Like the illusion of Wall Street, with its vast and powerful investment banks, now shuttered, China too is an illusion perpetuated by the Globalists that gave us the 15,000 mile Caesar salad, poisoned cat food and lead based paint on babies' pacifiers. Like the illusion that money would come from thin air to always push housing prices higher, China has spent a generation pursuing its illusion. Pursuing an unattainable dream to be like the West, while 6000 years of its carefully shepherded top soil blows into the sea.
Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:17 pm Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
jbeckton wrote:
steam_cannon wrote:
But societal collapse is pretty equivalent to doom. Losing all your money, food lines, paying people with bottles of vodka or other goods, being forced to grow your own vegetables and frequently dealing with the mob as other authorities walk away or require on the spot payment. If what happened there happens here all the bartering permaculture people will be putting their skills to use
The great depression is also a doomerish scenario, one that you may or may not think could happen again.
But you are very wrong if you think the great depression compares to the Soviet Collapse. Think about it this way, our government didn't fold during the great depression. This alone should illustrate the difference in scale and impact on human life. Go visit the place, talk to a Russian scientist selling broccoli in a market now. Maybe you don't think the life of my family members in the soviet union was bad enough for me to call it doom. But I'm familiar with the history of the great depression and the soviet collapse. And for many reasons they are a bad comparison.
And look, you fired off your answer because you wanted to disprove "what I feel" Armageddon would be. You can't disprove personal definitions or feeling. You're being pointlessly disagreeable and way off topic. Work on that.
Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:00 am Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
steam_cannon wrote:
But you are very wrong if you think the great depression compares to the Soviet Collapse. Think about it this way, our government didn't fold during the great depression.
Tell that to the residents of "Hooverville".
steam_cannon wrote:
Maybe you don't think the life of my family members in the soviet union was bad enough for me to call it doom.
Where did I say it wasn't your definition of doom? I said it wasn't the boards’ consensus of doom. You misstated my position, work on that.
steam_cannon wrote:
But I'm familiar with the history of the great depression and the soviet collapse. And for many reasons they are a bad comparison.
As far as the average Joe in Hooverville was concerned, how so? The conditions you describe:
-Losing all your money (and house)
-Food lines
-Paying people with bottles of vodka or other goods
-Being forced to grow your own vegetables
-Frequently dealing with the mob (or other criminals)
are all pretty much synonymous with the Great Depression you claim to know so much about.
You are far off topic, I made reference to the fact that Russia is an example of a modern nation that has willingly allowed its economy and population to deplete while there is a solution, hence willingly .
You can go on and on about the Russians plight which I acknowledge, but you can't convince me that Russia is the “Armageddon” we hear so much about on PO.com.
Where is the massive die-off?
Where are the zombies?
Where are the resource wars?
Why are the people with bunkers not the only ones left standing? _________________ Those that cannot do..... teach. Those that cannot teach......teach gym.-Jack black
Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:31 am Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
jbeckton wrote:
peripato wrote:
no nation would ever willingly allow its population or economic activity to cease
No?
Perhaps you failed to look into the example I provided before: Russia
Quote:
Russia is facing a demographic crisis so dire that its population could shrink by half within 50 years. The only obvious solution – to encourage youthful immigrants from overpopulated Asian neighbors such as China – is so politically sensitive that Russian leaders refuse to even discuss it. http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0418/p06s02-woeu.html
There you have it, a developed nation with declining population and economic activity, AND and obvious solution that they refuse to accept.
Again, what is your definition of willing?
The definition of willing => doing something voluntarily, as in; "No developed nation has ever voluntarily agreed to end population or economic growth."
Quote:
The crisis and government measures to halt it was a key subject of Vladimir Putin's 2006 state of the nation address.[4]. As a result, a national programme was developed to reverse the trend by 2020. Already a new study published in 2007 shows that, on the whole, the rate of population decrease has slowed: thus, if the net decrease in January-Agust 2006 was 408,200 people, this year in the same period it was 196,600. The death rate accounted for 357,000 of these, which is 137,000 less than in 2006. At the same time in the 2007 period, there were just over 1 million births in Russia (981,600 in the 2006 period), whilst deaths decreased from 1,475,000 to 1,402,300. In all the death:birth ratio dropped from 1.5 to 1.3. Eighteen of the 83 provinces showed a natural growth of population (in 2006: 16). The Russian Ministry of Economic Development hopes that by 2020 the population will stabilize at 138-139 million, and by 2025, to increase again to its present day status of 143-145, raising the life expectancy to 75 years. [5]
So, as mentioned, Russia, as a developed country, will do whatever it can to continue with population growth. Immigration is not the only solution to that problem, although it certainly provides an immediate stimulus. A third child policy and better health facilities (to lower the death rate), fiscal incentives for repatriation (immigration) of Russians from outside the old Soviet Union are other strategies that could be applied, and have been similarly applied by other countries (e.g. Israel, Australia) to boost their populations.
Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 9:46 am Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
peripato wrote:
jbeckton wrote:
Again, what is your definition of willing?
The definition of willing => doing something voluntarily, as in; "No developed nation has ever voluntarily agreed to end population or economic growth."
Quote:
The Russian Ministry of Economic Development hopes that by 2020 the population will stabilize at 138-139 million
So, as mentioned, Russia, as a developed country, will do whatever it can to continue with population growth.
You defined willing as voluntarily allowing the population and economic activity to decline.
News flash, while Russia can hope their population stabilizes by 2020 (That’s another 12 years of voluntarily DECLINE by the way!); it could immediately address this issue with immigration reform.
Please explain how waiting 12 years for "hope" to pay off is not voluntarily decline for 12 years while an immediate solution remains at the door step.
You can't because Russia is VOLINTERILY allowing their population and economic activity to decline.
So much for:
peripato wrote:
No developed nation has ever voluntarily agreed to end population or economic growth.
_________________ Those that cannot do..... teach. Those that cannot teach......teach gym.-Jack black
Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:56 pm Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
jbeckton wrote:
peripato wrote:
jbeckton wrote:
Again, what is your definition of willing?
The definition of willing => doing something voluntarily, as in; "No developed nation has ever voluntarily agreed to end population or economic growth."
Quote:
The Russian Ministry of Economic Development hopes that by 2020 the population will stabilize at 138-139 million
So, as mentioned, Russia, as a developed country, will do whatever it can to continue with population growth.
You defined willing as voluntarily allowing the population and economic activity to decline.
News flash, while Russia can hope their population stabilizes by 2020 (That’s another 12 years of voluntarily DECLINE by the way!); it could immediately address this issue with immigration reform.
Please explain how waiting 12 years for "hope" to pay off is not voluntarily decline for 12 years while an immediate solution remains at the door step.
You can't because Russia is VOLINTERILY allowing their population and economic activity to decline.
So much for:
peripato wrote:
No developed nation has ever voluntarily agreed to end population or economic growth.
True, immigration is not being considered at the moment. However the Russian authorities are not prepared to tolerate a slide indefinitely, are they? Which is why they are discussing other measures to prevent it. These things will take time to turn around then, especially in a country that went through the turmoil that Russia did during the 1990's, but the upwards path will resume, if it can, as it did after the revolutionary purges and WWII. Mark my words even formal immigration will be considered someday, so long as it's within the government's power to enact it, if the alternative means possible Russian territorial and economic disintegration.
Joined: Jun 26, 2004 Posts: 1191 Location: Madison,Wisconsin
Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:44 pm Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
Ok, seriously guys, cut it.
I haven't seen more than shouting over each over for pages now. Please don't make me break out the editing tools, because frankly, I don't have the time tonight, and I'd actually like to post something of substance rather than just name calling.
Pstar, if this was the hall of flames, you could name call away. It's not. Can it. Post all you want, but save the bitch and punk fest for HOF.
Oilfinder and jbeck, my criticism of you guys is less serious but no less moderatable. You guys go off topic like no one's business. A bit provoked, but still.
Now, my post.
Quote:
If the Green Revolution had not arrived, millions of people would have starved.
Incorrect. If animals(including humans) do not have a food supply, they do not reproduce. They simply do not do it. Hence, the population supply would have stayed steady. A suggested book is "the story of B" by Daniel Quinn. The arguments are compelling and easy to understand.
I wish the green revolution had not happened not because it means millions would have starved, but because it means that millions more people than this earth can support easily where produced. I can't think of anyone who doesn't agree that this many people stresses the life systems that keep humans alive and well.
Gotta go, wife wants a word. _________________ Azreal60
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:50 pm Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
peripato wrote:
True, immigration is not being considered at the moment. However the Russian authorities are not prepared to tolerate a slide indefinitely, are they? Which is why they are discussing other measures to prevent it. These things will take time to turn around then, especially in a country that went through the turmoil that Russia did during the 1990's, but the upwards path will resume, if it can, as it did after the revolutionary purges and WWII. Mark my words even formal immigration will be considered someday, so long as it's within the government's power to enact it, if the alternative means possible Russian territorial and economic disintegration.
Russian situation with population decline is not as serious or intractable as one might perceive it.
All what they need for population to stabilize and start growing again are abortion bans/restrictions.
More babies are now aborted in Russia then born.
So it is easy to deal with that problem and offically permitted immigration is not necessary.
And if contraception bans or restrictions are also implemmented they will have a real baby boom very soon.
With current Russian setup such policy is easy to implemment there.
It is enough for Mr Putin to declare that women must have more children... and they will.
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:53 pm Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
All what they need for population to stabilize and start growing again are abortion bans/restrictions.
That's an interesting opinion and I disagree with it.
I love Eastern Europe, but my experience in Ukraine (and what I know about Russia) was that having children was very expensive, so much so that parents were often looked on as heroes. The thing is if a family can't afford a child and they don't have an abortion, if they have family to move in with they move in with them (two room apartments with 5 or more people sucks pretty bad...) If they don't have someone to move in with they simply live much shorter lives seeking shelter in sewer pipes or live homeless in outlying forest. Honestly, most Americans don't have to make choices like that so I'm sure it's hard to understand.
When already 60% of a person's income goes to food and food prices are doubling, what can people do? Russia already has a big problem with homeless children. And very simply banning abortions doesn't mean these children will have homes. A nearby example Ukraine, Russia's breadbasket. Their climate is changing stressing farms, meanwhile demand is up and food prices are rising, production problems and international competition for natural gas is limiting industry. And what effect does this all have? Population grows in response to resources. Ultimately if the resources aren't there the people won't be, one way or another. By abortion or by dying of pneumonia in a sewer.
Children enjoying free geothermal heating provided by the wealthy Russian government.
I've met homeless children. I've had them chase our rowboat trying to steal "anything" off it. I've been challenged by groups on the street and though none caused me "too much" trouble, my wife has been injured and accosted a number of times. If these children are lucky and some space opens up in an orphanage, maybe they will end up in one. But it's hardly a solution for families.
Putin simply ordering women pregnant would mean more homeless children with knives on the streets. That's not something that I would like to see or something that most Russians would like either. And as a side note, politically most European women would resent being ordered to be pregnant and revolution has happened in CIS countries over lesser things.
How many are homeless? Russia has a population around 141 million and 4 million homeless children. 141 / 4 = 35.25, so about 1 out of 35 people in Russia is a homeless child. Think about that and about where you think Russia is going to stuff more children. Maybe they could dig deeper sewers? Maybe Putin could do things the African way, promise a mud hut for every family? I suspect that might not go over very well.
Quote:
There are more than 4 million Russian orphans and homeless children. Most of them live on the streets or in underground sewers... http://www.russianorphan.org/
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 3:31 am Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
steam_cannon wrote:
I love Eastern Europe, but my experience in Ukraine (and what I know about Russia) was that having children was very expensive, so much so that parents were often looked on as heroes.
Incidentally I live in Poland.
Quote:
The thing is if a family can't afford a child and they don't have an abortion, if they have family to move in with they move in with them (two room apartments with 5 or more people sucks pretty bad...)
I think, you are confusing Russian reality with western standards.
It is normal in Russia (and until 1960-ties was also normal on the West) that parents were living with children under one roof.
Once they died children with their families were staying in etc.
Only some proportion of offspring had to look for new housing.
Those who have failed to secure it were usually dying young and childless...
Such situation was sustainable in entire past history of humanity and there is no reason, why should it fail now.
However I must admit that it is very uncomfortable, unless your property is reasonably large and preferably in countryside.
Quote:
If they don't have someone to move in with they simply live much shorter lives seeking shelter in sewer pipes or live homeless in outlying forest. Honestly, most Americans don't have to make choices like that so I'm sure it's hard to understand.
Not being an American I can understand it, believe me.
Quote:
Russia already has a big problem with homeless children.
This is intractable Russian problem, also present at the beginning of XX century.
Do you understand word bezprizornyj?
(I do not have access to Russian keyboard, BTW)
Being Ukrainian perhaps you should.
Quote:
And very simply banning abortions doesn't mean these children will have homes.
They will, as long as their parents do not throw them out.
Quote:
And what effect does this all have? Population grows in response to resources. Ultimately if the resources aren't there the people won't be, one way or another. By abortion or by dying of pneumonia in a sewer.
If it is correct that land cannot support 145 millions of Russians then you are right.
Dieoff will proceed.
But in this situation any immigrants have no chance to survive there either, so peripato's argument is flawed.
Quote:
Putin simply ordering women pregnant would mean more homeless children with knives on the streets. That's not something that I would like to see or something that most Russians would like either.
That could be tried in more intelligent fashion.
If you have somewhere to live, you don't have right for abortion.
I am writing that because I am aware that first steps to force women pregnant are already taken in Russia.
Current approaches are voluntary schemes based on ideas that it is patriotic to get pregnant, but who knows what they will try in the future?
Quote:
And as a side note, politically most European women would resent being ordered to be pregnant and revolution has happened in CIS countries over lesser things.
In the world of declining economy, which we are entering right now, revolutions will have no prospect of success.
They will only accelerate decay of society but achieve nothing, eg rulers may change but collapse will continue.
Quote:
Maybe Putin could do things the African way, promise a mud hut for every family?
I suspect that might not go over very well.
I think that most of Russians outside of Moscow and few other cities are already living in properties comparable to mud huts.
I doubt, they would complain, if there is a project to build more of these.
Have you watch BBC document "Day of Bread" about 6 years ago?
It looked like Russian countryside about 60 miles from St. Petersburg have fallen into 200 years time loop.
Ultimate Powerdown... and something what is also in store for US...
It will be a great fun to watch progress of coming conversion...
Links that would fit on a notecard
tinyurl.com/
Keyboard: pn91
Transliterate: 33px48
Translate: 2enx
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
Being Ukrainian perhaps you should.
Well I do have Red Russian stickers on my keyboard and I did understand your transliteration. But I'm not Ukrainian, I used to live over there and my wife is from there. I'm American and a long way down the line I'm ethnically polish.
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
Do you understand word bezprizornyj?
...This is intractable Russian problem, also present at the beginning of XX century.
It's true that this is a 100 year long standing Russian problem and also a Ukrainian problem as well.
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
I think that most of Russians outside of Moscow and few other cities are already living in properties comparable to mud huts.
I doubt, they would complain, if there is a project to build more of these.
Hehehe, well there is some truth to that!
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
Have you watch BBC document "Day of Bread" about 6 years ago?
It looked like Russian countryside about 60 miles from St. Petersburg have fallen into 200 years time loop.
Ultimate Powerdown... and something what is also in store for US...
It will be a great fun to watch progress of coming conversion...
No I haven't seen that documentary, but I did visit the countryside and that is exactly what you see. I really liked the horse drawn carts going into and out of the cities.
And there is a lot of beauty in the countryside...
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
steam_cannon wrote:
And very simply banning abortions doesn't mean these children will have homes.
They will, as long as their parents do not throw them out...
If it is correct that land cannot support 145 millions of Russians then you are right.
Dieoff will proceed.
But in this situation any immigrants have no chance to survive there either, so peripato's argument is flawed.
These are some interesting points. Russia for example is a very big country with the large melting lands of Siberia which the Chinese would love to fill. Perhaps this is a topic I should get back to...
But for the moment I still don't agree with the banning abortions suggestion or that increasing the population will work out as well without improving some very basic social problems in both Russia and Ukraine...
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:03 pm Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
And speaking of Russia...
Quote:
There are many other parts of the world with heavy oil where THAI could also be used, including Texas, Africa, and Russia. This methodology could also be used on medium heavy oils, such as in some of the fields on the United Kingdom Continental Shelf. Since the percentage of oil recovery is so high, the method can be considered a method of Enhanced Oil Recovery, and can be used to extend the life of otherwise-depleted wells.
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:40 pm Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
azreal60 wrote:
Quote:
If the Green Revolution had not arrived, millions of people would have starved.
Incorrect. If animals(including humans) do not have a food supply, they do not reproduce. They simply do not do it. Hence, the population supply would have stayed steady.
This is incorrect. The people who reproduce at the greatest rates are the ones who are the poorest - and thus, are the ones who also have the least adequate food supply. Here is a map showing world fertility rates by country. The nations with the highest fertility rates - Chad and Niger in particular - as well as much of sub-Saharan Africa and Afghanistan are also the ones where famine is most commonplace. If you want people to stop reproducing so much, ironically, you need to feed them more, not less. It should also be noted that the Green Revolution has barely touched Africa to date (except for South Africa). All those African nations with rapidly-expanding populations don't have rapidly-expanding populations because of the Green Revolution, they have rapidly-expanding populations in absence of a Green Revolution.
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:53 pm Post subject: Re: Oil sands extraction without using water + using less en
Oil-Finder wrote:
But this is way off topic.
Oh no it is not. Not when you have an agenda to turn every discussion into an anti-doomer techtopian diatribe.
Now this particular diatribe assumes there is the petroleum, irrigation, hybrid seeds, biocides, harvesting and storage facilities for green-revolution crops to take hold in Africa and populations will thus decline.
In lieu of all this gimmickry these poor folks will probably do as they've always done and just breed their own old-age insurance--kids _________________ ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap 