Funny, stupid, or tragic?

[Jason1]

Eh...Its could be true, could be very true. Or it could be a bunch of overexaggerated garbage. Yea. Thats what im going to go with. Overexaggerated garbage.

[manasecret]

Propaganda.

The Peak Oil ideas are very interesting and I'd like to read more about that. But that website seems like a lot of political propaganda against the right.

Look at the way it's written.

The way things are presented is very propaganda-like, with very little point-counterpoint discussions about differing viewpoints. Instead, it's written with incendiary accusations and acting as if everything it says is pure fact. It seems very inflammatory, if that's the right word, like it's trying to use apocalyptic scare tactics or guilt to move people into action for something that isn't necessarily true. In other words, propaganda.

But hey, I didn't read it all. I was interested until I started reading the anti-war, anti-Bush drivel. I don't like Bush much, but once politics enters an article like that I take it with a grain of salt.

So if you think I'm wrong, fine. I'm not going to argue about it.

P.S. Some choice quotes.

What are some steps that I can take in the next few days to begin addressing this situation?

-5. Adopt a vegetarian/ vegan diet, or at least reduce your meat consumption as much as you can.

-12. Investigate alternative forms of health care such as bioenergetic healing, self hypnosis etc. . .

[Blackmane]

Originally Posted by manasecret

Propaganda.

The Peak Oil ideas are very interesting and I'd like to read more about that. But that website seems like a lot of political propaganda against the right.

Look at the way it's written.

The way things are presented is very propaganda-like, with very little point-counterpoint discussions about differing viewpoints. Instead, it's written with incendiary accusations and acting as if everything it says is pure fact. It seems very inflammatory, if that's the right word, like it's trying to use apocalyptic scare tactics or guilt to move people into action for something that isn't necessarily true. In other words, propaganda.

But hey, I didn't read it all. I was interested until I started reading the anti-war, anti-Bush drivel. I don't like Bush much, but once politics enters an article like that I take it with a grain of salt.

So if you think I'm wrong, fine. I'm not going to argue about it.

P.S. Some choice quotes.

What are some steps that I can take in the next few days to begin addressing this situation?

-5. Adopt a vegetarian/ vegan diet, or at least reduce your meat consumption as much as you can.

-12. Investigate alternative forms of health care such as bioenergetic healing, self hypnosis etc. . .

It merely said that going to war to fight for the last scraps of oil that were feasible to mine is foolish. He also said that Bush was one of the first to acknoledge the problem and put money behind finding new sources of energy, something he stated Clinton never did.

I found no signs of any real bias, lots of quotes from many different sources of opinion, and very well explained and thought out ideas, though perhaps a little more doomsdayish than other sources. Read the article completely before you make accusations against it.

The scary thing is that we can see some of this stuff beginning to occur. Just think about the soaring prices of gas and reading the newspaper about the lack of cooperation of middle-east countries in the "war on terror". It's kinda creepy.

[Kitana85]

I'll admit this wasn't written very well, but as I said, you can check out any number of reliable sites, including MANY national and government sites and its true. And yes, we do have alternative energy sources, but do you see high level massive overhalls? Me neither.

[TheGame]

Mana... I suggest you read through it all before making an arguement/opinion. I pretty much agree with Blackmane on this one.

"There are several solutions though, and people managed to live without oil and electric before."

True, but it wasn't exactly 6 billion people who have no experience with living w/o oil.

[manasecret]

Well that's why I pointed out that I didn't read it all, because if you think I'm wrong you're probably right and I can't make a good argument without knowing everything they said and going back over it multiple times.

Such as what Blackmane said about it not being anti-Bush; just after reading some more of it I realize he's right.

It's not worth arguing about it here to me is all. I have a few more things I could say against the article swirling in my head, but I know if I really get into this I'm going to end up reading it over and over, pulling quotes from everywhere, looking up facts on other websites, and so on until I run out of time in the day to do classwork and only have time to go out and drink.

[Blackmane]

Exactly what TheGame said. If this does occur, then I do believe there could be a big dieoff of people occuring. Of course we lived just fine without oil, but that was when we had a balance of people on the planet that could be sustained of the amount of food we could produce without oil to back us up. The fact of the matter is, without oil, we have no way (right now) of maintaining the food/water/medical infrastructure that is keeping 6 billion people alive on the planet..

[The Duggler]

I don't know if it will happen like it says in there, but I know that we will run out of oil someday, that's a fact. The questions should be, will we be able to adapt fast enough? And how much oil is really left and how much did we burn already.

And the human race is known to wait until something happens in order to do something about it, so I guess this will hit hard as we won't be prepared.

[TheGame]

Well, we won't get hit as hard if someone starts taking action soon... the longer we wait, the harder the hit. I makes me wonder though... who has a better chance of trying to solve the problem, Bush or Kerry.