[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PO_TimeCr0ss', 'R')ight. I am fully aware of the timescale invloved, and that's an excellent point to bring up. Although I feel that the effects of PO will begin to take hold in my lifetime (I'm 24), it is the thought of what my future children will have to endure in the post-peak world that amplifies my fears.

EDIT: Thanks for the warm welcome.

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dark-suzie', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MattSavinar', 'I')t's not your fault.

I mean with the war in Iraq going so well, peace breaking out all over the Middle East and Africa, international cooperation at an all time high, the US economy on stable footing, freedom spreading throughout China and Russia, competent leadership at the healm of the world's superpower, who would have thought that something really bad was brewing in the background?

Matt

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Nano', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'P')O Time cross--I think it's always wise to ignore people who advise you who to ignore. You should be able to make up your own mind.

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'P')O Time cross--I think it's always wise to ignore people who advise you who to ignore. You should be able to make up your own mind. Also be wary of people suggesting you not use certain terms, as "it makes us look bad". They're under the delusional impression that they own the Peak Oil theory and they're planning to take it public. Ooooh....I wonder what the Securities and Exchange Comission will think. Ooooh.

Just go along with them or they might get violent, no angry, no...that's not right either. That's too extreme. They might get--slightly annoyed.

[Nano]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PhilBiker', 'H')ee hee. What a presumptions and self-important post. Of course you are smarter and more evolved than the "sheep" and "lemmings" all around you. Give me a break!

Sooner or later when you delve into this thing you come to the realization that you're not really special and you're just as doomed as everyone else.

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') just ordered "The Party's Over." It seems to be a good book.

[Leanan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '3')% decline per year is disastorous for a monetary system that needs a 3% increase each year.

[notacornucopian]

PhilBiker, I have noticed that your posts reflect an unwillingness to accept viewpoints that do not mesh with what you believe. Heinberg's " The Party's Over " is the book I recommend to newbies simply because it is not fraught with doom and gloom. Rather, Heinberg uses plain language to describe a complex problem. Virtually no hyperbole, and reasonable suggestions on how to simplify your life. If it doesn't suit you, that is fine. However, what is the point in calling Heinberg a " wacko " unless you are trying to prevent someone from reading the book ?
You seem to be very concerned with credibility. Why destroy your own credibility by describing someone else's work in such black and white terms ?

[max_power29]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Leanan', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '3')% decline per year is disastorous for a monetary system that needs a 3% increase each year.

[threadbear]

Phil, If I'd told you ten or twenty years ago that I thought a right wing group backed by big oil AND religious fundamentalists would somehow weasel themselves into power in the US, you'd have called me a conspiracy theorist. Now you're yanging on about nut job anti-abortionists and Shiavo pro-life at any costers, being the same as conspiracy theorists. Who's the nutjob?

Give a thought as to why the Schiavo story is even dominating the news and you can see the strong hand of corporations pandering to the religious right. Is this a conspiracy? Not in the traditional sense. Does it look like one and work partly by stealth? You're damned right it does. And it's dead easy when you had the US completely distracted for the last 40 by the cold war commie hunt. When the cold war ceased the hysteria about communism shifted to the domestic front with a war on "liberals". A fertile breeding ground for the rise of fascism, in an academic atmosphere seeded with the idea that conspiracies don't exist or can't succeed due to the wearing action of random occurence.

Put another way, Lewis and Clarke conspired to set out on a journey to the west coast. They changed course many times and were at the mercy of uncharted terrain and plenty of random events. Several contingency plans were adopted to deal with various knowable scenarios that might have cropped up. Against all odds, they did end up on the West Coast. It worked. Did they develop Plan A, follow it through step by step, until they arrived at the coast? Hardly, they probably changed their basic plan thousands of times to account for unplanned events, and unknown terrain, but their "conspiracy" worked. They got there.

To use another analogy.The Donner party--They had the same goal, didn't see their plan through to fruition and ended up eating each other. Their conspiracy didn't work.

People who think conspiracies can't work, see conspiring groups as Donner parties embarking on missions that are doomed to failure. This is often the case, but I'd argue that the conspiracies that survive, eventually dominate to the point that their domains become the very air we breathe. They form the "that's just the way things are". They are the mainstream.



Conspiracy? Complicity of shared interests? You be the judge, but please refrain from castigating those who see more designed organization behind these events, than you are able or willing to see. Perhaps you are using honest rationalization and have simply arrived at a different conclusion. That's fair. I urge you to be fair to others who share different opinions but have arrived at different opinions.


I hate to be insulting, but it seems that people who surf sites like these, with the tone of intellectual superiority, gatekeeping alternative opinion are the biggest part of the problem. The attitudes expressed in your posts have been the ruination of the nominal left in your country.

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')hilBiker, I have noticed that your posts reflect an unwillingness to accept viewpoints that do not mesh with what you believe.

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')hil, If I'd told you ten or twenty years ago that I thought a right wing group backed by big oil AND religious fundamentalists would somehow weasel themselves into power in the US, you'd have called me a conspiracy theorist.

[Grimnir]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', 'I') tend not to disagree with first-hand witnesses, Grimmir.

[notacornucopian]

Phil, when I read books like " Crossing the Rubicon ", I always keep reminding myself that this is written by another flawed human being just like me. The author's viewpoint is just that, a viewpoint. All the references and footnotes in the world do not make that author completely right. In Ruppert's case, he does make a lot of references to mainstream articles and government documents ( as opposed to the David Icke / Jeff Rense / Alex Jones style of references which usually involve quoting each other to some extent ). He has at least attempted to be credible. But it doesn't make him the absolute authority. Discounting people like Ruppert just because the ramifications of his viewpoint paint a picture of rampant corruption at the highest levels of goverment and finance is pure denial. If you can explain to me why it is imperative that we totally deny these people the possibilty that there may be truth in their viewpoints, I'll shut up.

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'D')iscounting people like Ruppert just because the ramifications of his viewpoint paint a picture of rampant corruption at the highest levels of goverment and finance is pure denial.

[threadbear]

How is Ruppert a paranoid megalomaniacal nutjob? Supposing it were true, you could argue it takes one to know one. That would actually support his analysis, would it not?

How does being paranoid do anything but serve anyone nowadays? My husband and I benefitted tremendously, in lifestyle and financially by beating the rush and becoming paranoid in the mid 90's.

[threadbear]

By taking one to know one, I mean, of course. Ruppert, if he is a paranoid megalomaniac is in the best position to identify how some in postions of power and influence think and operate.

[PhilBiker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')ow is Ruppert a paranoid megalomaniacal nutjob? Supposing it were true, you could argue it takes one to know one. That would actually support his analysis, would it not?

[notacornucopian]

Phil, so what you are saying is that we shouldn't waste time on " kooks " that do not provide a solid foundation for their beliefs / viewpoints ? If I am not mistaken, this board's main focus is the problem of peak oil and what we can/need to do about it ( options that are shrinking by the week IMO ). Would you agree that part of an individual's credibilty has to do with the acceptance that whether the big rollover happens this year, or many years in the future, peak oil is a problem of paramount importance to mankind ? If we use that as a barometer to estimate whether a person is at least genuinely concerned about his fellow man, then I will put Mike Ruppert way above many other people on the planet. This would include the commander in chief, who has the gall to propose spending a lot of money, time and resources on a hydrogen economy that will never happen. Considering that the public look to their leaders to solve problems, this has far more dangerous implications than whether Mike Ruppert is a " kook " or not. In other words, a person in a position of great power and influence is leading a country towards disaster at full speed, while a " kook " is simply proposing that the system is completely corrupt involving those with great power and influence. Won't you admit that there is at least the possibilty that these two lines converge ?

[PhilBiker]

All that text....... I think Ruppert's a kook. You may not.

If you don't just say "I don't think he's a kook", why do you have to present distractions and straw men and all kinds of reasoning which has little or nothing to do with the guy? Are you trying to defend him? Are you saying that since other people who are supposed to be in positions of authority are bad and irresponsible, somehow that makes a nutjob like Ruppert better? Or that since some of the stuff Ruppert prints is legit that means we should respect it all? I don't agree with either of those positions.

Who cares? The guy's nuts. Do some searching, look into his background as presented by people who AREN'T his disciples. Analyze his behavior patterns, read the way he responds to people who don't lock step with him. Look at contrary views not just his disciples. Take some time, for every one thing you find that quantatively demonstrates his insanity you'll fine a hundred people lining up to agree with him. Somewhere in the depths of google I found some revealing comments from one of the publishers who turned down "Rubicon".

As I said I don't know why he seems to have so much charisma as some kind of "Peak Oil Messiah", they guy's a friggin' kook.