That paper is bogus. Wallow in it to your hearts content, but you are crazy to insist everyone else do the same.





"I didn't read all of it"

"I read the article"

"I skimmed it enough"

As these three of your statements are mutually exclusive, at least 2 must be lies.

Which 2 are lies sanity?

Or, is it all 3?

I am not supporting the article in My last posts.  Once again, you are half-ass glancing at something and assuming you know wtf it is about.





Sanity -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 8:19:26 AM)


Ive been very patient with you and what Ive written throughout the thread is clear enough.

If you and Hill are really unable to understand then you have my sympathy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Clearly a fraud? Did you follow all the references to verify they all didn't say what the paper reported? Are you saying the wetlands didn't disappear?





mnottertail -> RE: 60 Million gallons of gas to be released (7/5/2011 8:24:29 AM)

Understanding what you said is one thing.  The veracity of those claims is quite another.  You lack credible evidence for any of it.




Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625