Anyone know anything about this? Is it even 50% true?
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Sounds like kookery to me. From their website:
Resistance Is Not Futile? Well.. it's media Jim, but not as we know it.
And it's not science fiction.
RINF is an independent source for under reported news from around the world, which is updated on a full-time basis by one person, Michael Meaney.
2 posted on
01/02/2007 10:24:50 PM PST by
Petronski
(I just love that woman.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
I think you are right.!!!
3 posted on
01/02/2007 10:25:38 PM PST by
GitmoSailor
(...COLD WAR VET...)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Old news, but good news. Yes, it's true.
4 posted on
01/02/2007 10:26:04 PM PST by
Buffalo Head
(Illigitimi non carborundum)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
This is similar to the oil sands in Canada which is being developed on a monstrous scale. This has made Canada the #1 crude supplier to the U.S., all within the last 5 to 10 years. The u.s. oil shale supplies are well known.
7 posted on
01/02/2007 10:30:08 PM PST by
spyone
To: 2ndDivisionVet
I sense a zot, but I'll bite.
The fact is, there is a lot of shale oil in Rocky Mountains. This has been known for decades. However, it's much more expensive to extract than the usual oil supply. In particular, there are huge start-up costs.
If I recall correctly, at current prices, it's close to profitable to extract it. But if the prices go down (which any ME country could do by increasing supply) the whole process becomes a money-loser and there's no way to recover it.
There is no conspiracy.
I'd advise that you avoid such poorly-written articles in general and this website in particular.
There's no conspiracy or secret.
8 posted on
01/02/2007 10:30:38 PM PST by
AmishDude
(It doesn't matter whom you vote for. It matters who takes office.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
This is supposedly just one of several.
I read a book 30 years or so ago about how during Ike's Presidency the decision was made to keep secret lots of heavy duty deposits--and to not use them until the rest of the world ran out of oil.
I don't doubt that something like this could be true. Whether it is or not remains to be seen. And why are the puppet masters allowing it out, now. To forestall the zero-point energy technologies from being outted?
We shall see.
9 posted on
01/02/2007 10:32:41 PM PST by
Quix
(LET GOD ARISE AND HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED. LET ISRAEL CALL ON GOD AS THEIRS! & ISLAM FLUSH ITSELF)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Google Search revealed the following report done by Rand group which should make everyone cautious about this overzealous report from Stansberry. They say at least 20 years to get 1,000,000 bbls/day. Much of what Stansberry quotes is lifted from the report. Its Oil Shale Oil, needing 3 barrels of water to extract one barrel of oil. That's a lot of water for out West.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9143/index1.html
11 posted on
01/02/2007 10:38:32 PM PST by
Candor7
(Into Liberal flatulance goes the best hope of the West, and who wants to be a smart feller?)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
12 posted on
01/02/2007 10:39:02 PM PST by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Is this a cue strange music type of thread?
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Extract costs are very high, but at least some of it can be extracted for less than $60/bbl and a lot less than the cost of the Seventh Fleet.
19 posted on
01/03/2007 2:53:22 AM PST by
Lonesome in Massachussets
(The artist doesn't have to have all the answers; he must, however, ask the right questions honestly.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson