>> ^LordOderus:

A match burns at around 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, so I have no problems believing thousands of pounds of paper, wood (from furniture) fabrics and plastics (which are made from petroleum) could easily exceed 1000 degrees after burning for 7 hours.


Other things that can exceed 1000F:
-The elements on your stove
-Well ventilated cigarettes
-candles(better than 1400F)

Oh, and well ventilated wood can top 3500F.

If marinara takes this to heart I'm sure he'll be back shortly with a newly discovered understanding of the difference between energy and temperature, and some brand new misunderstanding of how to apply that to the problem.

A match burns at around 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, so I have no problems believing thousands of pounds of paper, wood (from furniture) fabrics and plastics (which are made from petroleum) could easily exceed 1000 degrees after burning for 7 hours.

The solution to our climate change issue is deceptively simple: stop using petroleum and start using hemp (along side a few other sources of energy, such as solar). No one needs to suffer. No one needs to commit to huge sacrifices. We just need to change how we do things, not what we do. The freedom of the people and the health of the environment must go hand in hand.

> This is nice but I'm still waiting for the Wave Motion Gun.

I bet the petroleum industry is bringing a gun over to this guy right now to talk to him about it.

I had to do a paper on them. Gold is a huge export as well as diamonds (although I don't see gold mentioned that much anymore; maybe it died out as the report is ten years old). It's chief exports are cocoa, iron, petroleum, copper, and cobalt (plus fish as they are coastal).

The French have a direct involvement with their past and I believe they still have ties presently. We do have reasons to be there "resource wise" as others were asking; like I said the French are there already. The "strange" name of Ivory Coast compared to other African countries is a dead giveaway that it was a colony (like South Africa--an extremely simplistic choice for a country's name).

I know someone from Ghana (next to Ivory Coast) and the situation there is bad (I believe he left in the early 90's; it was during a lot of bloodshed--I know another from Bulgaria, actually he was in the army for them; he left literally because his life and his mother's life were in grave danger--they got into the U.S. via political asylum). Ghana I think is the main exporter of gold and is next door. It wouldn't surprise me if the U.N. or a country does something soon if the situation spreads. To me it seems highly likely that this could spread to Ghana and a bit in every direction around those two.

>> ^ShakaUVM:

>> ^ravioli:
Please explain, I'm curious...

Basically, it's better to just manufacture new plastic bottles than to recycle them. Takes less energy / costs less. Recycled plastics have a limited market, and the "lack of landfill" issue is a myth, if you're living in America.
The materials for plastics come from parts of the petroleum spectrum that can't really be used for anything else, so if you hear people talking about how plastics are going to cause us to run out of gas, do us all a favor and laugh at them.
It's a different situation for aluminum cans, though.
Don't take my word (or anyone else's word) for it though. Do your own research and make up your own mind - just make sure to include both hippie sources and non-hippie sources in your research.


Please have a look at this article :
link

which contains a link to the actual study.

"...Cost of PET resin pellets between 83 and 85 cents a pound, compared to only 58 to 66 cents a pound for PET recycled pellets."

Plastics recycling is the most difficult to achieve compared to paper, glass and aluminum. But no reason to disregard it. We live in large countries with a lot of space for landfills still available, but we are exceptions.

>> ^ravioli:

Please explain, I'm curious...


Basically, it's better to just manufacture new plastic bottles than to recycle them. Takes less energy / costs less. Recycled plastics have a limited market, and the "lack of landfill" issue is a myth, if you're living in America.

The materials for plastics come from parts of the petroleum spectrum that can't really be used for anything else, so if you hear people talking about how plastics are going to cause us to run out of gas, do us all a favor and laugh at them.

It's a different situation for aluminum cans, though.

Don't take my word (or anyone else's word) for it though. Do your own research and make up your own mind - just make sure to include both hippie sources and non-hippie sources in your research.

>> ^Enzoblue:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/Jinx" title="member since March 21st, 2009" class="profilelink">Jinx,
Royal Dutch/Shell- 4.5 to 8.2
ExxonMobil - 4.7 to 17.2
British Petroleum- 3.4 to 5.9
Chevron Texaco- 1.1 to 3.5
Profits in Billions from 2002 to 2003. (USA Today, 8/28/03)

What has that got to do with the towers collapse though. I don't doubt that many of the motives for occupation in the middle east are based on oil, but as an excuse to go to war 9/11 was a pretty poor one. No doubt the US government used the tragedy to justify war with Iraq, but there really was no connection and thats why I have a hard time believing they engineered the whole thing. If they can go to all this trouble to rig the buildings, get some planes to fly into and succesfully cover it up, why did they put Saudis in the planes? I think its much more likely that this was a terrorist attack and the US government scrambled to use it to their own advantage.


As for how the planes brought the buildings down, well I think I'm happy with the explanation. The fire, while not hot enough to actually melt steel, would have still weakened it sufficiently to allow it to bend and buckle. The floors pancaked and domino'd all the way down the tower. With the floors gone the walls had no support so they fell in too.

It seems to me the problem here is that there were accounts of molten metal which can't have been caused by the fire, and thats the lose end the guy in this video is trying to address. I cannot speculate how the metal melted, but I'm pretty confident that if there had been girders cut through with thermite there would have been evidence. You saw how distincive those cuts are. As for this "nanothermite", my guess would be that it was left there from contruction. Thermite is used in the contruction of railway tracks to fuse the joints together, its not impossible that a similar method was used in the contruction/repair of the towers and that it remained there (along with the balls of iron).

Anyway, tl:dr. Molten metal. Must be conspiracy. lol.

@Jinx,
Royal Dutch/Shell- 4.5 to 8.2
ExxonMobil - 4.7 to 17.2
British Petroleum- 3.4 to 5.9
Chevron Texaco- 1.1 to 3.5

Profits in Billions from 2002 to 2003. (USA Today, 8/28/03)

Looks like "Energy in Depth" is another bullshit oil industry front group.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Energy_in_Depth

Energy in Depth (EID) is a pro-oil-and-gas drilling industry front group formed by the American Petroleum Institute, the Petroleum Association of America and dozens of additional industry organizations for the purpose of denouncing legislation proposed by Colorado U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette to regulate underground hydraulic fracturing fluids. Hydraulic fracturing of underground geological formations, commonly called "fracking," was invented by the Halliburton Company. It is done to increase the amounts of oil and gas that can be extracted from existing wells. [1]

Energy in Depth denounces DeGette's proposed fracking legislation as an “unnecessary financial burden on a single small-business industry, American oil and natural gas producers.” In June, 2009, Energy in Depth started a multimillion dollar lobbying and public relations campaign aimed at derailing public health legislation that would require the disclosure of the chemicals used in fracking fluids. In addition to a Web site, EID's campaign includes a Twitter feed, a Facebook group, a YouTube channel and an aggressive advertising campaign. [1]

Energy in Depth trumpets the economic contribution oil and gas drilling makes, and the numbers of people employed by the industry.

>> ^wagthedog1:

>> ^nanrod:
I know this is all bullshit because T. Boone Pickens was on the Daily Show and he assured me that no water well has ever been contaminated by fracking. He wouldn't lie would he?

And neither would Lee Fuller, executive director of Energy in Depth, who has told the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences that a litany of errors in the anti-drilling film should render it ineligible for the Oscar for best documentary feature.
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011
/02/01/01greenwire-ioil-and-gas-group-urges-oscar-judges-to-steer-99256.html
Besides, it is good that North Americans are once again getting a small taste of what many petro-states have have to endure over the decades to fuel a lifestyle of excess.

I'm in and out of the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission building in Casper about a few times every month, and all I see are businessman from the petroleum industry (including Encana fucks) bitching about not getting enough permits to drill. And I don't care how much the state increases the number of permits, it's fucking never enough. They view them as a goddamn birthright. Of course these guys drive there in their Hummers, so they probably each need a well just to fill their gas tanks. I even heard one of those assholes complaining that Nixon would never have signed the Clean Water Act if he knew all the regulations it was going to create. Makes you want to scream.

*quality

http://www.lyrics007.com/Scott%20Miller%20Lyrics/Red%20Ball%20Express%20Lyrics.html

I jumped at it when I had the chance,
I joined the army and I went to France
At Roosevelt's request.
Two weeks of sitting in the mud
Made me lie to the man that I could drive a truck
For the Red Ball Express.

All we do is keep it rolling on
Trading bodies for petroleum
Heating rations on the manifold
And never sleep enough to dream about home

Benzedrined and looking through cat eyes
Of a deuce and a half and a days supply
Of jerry cans in back
Ain't no secret how the generals felt.
"Fuck the men they can eat their belts
but the tanks they must have gas"

All we do is keep it rolling on
Trading bodies for petroleum
Heating rations on the manifold
And never sleep enough to dream about home

The gears are sticking and the pressure's low
I felt the bump that means its time to go
Another twenty miles.
Thirty-six hours and I still ain't slept
I'm hearing voices talk inside my head
In Burma Shaving rhyme

All we do is keep it rolling on
Trading bodies for petroleum
Heating rations on the manifold
Even now I've never felt that old

Because fifty years later and you don't forget
Being eighteen and scared to death
In a world that's changing fast
Now my own son sends his own son off
To fight the next fight to be fought
And the Red Ball brings me back

If they were serious about cleaning this up there wouldn't have been misspoken numbers for months, and they wouldn't have left BP in a position to dictate and make decisions. They would been a lot more open, and while they would have used BPs resources and some recommendations this cover up stuff wouldn't have even been considered. It really didn't matter if BP suffered financially, that's what happens when you punch a hole in the ground and don't properly manage it.......and then fail to have the capacity you claim to have to deal with the problem in a timely manner.

There were a lot of people who probably would have volunteered to work there for room and board if they had some kind of assurances that the air wasn't toxic and they would be given at least adequate protection against contact with toxins. And even more people who would have liked to be paid to clean up the mess, and I mean really clean it up. Not out there with shovels and a trash bag in white paper suits. Bring in some machinery, dig and line some trenches to divert water to where it could be treated as it came in a long the coast lines. Boom the waterways and treat the water before spilling it into the reserves and parks.

Most of the footage you saw were guys in white outfits with shovels and trash bags.....if you had a spill anywhere else in the world of petroleum based products, they'd laugh at you if you just had guys with shovels and trash bags trying to clean it up. A few guys on dozers/hoes/bobcats could replace all of those guys for a majority of the work you saw being done, handwork can not be completely replaced but the majority of it can be and much more efficiently. It would have cut the penetration time down significantly having a machine sweep it away instead of having people trying to outdig the ocean current.

And it's not as if they couldn't justify the cost of severely damaging equipment in the process of this clean up..since sand and oily grit are going to wear machines out if they are exposed to it constantly. They probably could have gotten the machines damn near donated by any of the manufacturers to get their brands on TV and in the news.

Let's see.

1) There are approximately 650 research scientists in the world who have published papers on Global Warming.

2) Six of them have said they don't believe it's man-made.

3) One of those six recently recanted and now says he believes in man-made Global Warming.

So, do you believe the >99% of scientists or the <1% (who by the way are universally funded by corporations which would lose money if governments began proper anti-GW strategies)?
The only real interesting lesson is that slightly under one percent of scientists will sell out for money. I'm a bit surprised, personally I'd have thought the number would be higher.

So why do 50% or so of ignorant people (everyone who is not a climatologist is ignorant on the subject for these purposes) believe that <1% of the scientists are right and >99% are wrong?

Because a LOT of money goes into things like the video above. Paid by petroleum and related industries.

Cato Institute:

Established: 1977
Founders: Edward Crane and Charles G. Koch
President: Edward Crane

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/cato-institute

Cato Institute was founded by Ed Crane with a $500,000 grant from Charles Koch, a chemical and petroleum heir who was active with Crane in the Libertarian Party.

Cato's corporate sponsors include: Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Bell Atlantic Network Services, BellSouth Corporation, Digital Equipment Corporation, GTE Corporation, Microsoft Corporation, Netscape Communications Corporation, NYNEX Corporation, Sun Microsystems, Viacom International, American Express, Chase Manhattan Bank, Chemical Bank, Citicorp/Citibank, Commonwealth Fund, Prudential Securities and Salomon Brothers. Energy conglomerates include: Chevron Companies, Exxon Company, Shell Oil Company and Tenneco Gas, as well as the American Petroleum Institute, Amoco Foundation and Atlantic Richfield Foundation. Cato's pharmaceutical donors include Eli Lilly & Company, Merck & Company and Pfizer, Inc.

Other non-Bush Administration alumni include former board members: Rupert Murdoch and Theodore J. Forstmann, also founding chairman of Empower America, now FreedomWorks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreedomWorks