Exxon President Slams Peak Oil Concept

by **eric144** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:02 am

oops, forget it Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=eric144>eric144</A> at: 11/9/05 10:03 pm

by **Dreams End** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:20 am

JD? That mean ole man done just called us slack. I don't like it when they call me slack. Guess you aren't from around here, huh, prac? Here's his website: <a href="http://prac.lindalane.com/">prac.lindalane.com/</a> This website is about how the "Illuminati" (undefined at the moment) are controlling the world through oil. Now, I am no fan of oil companies, and I had hope for at least a LITTLE novelty when he had the Rothschild's working for Rockefeller and not the other way around. The chart in question shows, according to "prac", that the Marshall Plan allowed the big oil companies to extract oil from these countries at greatly reduced rates which, even with transport cost, led to a bonanza that was NOT passed onto consumers. I'd have some specific questions as this data does seem significant, such as, weren't the same folks extracting the oil here in the U.S. so wouldn't it all go in the same pot anyway? And perhaps, I would ask to see specific breakdowns of transport costs to support his assertion that they don't offset extraction savings. Well, heck, I had a lot of such questions. But now I'm discouraged that our buddy may simply be about to spring on us who these nasty Illuminati really are. So let's see. The site is on "lindalane.com" which is the domain of someone who signs his name "Jay D."! Get out of town! A THIRD JD in one day! Unfreakingbelievable! Anyway, Jay D is not the name used to sign the article on prac.lindalane.com. Those are signed, John. And Jay D is part of a web design team (and evidently a good one) who may simply have provided space to John. Don't know who John is. But I know one website he reads. And he sent an email in praise of a particular theory. And sad to say, I'm afraid that the subsequent parts of his shocking story are going in the same direction. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Hi Just distracted myself by going to RMN (rumor mill news) and reading the amazing thread provoked by Anrudil and Alladin's humor. Then Escalmonde's excellent post you drew my attention to. I'm sure E is right, that the Kazzars (sp) are behind everything. BUT they are the vehicles for delivering us ALL into a diabolical system. It could have been anyone else. (well, thanks for that, anyway.) The point to me is how did they do it. Its the METHOD thats the problem. Not who did it. The method was cornering the market, establishing monopoly cartel control over supply and demand. Cornering every market conceivable, Food production (agri-business), Health (Pharma-corps), Energy (the Oil Cos). Need more egs. I could go on. The METHOD has delivered an unstable mechanistic system where we trade a (generally) fixed proportion of the time of our lives to working to make money. The time money trade off is uneven, the money being negotiable but the time not. So we are transformed from being souls (with all that the term soul means) into worker/ consumers mediated totally by what Sigmond Froide (SP?) described as the excrement at the end of the productive process, money. This is/was/has/been the method, a method that has been enabled by the parasitic exploitation/ despoilation/surplanting of everything organic, and by nature outside the Money equation, unco-opted and pure. Please, please. It is very urgent for relations at RMN that Bush be seen as renograde F1. Please follow up on my suggestion in my last note to you. Attributing blame may well be historically correct but it doesn't matter who did it. Its what was done, and how they did it, do it, that's important. Back to work. JohnP _________________________________ What's done in this world is what's paid for... and who's had the money? go to <a href="http://prac.lindalane.com">prac.lindalane.com</a> ___________________________<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?noframes;read=56038">www.rumormillnews.com/cgi...read=56038</a> Here's the thread that he was referring to: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>My Brother, Aladdin, My Sister, Rayelan, I love you both! YES! We have got to stop fighting each other. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to realize that Fighting is NOT the way to get anything done on any long term basis. All we have to do is look at history to see that. AND MAKE NO MISTAKE: THE KHAZARS have been hiding like sheep in wolves clothing in every belief system on the planet INCLUDING CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM AND JUDAISM, WHICH THEY (NWO) ARE USING VERY DEFTLY ON THIS CONTINENT EVEN AS WE SPEAK! And they've done so in order to cause chaos and hatred to proliferate. <hr></blockquote> So I don't expect to see much new on this site. Maybe a little more nuance on exactly which group replaced the "real Jews" with the "luciferians" of today masquerading as Jews (this, somehow, is seen as a defense against charges of anti-Semitism.) So anyway John, sorry I'm so slack. Can't wait to find out who the Illuminati really are!

by **wintler** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:08 am

Careful there JD, such cold rigor will get you in trouble here. Wheres your triple-veiled allusions to 'dark actors' and the obligatory rockerfeller quote? <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin"> Incidentally, the "oil co's" (presume Prac means publicly listed multinational companies) apparently hold less than 10% of actual oil reserves ( <a href="http://www.rice.edu/energy/research/nationaloil/">www.rice.edu/energy/resea...tionaloil/</a> source should make many cringe but widely agreed figure), so the assertion that they control the market (let alone "just about every aspect of our received Reality"!!) is .. funny. The rest is held by national governments or their institutions, who of course may also conspire, but that they so rarely get a mention indicates the ignorance of 'its an oil co plot' debunkers. To befuddle the reflexively opposed & 'its an oil co plot' sets, please consider: Running on empty at Rimini (where C.Campbells championing of the v.just Rimini Protocol saw him sidelined) <a href="http://www.energybulletin.net/10571.html">www.energybulletin.net/10571.html</a> Ford Exec: Oil Production is Peaking (if "all execs lie", and Exxon exec says opposite, then...?!?) <a href="http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/10/ford_exec_oil_p.html#more">www.greencarcongress.com/....html#more</a> Neocons Driving Priuses (where neocons prove they're more open minded in at least some ways than many 'progressives') <a href="http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/28011/">www.alternet.org/envirohealth/28011/</a> (funny photo too) Wordspeak: the 1998 paper you linked, by MIT economist Mike Lynch, criticises some of C.Campbells methods and repeatedly implies prices will stay low or go lower. Mr Lynchs credibility can be judged against his record, which is pretty awful - he has been predicting prices would fall for years now, but they've been rising <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum</a> ( see oil price chart 2/3 way down ). Lynch doesn't really challenge Hubbert theory in general, just how much is left exactly and what the global production curve might look like. The current 'Official' USGS 2000 guesstimate of how much is left (which Lynch, & most economists & govts use) is a joke - it relies on OPEC reserve numbers that were patently jigged in the 1980's, and on a surreal statistical slight of hand: "if theres a 5% probability of original world oil reserves being >4trillions barrels, & a 95% probability of <2trillion barrels, we must have 3 n'a bit trillion barrels" - pure Enron accounting, substantiallly higher than pre-Bush-appointee USGS estimates, and not even nearly matched by oil discoveries since then. The facts make the official position ridiculous, but don't expect anyone to notice (that would be bad for the economy). Guy named Kurt Cobb writes a blog that did (i think) a fair wrap on the disagreements of cornucopians & peakers <a href="http://resourceinsights.blogspot.com/2005/08/oil-supplies-and-infallible-goddess-of.html">resourceinsights.blogspot...ss-of.html</a> but don't want anyone to get the idea that its mob A vs. mob B - there are a range of views etc.

by **podunkoiler** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:23 am

95% probability of <2trillion barrels iffin you were so inclined to track down the data that props up that 95% confidence nummer, you would find that it only adds up to 1.700 trillion barrels... so where did the other other 300 come from? time for some riggur? unhuh....

by **Dreams End** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:23 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>In a rational world, Peak Oil Skeptics would say ï¿½Hmmm ï¿½ wait the President of Exxon is saying the same thing as me! So either Iï¿½m right and in that case he ainï¿½t a bad guy as heï¿½s saying the same thing as me; or Iï¿½m being delusional for being a Peak Oil Skeptic. Orï¿½.. as the President of Chevron is saying something different maybe nobody really knows the answer and we are in the midst of a changing paradigm!ï¿½<hr></blockquote> Back to the real argument. Leaving the Khazars aside for a moment. A skeptic might say that you quoting one oil exec to prove a point either way makes no sense. Anyway, I responded to that. Peak oilers want to have it both ways. It's being hush hushed by the oil execs, but then when we point out Chevron and all the mainstream reports coming out, they want to point to THIS evidence to support their case as well. You're a petroleum engineer, so you know a lot of things I don't. But I do know that Enron happened. Artificial scarcity was deliberately and cruelly created to boost profits. So I don't think it's ridiculous to suspect same COULD be happening with oil. My Heinberg investigation makes me wonder if maybe there's some other motive. But in any event, when you have people telling you that catastrophe is on the horizon (you, like the other JD on peakoildebunked, have the position that we'll be able to pull through, so this doesn't apply to you) who are also advocating population reduction, for example, or publishing blurbs on their books from open white separatists, you tend to distrust this information. Then you get the ASPO newsletter containing an article that advocates...well, genocide really (See ASPO's plan for population reduction in the energy issues archive) then you start to distrust the sources even more. Now, I don't get geological reports from private oil companies on MY desk every week, and even if I did, why would they tell me the truth? Interestingly, one part of the whole Peak Oil plan is the so-called "depletion protocol" which not only limits oil imports but also demands open books in relation to oil reserve estimates. It even demands this open reporting, coerced if necessary, from NATIONALIZED oil companies, such as Venezuela. And who is one of the main proponents of this plan? Matthew Simmons. And what does HE do for a living? Manage over 50 billion dollars in energy industry investments. So fuck yeah, he wants access to their books. So here's yet ANOTHER source I don't trust. So you see, I may not buy Peak Oil, but I'm not stupid. I DO have reasons for my suspicions. You can check out the other threads in the energy issues archives to see more detail. By the way, you should really find a way to post comments on peakoildebunked. JD will get a kick out of another JD who shares his views exactly on Peak Oil.

by **podunkoiler** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:32 am

" I don't think it's ridiculous to suspect same COULD be happening with oil." if enron could not pull off a single company manipulation of one market in one year without getting caught, what probability could you possiblly assign to the global oil market over multiple years?

by **Dreams End** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:36 am

They are doing it right now, with Katrina gouging. Let's see how long that lasts. Sure there are congressional hearings, but that won't amount to much, I'm sure. Plus, I heard a rumor that a lot of our politicians made their fortunes in the oil bidness. Just a rumor though. The fact that they haven't been busted doesn't prove they aren't doing it...but I'm aware it doesn't prove the ARE, either. I just said that the suspicion was not unreasonable. I also think there are other motivations behind the peak oil gloom and doom crowd. Many of the "world is ending/die-off is coming" themes were around long before peak oil. The idea was general resource depletion. Tragedy of the commons...goes all the way back to Malthus. Promoted by Garrett Hardin who is funded by the eugenics pioneer fund, but you really should go read those threads, 'cause this is mighty repetitious.

by **wordspeak** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:40 am

Wintler, I see one erroneous prediction on Lynch's part. Perhaps he's wrongly predicted price fallings before. I don't know that he's perfect, but his logic refuting Campbell read as strong to me. And it seems like ppb is a figure that can be rigged. And has not Campbell been predicting a Peak Oil for decades now?

by **JJDD** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:34 am

Hi JD and everybody, This is JD from peakoildebunked. Thought I'd pop in and say Hi to the other JD. A couple of things I would like to clear up. Yes, I do strongly support nuclear power, but only as a bridge technology. I believe the ultimate goal of the post fossil fuel era should be 100% clean space solar power (SPS). SPS can be done with current technologies, and shouldn't be blown off until you have carefully read the material. All the glib objections you might thing of have been dealt with in nauseating detail by the engineers. See: <a href="http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2005/09/104-more-on-lunar-solar-power-lsp-and.html">peakoildebunked.blogspot....p-and.html</a> <a href="http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2005/08/33-lunar-solar-power-lsp.html">peakoildebunked.blogspot....r-lsp.html</a> <a href="http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2005/08/51-space-mirrors.html">peakoildebunked.blogspot....rrors.html</a> <a href="http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2005/08/5-beam-it-down-how-new-satellites-can.html">peakoildebunked.blogspot....s-can.html</a> Also, JD writes: "I'm LMAO at the "alternative thinking" folks who believe that the concept of Peak Oil is a scam put out by big oil to push up energy prices. In fact, such "alternative thinking" Peak Oil critics are parroting the same line as the President of Exxon. Sorry folks but on this topic the true challenger to mainstream thinking are the Peak Oil supporters." Peak oil is a hall of mirrors, and it's really hard to say who is on which side (and I say that from experience, having argued relentlessly with peak oil supporters for over a year). For example, there are staunch peak oil supporters who think driving as much as possible is the best approach, because that will bring on the crash sooner. That's a pro-Exxon position. Others think conservation is futile, so you might as well drive as much as you want. That's also pro-Exxon. Many others think conservation isn't realistic for the U.S., so they're parroting the line of Dick Cheney. So I really wouldn't say uniformly that "peak oil supporters" are challengers to mainstream thinking.

by **Prac** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:12 am

DE Ad hominem attacks always work. You're not interested in anything but the sound of your own voice. So keep shouting, you idiot. What's going down will go down. Great sleuthing by the way... but no substitute for thought. As my closure from the debate... every oil price spike since the late 1940's has been followed by recession in the US. I wonder why?

by **eric144** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:13 am

I think having the debate at all is as dumb as Mike Ruppert and my only contribution is ad hominem sarcasm.

by **Dreams End** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:44 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>every oil price spike since the late 1940's has been followed by recession in the US.<hr></blockquote> Why is that even mysterious? And next time, just say what your little charts mean and that will save me some time. And it's NOT AN AD HOMINEM. I said nothing about you personally. What I did was expose your POSITION on this. Your point of view, which is that...well, we know what it is now. Sort of. How is that an ad hominem. And now we have a JJDD. To go with our JD. Very confusing. However, now that JJDD posts, I think I remember you posted previously under that name here. JJDD, here's an interesting question I don't even know how to research. Of the big oil companies, how many are also involved in any great extent in the nuclear industry? I know nothing of that industry. Is there no crossover? Lots? For example, I see the Chevron site pushing nuclear. Are they involved in the nuclear industry? I hope you are right about the solar space energy. I've always assumed that if in the 70's we'd focused on solar with anything approaching the level of research we should have, this debate would never have happened. I guess since you can't block the sun when someone doesn't pay it's not a real popular moneymaker. Go here for an interesting look at Heinberg: <a href="http://dreamsend.blogspot.com">dreamsend.blogspot.com</a> It goes beyond the abernathy stuff.

by JD » Thu Nov 10, 2005 3:18 pm

Hey JJDD. Saw your site last night and am very impressed. Didn't work through the whole site but overall thought well thought out and presented. I too am a Peak Oiler But Not A Doomer. I'll acronym this to POBNAD. (My goodness - people will think I'm an intelligence agency plant for sure now! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smokin.gif ALT=":smokin"> ) Dreams End this is indeed too bizarre - three JD's in one day! Hmmmm just raised the synchronicity bar I'd say! I didn't know you blogged and look forward to picking through your site. Your research on Prac was pretty cool to pull together so quick. I see from his site he's been working on his "oiluminati" theory for 30 years so I guess us "slackers" are the underdogs eh? JJDD wrt the "Hall of Mirrors" statement. This is an excellent observation. I think what we are seeing is society being confronted with a major new challenge and frankly not knowing what to do about it. This makes for all kinds of openings to people that'd like to change the status quo. For example the "end-timers" who used to preach the world was coming to and end via nuclear winter now have a new perch from which to chirp about impending doom. Overall I'm glad I got hooked into this as I hadn't really twigged on to the huge variation in responses to Peak Oil. I thought it was fairly obvious that conservation should be implemented in a big way; followed by installation of alternative energy sources. Personally I was looking forward to a big energy price spike with which to increase my personal wealth in a rather dramatic way, and have been positioning myself for this for years now. Awesome, the plan is working so far <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/happy.gif ALT=":D"> But before I can ride off in the sunset, I’m now seeing a large variety of unexpected responses are out there, some of which threaten my comfortable existence. These unexpected responses may simply be a sign of flux; society hasn't really made up its mind as to what peak oil means. Pure speculation, but it may also be a sign of "control of all sides of the debate". Just as the same team cheered on the left and right over a century and conducted world politics like a reality TV game show to determine which philosophy to dominate the NWO, perhaps the same team is cheering on the cornucopian and the doomsters as it is not clear to the PTB which way things will transpire? What I find even more disturbing than the chirping of doom and gloomers (which I’ll call DAGs) is the LACK OF ACTION by governments. For example, I think the USA has a serious strategic issue on their hands in the form of a lack of energy security. Surely any rational approach to this problem would focus on conservation first. With the exception of some neo con Prius’s parked in Washington, I find the inactivity of conservation measures, in light of obvious strategic need, is truly anomalous. Now the following is a vast leap, but I'm concerned that the total liaises faire attitude towards conservation coupled with the active development of the DAGs philosophy may indeed be a harbinger of measures that will be undertaken to reduce population. It'd only take the release of a few select bio weapons by a few madmen for this to occur. This is all frightening stuff. But let’s accentuate the positive. How can we get the POBNAD story out there? If our leaders won't lead us to positive places, maybe we'll have to do so ourselves? I know Peak Oil has been "done" here before but I think it is too important to not keep alive. It is possibly the defining issue of the near term future. JJDD - what are you doing in Japan? Very cool situation to be in, hope you are enjoying it. Sorry all my writing is rough but I have very little time to compose and end up dumping a stream of consciousness. Hope it is at least marginally intelligible. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":b"> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":b">

Exxon President Slams Peak Oil Concept

Re: Frick the Intuition - Let's Get Rigorous!

Re: Oil and the economics of abundance

now now

'n you know what is really a hoot?

Re: Oil and the economics of abundance

reason to believe (springsteen nebraska dub re-mix)

Re: reason to believe (springsteen nebraska dub re-mix)

Re: 'n you know what is really a hoot?

Peak oil supporters

Re: Oil and the economics of abundance

dumb

Re: dumb

POBNAD vs. the DAGs

Who is online