Hundreds in Seattle rally against fossil fuel use

To see Big Brother's worldwide grip on science today:

1. Video summary as "Big Brother" took control of science (1961-2011)
http://dl.dropbox...reer.pdf

2. Professor Ian Pilmer's new book, "How to get expelled from school"

http://joannenova...ew-book/

One of few politicians who understands the serious danger facing our formerly free society today, Václav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic wrote the Foreword.

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://myprofile....anuelo09

I fail to see the connection Oliver in pushing conspiracy theories in relation to this article about people out to show there are better ways to live in an urban setting.

So do those people ride their bikes everywhere, everyday?

How many in Seattle would welcome a nuclear power plant in Puget Sound?
The 'progressives' get very upset at the nuclear powered submarines at Kitsap.

The article states "governments in the U.S. have been spending too much on highways and too little on public transit". Am I the only one to get the gist of this? The people came on alternative forms of transportation as a show of support for greater funding of alternatives to our current mass car use. Their creative choice of how to show up was not a vote on how it should be done.

Hundreds in Seattle rally against fossil fuel use

So many idiots; so little time.

instead of rallying and protesting, they should try and figure out practical approaches to weening ourselves off fossil fuels. too many protesting idiots thing that somehow the world can go cold turkey without creating a stroke for civilzation, a situation where people's needs for travel, food, and energy go unmet. that's called the 1600s. and anyone telling me we are better off living in the 1600's because fossil fuels are poisoning the air, i'll just tell them that if we keep doing what we're doing , the poison will do its own natural job of bringing us back to the 1600's without us needing to 'scale back'.
REAL approaches BEGIN with these progressives ( of which i consider myself a sympathizer if not a non-protesting member ) convinccing their unreasonable sheepish brethren to stop 'my way or the highway' approach beginning with embracing ALL electric generation, distribution and storage technologies---first priority no more fossil fuel combustion only fueled automobiles.

instead of rallying and protesting, they should try and figure out practical approaches to weening ourselves off fossil fuels. too many protesting 'enthusiasts' think that somehow the world can go cold turkey without creating a stroke for civilzation, a situation where people's needs for travel, food, and energy go unmet. that's called the 1600s. and anyone telling me we are better off living in the 1600's because fossil fuels are poisoning the air, i'll just tell them that if we keep doing what we're doing , the poison will do its own natural job of bringing us back to the 1600's without us needing to go cold turkey.
REAL approaches BEGIN with these progressives ( of which i consider myself a sympathizer if not a non-protesting member ) convinccing their unreasonable sheepish brethren to stop 'my way or the highway' approach beginning with embracing ALL electric generation, distribution and storage technologies---first priority no more fossil fuel combustion only fueled automobiles.

The strongest evidence that I am aware of for the existence of "Black Holes" is probably the funding of, and budgeting processes involved with, public transportation. Otherwise, I'm skeptical of their existence.

But that's really kind of neither here nor there, because solid evidence has been mounting for decades that petroleum isn't a "fossil fuel" at all, but rather the natural result of an ongoing geologic process involving ferric oxide (Fe2O3, or "rust"), calcium carbonate (CaCO3), water, heat, and boatloads of pressure.

It is almost as bad as watching Leftists protesting against the treatment of unicorns ("It is CRUEL and INHUMANE to force them to learn how to tap-dance!!!"). And of course, when you try to point out that they're not unicorns at all, they scream, call you juvenile names, and scoffingly dismiss you by saying "Go learn some Science, you Denier!".

Sigh. Some people... what can you do?

Shelgeyr:
If petroleum is abiogenically produced (IE, not a fossil fuel) then it wouldn't have (consistent, non-contaminant) biomarkers in it. It does, so it is physically impossible for it to be abiogenically produced. Abiogenic production of oil has been thoroughly debunked.

One of few politicians who understands the serious danger facing our formerly free society today, Václav Klaus

He's well known proponent of fossil fuel lobby in my country with many connections to Russian intelligence service. After all, he is not quite qualified to talk about private property due to his kleptomania...

http://www.youtub...aJCd6qMk

The people should promote the private property at public only when they respect the private property in their privacy.

@gopher65 said:

If petroleum is abiogenically produced... then it wouldn't have (consistent, non-contaminant) biomarkers in it.

I've read more studies than I can recall offhand, and let me assure you (although please don't take my word for it, feel free to do the research) that the dispute is still wide open.

Abiogenic production of oil has been thoroughly debunked.

With no intention of giving offense, I must say that you are terribly mistaken. It has only been *claimed* to have been thoroughly debunked by people who have thoroughly failed to do so. This isn't mere wishful thinking on my part.

A good bit of the industry's (mostly non-USA) petroleum research/exploration is focused on (and successfully pursuing) resources that defy rational explanation outside of abiogenic theory.

Believe what you will, but I've seen your objections rebutted many times, with the best evidence being successful ultra-deep production, outside the oil window, and below the salt layer.