Energy Pearl Harbor

21 posts / 0 new
Last post
investorzzo's picture
investorzzo
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 7 2008
Posts: 1182
Energy Pearl Harbor

In Confronting Collapse, author Michael C. Ruppert, a former LAPD narcotics officer turned investigative journalist, details the intricate connections between money and energy, including the ways in which oil shortages and price spikes triggered the economic crash that began in September 2008. Given the 96 percent correlation between economic growth and greenhouse gas emissions and the unlikelihood of economic growth without a spike in energy use, Ruppert argues that we are not, in fact, on the verge of economic recovery, but on the verge of complete collapse.

http://www.financialsensenewshour.com/broadcast/fsn2010-0728-1.mp3

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

Why another thread when there are several related to Ruppert and Collapse. I give up 

V

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

Hi investorzzo,

Jim Puplava brings the best out of Micheal Ruppert, stearing him well on specific issue's. Thankyou for posting ...

~ VF ~

 

goes211's picture
goes211
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 1114
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

investorzzo,

I appriciate the articles that you bring to our attention daily but I am starting to agree with V and wonder if this many new threads are necessary.  It really makes hard for older threads to gain traction and foster interesting discussions when new threads are created for articles that already have their own thread or that don't really seem like they will support a new discussion.  I know LR will disagree but many of these do seem like they would be better off in the daily digest  (mail them to [email protected]).  Just a thought.

Erik T.'s picture
Erik T.
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 5 2008
Posts: 1234
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor
V wrote:

Why another thread when there are several related to Ruppert and Collapse. I give up 

V

V,

You really are sounding more and more like me every day. I hope that freaks you out, dude. It certainly freaks me out! :-)

Erik

investorzzo's picture
investorzzo
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 7 2008
Posts: 1182
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

I think from now on, before I post anything I need to check in with V and Erik?

I'm a baaaaaaaddddddd boyyyyyy.................Abbott!

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor
investorzzo wrote:

I think from now on, before I post anything I need to check in with V and Erik?

I'm a baaaaaaaddddddd boyyyyyy.................Abbott!

That would be a welcome change. There is not a need to start a new thread every time you read a new article . You can post them in existing threads and take part in the discussion. With ever increasing numbers of visitors this problem will grow exponentially till this site becomes a Tower of Babble if it hasn't already.

Erik

Yes sounding like you REALLY freaks me out.

LOL

V

LogansRun's picture
LogansRun
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2009
Posts: 1444
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

I don't have a problem either way really.  I appreciate Invest. doing the legwork here, but I understand some peoples dislike of repeat threads so..........But either way, it's just my opinion which means that it's not better nor worse than anyone else's.  

Welcome back Erik!

V, you're becoming a grumpy old man!Tongue out  Maybe getting a little meat in your diet would help?Laughing  I'm making a Moroccan Lamb Chop dinner tonight, with lots of curry, turmeric, yogurt, cardamom, with a Rutabaga, parsnip, beet, onion, garlic mixture!  You're welcome to come on up and fill your belly!

Cheers to all!

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

LR

Men have an impossible time multitasking. Grumpy old men have no interest in trying to follow 39 threads on the same subject.

I am btw not becoming a grumpy old man. I AM one

V

green_achers's picture
green_achers
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Posts: 205
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

I mostly agree with V, but only up to a point.  It's usually the job of the moderators to combine threads when a number appear on some topical subject.  However, on topics that range over a very big and perennial issue, I find all of the "definitive" threads to be just as off-putting.  I am not going to try to slog through 97 pages of some discussion just to make sure I'm up to speed on the conversation and to make sure I'm not stepping on someone's toes.  I'm also not likely to stay with one of those threads if it gets to the point that I risk having to spend hours catching up whenever I take a day or two off.  There needs to ba a way that people can have conversations on the bigger subjects that live and die the way real conversations do.

isjrb029's picture
isjrb029
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 16 2009
Posts: 51
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

I was just thinking the same thing. Most of us are just checking out the current reads. I do not have time to go throught them all.

goes211's picture
goes211
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 1114
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

Their is always the "mark all read" button. Once you are caught up, it is much easier to stay in sync by just keeping up on threads with new info.  Just sort by last reply.

LogansRun's picture
LogansRun
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2009
Posts: 1444
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

You missed dinner, Grumpy.  Wink

I understand.

Peace

V wrote:

LR

Men have an impossible time multitasking. Grumpy old men have no interest in trying to follow 39 threads on the same subject.

I am btw not becoming a grumpy old man. I AM one

V

investorzzo's picture
investorzzo
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 7 2008
Posts: 1182
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

From financial sense this weekend. Matt Simmons,Oliver Inderwil, Dr. Robert L Hirsch

Peak Oil; Saudi Arabia's halt to oil exploration; BP oil spill

http://www.financialsensenewshour.com/broadcast/fsn2010-0731-2.mp3

 

ronmeisels's picture
ronmeisels
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 27 2009
Posts: 11
Re: Whiners taking over threads and making website worse.

Well it seems to me that if anyone would like to skip a new thread on a topic they think they have read up enough on they could easily ignore it?

Sort of like changing the channel on the television if you don't like the show, some people like sports and can watch game after game, I personally fingd it BORING and they all seem very much the same. I don't have the same opinion about topics I am interested in and I would rather not have to return to threads that have become long winded and perhaps evolved into 2 way conversations veering from the original topic or maybe a thread that is getting too technical with complicated formulas or whatever! Sometimes the graphs are very informative, likewise any clips or interviews I haven't heard before, so I find new threads on the same old topics refreshing and enjoyable! What I don't find enjoyable is having a thread be overun by a couple of whining crybabies that can't manage their own curiosity and expect perfection and order as if this website is supposed to be organized like a encyclopedia.

Just face it that it's not an encyclopedia and other posters such as I enjoy many of the posts by investorzzo and look forward to seeing new posts and discussions even if they are on older topics that have been discussed by others before. Did anyone who is complaining ever think that maybe there are other people out there who would like to begin or discuss the same old topics again especially if there is a new article, video or audio clip and that MAYBE every poster and visitor to the site does not have to partake in every discussion? Especially if they have already covered the same ground with other posters at an earlier date? Perhaps there is something else to do but whine and complain like checking your food stores or tilling your soil or building a wind powered washing machine. For heaven's sake I don't WANT every topic pigeon holed on the daily digest so would you all stop whining and complaining because now I have to complain about your complaining and it would be so much easier to just leave a post or thread of which topic you feel you have participated in already to others who haven't but would like to discuss things anew. Stop trying to police peoples posts and maybe even consider that you don't have to participate in every single thread that is posted.

Sincerely,

Ron Meisels

[Moderator's note:  Calling the users whiners is not nice.  Please try to refrain from doing so.]

goes211's picture
goes211
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 1114
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

Ron,

As you say, new threads are kind of like new TV channels.  I personally would find it hard to figure out what to watch if every day my cable company added a few new channels.  I think it would be far easier to keep up if new science shows were added to Discovery Channel and new female dramas where added to Lifetime.  In that situation I would immediately know what I might be interested in and what could be safely ignored. 

This is just my opinion, and clearly a new thread can be created under any topic that is within CM.com guidelines.  Just as clearly however, is the freedom for others to discuss the relevance of the new thread, the ramifications on this sites quality if everyone created X new threads everyday, and how they would like to see the site work.

You may not be aware of it but Ruppert threads have a very colorful history on CM.com.  Most have been banished to the dungeon except for the agreed upon single thread "Collapse - A documentary film by Mike Ruppert" which we are trying to keep upstairs.

investorzzo's picture
investorzzo
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 7 2008
Posts: 1182
Re: Whiners taking over threads and making website worse.
ronmeisels wrote:

Well it seems to me that if anyone would like to skip a new thread on a topic they think they have read up enough on they could easily ignore it?

Sort of like changing the channel on the television if you don't like the show, some people like sports and can watch game after game, I personally fingd it BORING and they all seem very much the same. I don't have the same opinion about topics I am interested in and I would rather not have to return to threads that have become long winded and perhaps evolved into 2 way conversations veering from the original topic or maybe a thread that is getting too technical with complicated formulas or whatever! Sometimes the graphs are very informative, likewise any clips or interviews I haven't heard before, so I find new threads on the same old topics refreshing and enjoyable! What I don't find enjoyable is having a thread be overun by a couple of whining crybabies that can't manage their own curiosity and expect perfection and order as if this website is supposed to be organized like a encyclopedia.

Just face it that it's not an encyclopedia and other posters such as I enjoy many of the posts by investorzzo and look forward to seeing new posts and discussions even if they are on older topics that have been discussed by others before. Did anyone who is complaining ever think that maybe there are other people out there who would like to begin or discuss the same old topics again especially if there is a new article, video or audio clip and that MAYBE every poster and visitor to the site does not have to partake in every discussion? Especially if they have already covered the same ground with other posters at an earlier date? Perhaps there is something else to do but whine and complain like checking your food stores or tilling your soil or building a wind powered washing machine. For heaven's sake I don't WANT every topic pigeon holed on the daily digest so would you all stop whining and complaining because now I have to complain about your complaining and it would be so much easier to just leave a post or thread of which topic you feel you have participated in already to others who haven't but would like to discuss things anew. Stop trying to police peoples posts and maybe even consider that you don't have to participate in every single thread that is posted.

Sincerely,

Ron Meisels

Thanks Ron, nice to know I don't offend some folks.............. I know for me, I don't live on this board, so I don't see how anyone can keep up with every single post. Jon

Moderator Jason's picture
Moderator Jason
Status: Moderator (Offline)
Joined: Dec 23 2008
Posts: 98
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

While there is no hard and fast rule about categorizing threads, we do appreciate it when users try to self-police:  If a news article is a stand-alone article, then it should go into the Daily Digest comments.  If the poster wants to start a real discussion, then they do have some responsibility to look and see whether there is another thread already going on the topic. This helps to keep the threads orderly, and helps users locate information.

It is very easy to hit the "create new thread" button.  Not only is it easy, but the child inside every user always wants to see their post at the head of a brand new thread.  But before creating new threads, it is simply good posting etiquette to check for existing threads on the topic.  It is a general guideline of polite posting.  Thanks.

Erik T.'s picture
Erik T.
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 5 2008
Posts: 1234
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor
Moderator Jason wrote:

While there is no hard and fast rule about categorizing threads, we do appreciate it when users try to self-police:  If a news article is a stand-alone article, then it should go into the Daily Digest comments.  If the poster wants to start a real discussion, then they do have some responsibility to look and see whether there is another thread already going on the topic. This helps to keep the threads orderly, and helps users locate information.

It is very easy to hit the "create new thread" button.  Not only is it easy, but the child inside every user always wants to see their post at the head of a brand new thread.  But before creating new threads, it is simply good posting etiquette to check for existing threads on the topic.  It is a general guideline of polite posting.  Thanks.

Thank you Thank you Thank you, Jason!

This reversal of policy from site management came as a complete surprise, albeit a very welcome one. It's great to see you guys finally starting to take an interest in resolving the quality problems that have developed on the site in recent months, and which have driven away a long list of formerly regular contributors to these forums, including myself.

I hope this change of direction from the moderators will continue. It's long overdue.

Best,

Erik

plato1965's picture
plato1965
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 18 2009
Posts: 615
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

Erik: It's a damn hard thing to run a serious forum... or any forum come to think of it..  it is a "new thing under the sun" to quote ecclesiastes++

 Eventually better protocols and code will emerge.. 

 You remind me of poor emily postnews railing against the dying of the usenet... *grin*

 http://www.templetons.com/brad/emily.html

 

eg: preventing selfish new thread promiscuity (rationing?)

 mitigating first post spam - (early post quarantine...?)

 I've shared much of your frustration, nothing is perfect.. kudos to Chris + mods.. they're doing their best...

 

goes211's picture
goes211
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 1114
Re: Energy Pearl Harbor

LOL !!!   That is some good advice.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments