To what degree are supposedly Green organizations being used to....

....get at the thirty five TRILLION dollars worth of oil and natural gas reserves in the Arctic?

Or to set the stage for the devaluation of the USA petro - dollar which is in some danger due to the 4.3 trillion USA petro - dollars in the hands of China, George Soros, Iran, Europe and Russia?




GLOBAL INVESTING HOT SPOTS
Russia and China vie to beat the US in the trillion-dollar race to control the Arctic

Russia and China know that the weakness in the USA petro - dollar could be their key to taking the USA out as the world's leading military superpower so.......
they have good reason to finance supposedly Green efforts to stop pipelines which can mess up the USA and Canadian economy.

I actually voted for Green Party leader Ms. Elizabeth May in our 2008 Canadian federal election when she ran in my area Central - Nova and I did later on apologize to her for my ignorance as to the effect that atmospheric carbon dioxide can have on Ocean Acidification but......... it is obvious that Russia and China are after those 35 TRILLION dollars worth of oil and natural gas reserves up north and of course therefore are interested in taking advantage of the weaknesses that Wall Street and the Federal Reserve have given to the USA petro - dollar.

(Or at the 117 TRILLION dollars worth of Derivatives mentioned by Mr. Jim Rickards in this interview)?

FORGET IRAN, IRAQ, UKRAINE
THIS IS WHERE WWIII STARTS...

 

Am I incorrect to strongly suspect that if this gambit to significantly devalue the USA dollar succeeds that a significant increase in the prices of gold and silver will probably occur?

St. Mary’s River Association says nope to Cochrane Hill mine

 

I would have to say that being against the pipelines is directly tied to globalist attacking America's economy. Our environmentalist friends would rather use Warren Buffett trains to transport oil. Much less efficient and far more messy.

 

I used to think it was a ploy to use up the rest of the worlds energy as quickly as possible so we'd have a monopoly.

I stopped believing that when I realized how petty and short sighted our politicians tend to be.

 

Unless the lines spring a leak

 

Liberal tree huggers and defenders of the polar bear used to give the bum rush by claiming that the end of the Oil Age was just over the horizon

So, according to them, we better start switching to windmills now while we still have time

Now they worry that we will not run out of fossil fuel soon enough to save the planet from the man-made-global-warming hoax

 

That is exactly what I think as well.......

My wife is Latin and taught me the following wise saying......
"Mas sabe El Diablo...... por que El Diablo..... es mas anciano....... y por que....... El Diablo....... es El Diablo"
"More wise is the Devil......... because The Devil is older..... and because...... The Devil..... is The Devil!"

The nations and individuals who term America the "Great Satan"......
tend to be shockingly like the sixty percent or so of the "Teacher" subjects in the Stanley Milgram Ph. D. experiment who willingly and obediently hit the buttons to zap the "learner subjects" to the point where their lives would have been in danger if the zapping buttons had been real and not a prop in a psychological experiment!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

 

Liberal enemies of the pipeline lack common sense

They would rather see canadian oil go to china instead of the US

 

You don't mind all the derailments and train car crashes. I understand that Warren Buffett is a Democrat and he donated heavily to Obama so the democrats are using their brain washing machine to Stir up hatred for pipelines and keep the trains running.

 

I personally have never promoted a Carbon Tax.....
I so much prefer the Carl Cantrell theory on what we should do:

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...field-theory-of-m-w-p.548225/#post-1070047904

Global Warming II by Carl Cantrell:

 

Who would pay for such a project?

 

I mind derailments too, but a pipeline can spill literally thousands of gallons before it's stopped, whereas not all railcars will even leak at all in derailments. What? are pipelines back on the Koch Bros. marching orders for you guys this week?

 

Mexico

 

It was a serious question so you and yourvsnark are not welcome

 

Lighten up

A serious answer, Nobody, it would probably break the United States and not work even then

OTOH we only recently have made some breakthroughs in water desalination that would make it more feasible

https://news.utexas.edu/2018/04/03/water-purification-breakthrough-uses-sunlight-and-hydrogels/

But water desalination isn't all that's reqiuired, and do we WANT to go monkeying around with our deserts this way? I'm generally not one who credits the Law of Unintended Consequences but this seems an area where that might apply

And why doesn't this idea just look into changing the monsoon patterns over East Africa? My understanding is that the Sahara was green until about 10,000 years ago when they shifted and some people say those monsoons are changeable, though I don't know how.

 

I dont take the idea very seiously

but I think many people might

So I asked them a serious question hoping for a thoughtful answer

Instead I got you

 

We sometimes get what we deserve rather than what we wanted

 

Sure

If you want to sneer at @DennisTate for thinking outside the man-made-global-warming-we’re-all-gonna-die-environmentalist-wacko box its no skin off my nose

 

I was addressing you. I would never sneer at Dennis, I like Dennis.

I was trying to discuss Green Sahara seriously but you seem to just want to snarkfight

 

Ok lets be serious

It would be very expensive

But if the swedes or germans want to try it at their own expense be my guest

Changing the rain patterns of East Africa would be a pretty radical and risky manouver with unknown consequences

But if we changed conventional farming practices by adopting Regenerative Agriculture it would accomplish much and cost very little

 

This is one of those things like removing gold from seawater. Blue Sky projects that would require billions on billions to even test and have dozens of reasons why they wouldn't work. But OTOH it would be just wonderful if they did and sometimes these kinds of things are successful

I looked at the website for Regenerative Agriculture. Seems like a great idea. I'd hate to see it co-opted by the Militant Vegans though

 

Raising livestock is a central component of the regenerative practice

But so are soybeans

Something for everyone

 

I was thinking of the people who want everyone to use only free range chickens and cattle and such. I don't like to be cruel to animals but I also don't want to pay $4 for a dozen eggs rather than 65 cents and I really don't think a chicken cares as long as it's comfortable and not being eaten by a fox.

This whole thing shouldn't be politicised though. I don't think people opposing pipelines are attacking the USA economically. This whole idea that environmentalists are attacking the economy is bollocks. If you factor in the environmental costs of doing things, like all the things that can get screwed up, then environmentalism pays. And environmental costs can be horrendous if you just ignore them. Russia has many good examples of this. Look up Aral Sea if you want to see one not associated with nuclear power, which I think is a special case there

 

Free range animals on natural grassland teeming with micro organisms are healthier and more nutritious tha so-called conventional products raison on dead dirt and chemical fertilizers

Free range meat costs more now because demand is greater than supply

Farmers who adopt regenerative farming can make a profit without government subsidies

 

I would like to see the yields on regenerative farming compared to modern strategies.

Now I could see it being better then many of the slash and burn and other strategies in the world, but I'd be curious if it can produce in the kind of quantities that our system in the majority of America can.

As for the opposition to the pipeline, I think it is MUCH more likely that it would be astroturfed by corporations who do not want their competitors. For instance, in the Dakota Access Pipeline issue there were companies that stood to make BILLIONS extra if the pipeline wasn't completed on time. Thus giving some money to some well meaning idiots would be beneficial.

That said, pipelines do need to be controlled on where they go and the mitigation plans need to be excellent. As was pointed out they can cause mass damage.