<Walking Towns: Universities, Military Bases & Pre-Auto Urban Areas The Oil Drum Is the Decline of Base Production Accelerating?>
<DrumBeat: November 18, 2007 DrumBeat DrumBeat: November 20, 2007>

290 comments on DrumBeat: November 19, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Show without comments | PDF version

Dragonfly41 on November 19, 2007 - 3:17pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Holy frickin...wow!! WSJ, CBS...how much more mainstream can this get? Even if the WSJ threw a punch at the peak oil theorists...they used the term "peak oil" in hard copy. That was a taboo up until this year and mostly in the 3rd and 4th QTR. It's sneaking into the psyche of the culture now....no turning back...unless, unless...crude production rises dramatically and price shoots down to $60 again somehow.

With a falling U$D and numerous reports on supply/production issues worldwide, I don't see how anyone could do more than keep the price in a narrow band between $80-100 and even that is working hard.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
PrisonerX on November 19, 2007 - 3:59pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Well it does seem that the interview with TB Pickens during the Night football game was not an accident, or something the announcer just wanted to talk about.

That was one week ago wasn't it.

so is this "good" news or "bad" news.

good in that PO is being brought to the masses, and not a wacko theory as it was portrayed even recently by most.

but with a media and most others doing all they could to
portray it as non issue and NOW its is something that is right.

Thats probably a BAD thing perhaps for the economy etc.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on November 19, 2007 - 4:19pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

It seems like something has changed. Is it just the MSM doing it's job and informing the people of a major "new" issue? Did it take so long because they are just slow and there was too much inertia?

I dunno, the MSM act as an official government mouthpiece on every other issue - it seems to me like there has been an official change in message. The question is why?

I'm happy to see the word getting out, but my level of trust is zero, and I can't help but think that someone has a plan to use this to their advantage (and by definition, not mine).

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
NoLogos on November 19, 2007 - 5:50pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

The MSM is doing its job, but they don't work for me or you. However, as with global warming, the evidence is so in-your-face that the average 'Merkin would begin to doubt the MSM if they continued with the lies. Besides, there are alternative sources of info, like this venue-and it is easy to see which source of news is trustworthy. The 'iron triangle' doesn;t want too many more folks go off and learn things...that would make it hard to sell SUVs and McMansions.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on November 19, 2007 - 6:00pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Well I certainly have my opinion of who the MSM works for, so this is not news! If I read what you wrote correctly, the idea seems to be that the MSM would lose face if they persisted in denying PO, so that they have to let people in on it. But this does not feel right - the thing is that I do not see this as any more of a bald-faced deceit than a dozen other issues where what is reported is obviously untrue. This is a group with no shame, and this feels different - fear of being discredited does not seem like a strong enough reason for the about face.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
oregon7 on November 19, 2007 - 6:55pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I read the WSJ article while waiting for a sandwich today for lunch.

It's amazing how the WSJ both reports the peak oil story yet attacks the people who have been talking about it as "out of the mainstream." The article presents all sorts of reasonable arguments about undulating plateaus and near future peak dates as if they were counter to some imaginary extremists... when those are the very arguments that people are already making. It's more about character assassination and propaganda than rational argument. But the WSJ long ago took leave of political rationality.

It's also fascinating how they portray the problem primarily as one related to the effect of security and instability on extraction. Most people look at peak oil and think... hmmm maybe we should change how we live, and consider reducing our energy consumption... wouldn't be bad for the global climate either. But the WSJ portrays the problem as something that can be fixed by more "security"... which means more tanks, more airplanes, more military industries. It is so predictable. When you are a propaganda mouthpiece for an empire the whole world looks like a colony.

They really do see the problem as "how did our oil get under their sand?"

They really do understand the problem as an opportunity... to sell killing machines. Up to a point they may have a point... but in the end we're not facing a security crisis but an oil production shortfall. The WSJ crowd figures that until it really hits this is all just another money making opportunity in the armaments business.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Greg Hunter on November 20, 2007 - 7:23am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

It's also fascinating how they portray the problem primarily as one related to the effect of security and instability on extraction.

Larry Kudlow was cheerleading regime change and multinational management as the solution to the problem last night on CNBC. The American way of Life is not negotiable, but the terms of surrender....! I wonder how long it will take the Saudi's to notice the pattern?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
NZSanctuary on November 20, 2007 - 2:51am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Theory: The MSM is embracing PO now for the same reason Global Warming has become such a large issue. Consider Gandhi's quote that is sometimes on this site... First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

1. First they ignore you. (Now very difficult)
2. Then they laugh at you. (Becoming harder)
3. Then they fight you. (Bring it out in the open so doubt can be instilled)
4. Then you win. (Draw out stage 3 as long as possible to avoid this)

"You can never solve a problem on the level on which it was created."
Albert Einstein

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
SacredCowTipper on November 20, 2007 - 3:45am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I think this situation is a little different. If the things we read here are right there is no #4 - everyone loses.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
NZSanctuary on November 20, 2007 - 4:38pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Well, yes.

"You can never solve a problem on the level on which it was created."
Albert Einstein

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

290 comments on DrumBeat: November 19, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Show without comments | PDF version