So, what you are saying is that you do not have any factual evidence of your
assertions.  Ok.

And by the way, the press is always complaining the current administration
is simply not leaking.  That also contradicts another of your assertions.

Sorry, gotta run.


Denys...


Denys...

-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
Wirt Atmar
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 2:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: OT: Carter awarded Nobel Peace Prize

Denys denies,

> Wirt, you are confusing me.  In May of this year you stated the world
would
>  run out of petroleum within 20-30 years.  Now you say Iraq has enough oil
>  for 250 years.

You misunderstand. I did not say that. If I said anything, world oil
depletion may well occur in 50 to 100 years. Oil depletion for US domestic
supplies is clearly increasing, and US production will in all probability be
out of business in 20 to 30 years. Every Texas oil man knows that to be
true.

Worse, if new reserves such as the Alaskan Wildlife National Reserve were
opened up to drilling, their estimated times to depletion would be measured
only in the tens of days if the US current requirements were satisfied only
by these new reserves. Oil reserves are capable of longer sustained periods
of production only because each reserve supplies just a small fraction of
the
world's demands.

At *current rates of consumption*, Iraq will probably run out of oil in 250
years, but if it had to supply the world's demand single-handedly, it would
probably be able to do so for only a few decades.

Of course, conservation and alternative fuel developments can extend these
times dramatically, if not indefinitely, if they were actively pursued, but
those courses of action are not on the current administration's agenda.



>  Also, do you have ANY backup material one could read about your
accusations
>  of the administration doing the things you accuse it of doing?  And
please,
>  The New York Times is not a credible source of ANY news.

In this, you greatly misunderstand. Although the Bush administration came to
power only two years saying that it would never poll public opinion in the
manner of the Clinton administration or leak its plans to press as "trial
balloons" to test their receptions, the Bush administration is now leaking
its various future policies at a greater rate than the Clinton
administration
did.

The NY Times *is* the mechanism by which these trial balloons are floated.
Although other great newspapers, such as the LA Times, the Washington Post,
and the WSJ,  are also occasionally used, the NY Times is the traditional
instrument of public dissemination of plans that are not quite yet policy.
If
you read the NY Times as a "love letter" (and virtually all of the other
news
organizations and governments do), you will have a very clear idea of what's
likely coming and what's not.

Wirt Atmar

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *