Henri,
"We took out Hitler for the same reason"? Are you saying that the
Americans took out Hitler, or do you include others in it? Maybe
you are Russian or from an other former Soviet country? In the
latter case you have 100 times more reasons to claim it, compared
with Americans and 10 times more compared with Western European.
On the other hand, the events in US during the last 3 years, seems
to use the events in 1930's as blueprints.
History is interesting and maybe you should read it, instead of using
Hollywood movies.
Hakan
At 04:55 AM 4/1/2005, you wrote:
Hakan,
I would like to give a humble option here,
( Hakan wrote;...Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that
Iraq were no WMD threat to US. )
We took out Hitler for the same reason, Him and Suddam Hussein were
weapons of mass destruction.
H.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hakan Falk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 31 March, 2005 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Bob,
You were right and I am wrong and I am glad that I did get
a very good explanation on how Hubbert could be so right.
It also explains why president Carter was so genuinely
worried, when he developed his energy plan. He had the
foresight to realize that Hubbert was right.
It also explains why we see the surge in the genuine hate
of Americans. It is the cost of aggressive and egoistic foreign
policies, that resulted in about 10 more years of artificially
low oil prices.
All of this, ending up in an almost criminal behavior by the
Bush administration. I say almost, because I do not want
to be too "crude". The legal aspect of being criminal, is very
clearly established, Criminal, established by the fact that we
now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. By laying
the responsibility at the feet of faulty "US intelligence
community", the Bush administration is trying deliberately
to avoid their legal responsibility. A kind of reversed side
of the well known argument "it was not my fault, I was
ordered to do it". LOL
All of this supported by the America people, in a reelection
of president Bush. I hear the false argument that only 48%
voted him in office. This argument is poor mathematics, I
cannot get to this result, when Bush won with a more than
3 million of the populous American vote. It was the first
election of Bush, that he did not have a populous majority
and he was put in office by the Courts.
Hakan
At 11:16 PM 3/31/2005, you wrote:
All I know is what I read in the brief biography. (and what I recall
from hearing about his work many years ago)
Hakan Falk wrote:
Bob,
I stand corrected and the only excuse I have, is that I only brought
forward a mistake that I read earlier. I remember that it was an
article about the hearings in US congress in mid 70'. Will however not
do this mistake again, but do not despair, there are many others I will
do and surely in my far from perfect English. -:)
What was his field at Berkeley?
Hakan
At 05:35 PM 3/31/2005, you wrote:
Howdy Hakan, calling him a mathematician is a bit short-sighted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_King_Hubbert
Hubbert was born in San Saba, Texas in 1903. He attended the
University of Chicago, where he received his B.S. in 1926, his M.S. in
1928, and his Ph.D in 1937, studying geology, mathematics, and
physics. He worked as an assistant geologist for the Amerada Petroleum
Company for two years while pursuing his Ph.D. He joined the Shell Oil
Company in 1943, retiring in 1964. After he retired from Shell, he
became a senior research geophysicist for the United States Geological
Survey until his retirement in 1976. He also held positions as a
professor of geology and geophysics at Stanford University from 1963
to 1968, and as a professor at Berkeley from 1973 to 1976.
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
