but seriously Vikings.
Random Politics & Religion #00 |
||
Random Politics & Religion #00
Bahamut.Ravael said: » I just realized that Zicdeh hasn't posted in quite a while. King too. Are any of the other P&R regulars missing? Zicdeh on the other hand hasn't post for a very long time. Maybe the Commie-Feminazis got him? Leviathan.Chaosx said: » .... Native Americans really. But that was over the course of thousands of years coming from Asia crossing the land bridge. The highlands of Peru inhabited somewhat later. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » 1st, are you really suggesting that when I say it was discovered I meant it didn't exist before then? Clearly Columbus created America when he discovered it yo! If you are talking about naming rights you should be mentioning Amerigo Vespucci, not Columbus in context for America. Just because someone names something doesn't mean that "something" hasn't been used or referred to before. Quote: 2nd, you've referenced the 97% consensus before, don't pretend you don't use it to bury skepticism via a mob fiat. Odin.Godofgods
Offline
Bahamut.Kara said: » Consensus that scientists agree climate change is occuring i dont understand how this is debatable to some ppl. We know that many millions of years ago when volcanic activity was drastically higher that the earths temp was much warmer then it is today. We also know that around 12k-100k years ago the earth was in an ice age. Something that has happened multiple times... With or without human activity the earths climate has drastic changes all on its own. That in itself is proof that climate change exists. The only (self important) question left is will our activities change the natural climate change (either speed up or slow down) Ultimately irrelevant tho, because either way... it will happen. Unless we can develop a star trek weather modification net... That's the thing though, we are affecting it (by all evidence observed), and by a lot, apparently.
We can affect that and mitigate mitigate our influence, whether or not we can reverse it now, that's another story. Either way the planet will continue, and life on it will probably do so, however a lot of species will die out rapidly at this rate, including ours. Odin.Godofgods
Offline
reverse our effect or not, its still going to happen. And the elites and gov will never give a damn. We will never be prepared in the next century. Hell, we probably wont give a damn for the next century.
Jetackuu said: » Either way the planet will continue, and life on it will probably do so, however a lot of species will die out rapidly at this rate, including ours. The more i see from our species, the more i wonder if thats a bad thing. :/ Reminds me of this Q/A Start 1:13:52 End 1:17:17 YouTube Video Placeholder Quote: Q: Mr. Carlin, we know a lot of your comedy comes from things that rly piss you off. What are some of the things that rly piss you off that you haven’t rly talked about on stage recently? A: I think its not so much what im angry about. Anger implies you have a stake in the outcome. That you care. And I don’t rly care. I don’t. It comes across as anger. Obviously theirs a theatrical. it’s a heightened kind of intensified theatrical anger that you need to convey these thoughts. But im not personally an angry man. Im not personally angry about these things. I think they’re wonderful. Because I root against the species. I finally came to a realization, and this freed me as a writer. This was part of that transformation in the 90's. I realized i didn’t rly care about this outcome on this planet. I didn’t care what happened to this species. I think this is a species that was given great gifts and had great potential.. and squandered them. I think this species squandered them. I think it chose poor ways of organizing itself; socialy and politically. I think it made a wrong turn when it came to buying the okeydoke that the spiritual leaders gave; the high priest. We turned it over to the high priests and the traitors. Its commerce and religion that have ruined and spoiled the potential of this species. And in this country the same two things are true. But this country is writ large. And this country is the leader in the decay of the soul, if you will, just use that metaphorically. And i just don’t care what happens to this country. I don’t care. I don’t give a ***!! You know what the anger, the only anger there is, and I recognize in my voice there, you know what that is? Its rly a reflection of disappointment and disillusionment and being let down by my species. Ya know? We had such great possibilities and there not being realized Ya know. They talk about poets and philosophers. 'Well arnt there poets...' yes there are. How much influence do they have? NONE. There are more ppl writing poetry in America then there are reading it. (laugh) Imagine that. Well i guess that’s true in a lot of fields. I think that’s the anger. Its a frustration. Its a let down, Ya know. It comes from "how can you do that...?" That’s why i usually always use the second person. I talk about the audience and i say 'Ya know what YOU did?' I don’t say 'Ya know what WE did here in this country?' I say 'Ya know what YOU ppl did?' I put it on them. Its not my problem. Anyway, that’s just a taste of what eats around the edges for me. Odin.Godofgods
Offline
rly wish i could get youtube videos to start where i want on here :/
Ok, seriously? Don't abbreviate words when you quote. You might be lazy, but that doesn't mean that the person you quoted is.
Especially when you are quoting someone's verbal response. In fact, if you are going to mangle it that badly, don't quote. Just link the source material. The difference is happening a few hundred thousand years or more down the road vs a couple decades is a very large difference, and something we should be greatly concerned about.
Offline
Posts: 35422
Bahamut.Milamber said: » Ok, seriously? Don't abbreviate words when you quote. You might be lazy, but that doesn't mean that the person you quoted is. Especially when you are quoting someone's verbal response. In fact, if you are going to mangle it that badly, don't quote. Just link the source material. wat are youz talkin bout ? Dat is the way wez talk ! Offline
Posts: 35422
Have scientists taken the Pepsi challenge though ?
YouTube Video Placeholder Saudi Arabia refuses to cut oil production, prices fall.
I'm sure this is all according to Putin's plan. Offline
Posts: 35422
Do they eat turkey and watch football in Saudi Arabia ?
Quote: Saudi Arabia's oil minister told fellow OPEC members they must combat the U.S. shale oil boom, arguing against cutting crude output in order to depress prices and undermine the profitability of North American producers. Huh. So fracking is actually a major contributing factor to lower oil prices.
Bahamut.Ravael said: » Huh. So fracking is actually a major contributing factor to lower oil prices. I'm sure the people with methane coming out of their faucets are very happy about the low gas prices. Bahamut.Ravael said: » Substantiated sources have been posted numerous times, but I was just being snarky anyway. Odin.Jassik said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Substantiated sources have been posted numerous times, but I was just being snarky anyway. I wasn't able to find any. It was mostly just stories that were shown to be false, but your snark has been noted. I will continue to enjoy my gas prices in the meantime. Bahamut.Ravael said: » Odin.Jassik said: » Substantiated sources have been posted numerous times, but I was just being snarky anyway. The Saudis are trying to keep oil prices low enough to discourage fracking. We frack, they lower prices below fracking production costs. I see this as a win / win. Garuda.Chanti said: » In a strange way fracking is a major contributing factor to lower oil prices. The Saudis are trying to keep oil prices low enough to discourage fracking. We frack, they lower prices below fracking production costs. I see this as a win / win. Anything that acts as a thorn in OPEC's side and drives prices down is good in my book. Competition is a beautiful thing. Bahamut.Ravael said: » Huh. So fracking is actually a major contributing factor to lower oil prices. Its fun to watch the libs writhe as they must face the fact that "drill baby drill" works. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Huh. So fracking is actually a major contributing factor to lower oil prices. Its fun to watch the libs writhe as they must face the fact that "drill baby drill" works. Nobody questioned whether it could lower prices, that's economics 101, they question the drawbacks of poisoning your own back yard. Odin.Jassik said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Huh. So fracking is actually a major contributing factor to lower oil prices. Its fun to watch the libs writhe as they must face the fact that "drill baby drill" works. Nobody questioned whether it could lower prices, that's economics 101, they question the drawbacks of poisoning your own back yard. Oh, you musta missed that whole conversation I had a week or so ago in here about it. Plenty were. US fracking is not a major contributing factor to oil prices decreasing.
It is a factor. The slump in global demand, the USD strength, the increase in production across the globe, and the decrease in global growth are major factors. Quote: The price of oil fell some more on Tuesday, down as low as $75.84 before closing at $77 a barrel. The decline is blamed on Saudi Arabia cutting prices rather than cutting output amid signs of global glut. That’s discouraging to America’s highly leveraged drillers, who had been hoping beyond hope that $80 would act as a floor on prices. If prices don’t recover soon this could be the beginning of the end of the Great American oil fracking boom. Already ConocoPhillips COP -6.72% and Shell have announced a pull back in onshore investment. But the real pain will be felt by the army of smaller independent producers. There’s been a lot of talk about the breakeven prices per barrel needed to sustain drilling in various oil plays. Some say $80, others say $70. If you have acreage in a sweet spot you might be safe down to $50. But let’s get real — breakeven just isn’t good enough. Investors need returns on capital, not just returns of capital. And for myriad small drillers this fall in prices has virtually eliminated any possibility of turning real cash profits. Over the long run, a company that can’t generate a profit is worthless. Though oil prices are down “just” 30%, shares in some drillers with shaky balance sheets have plunged 60%. It is always the case that shares in leveraged commodity producers are more volatile than the underlying commodity. Equities are ultimately priced on a company’s ability to generate profit. Small moves in commodity prices have a huge impact on earnings. At $100 a barrel, the average oil company can generate net income on the order of $15 a barrel (see the comments section for more discussion of this). But as prices fall, this margin evaporates quickly. A decline of $10 to $90 leaves a margin of only $5, that means profits plunge 66%. Thus, at current prices, the average oil company won’t be profitable at all, and the weaker ones, loaded up with debt, are the walking dead. A perfect example is Goodrich Petroleum GDP -34.24%, which announced some big new discoveries in the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale. While the oil may be there, “the play is not economic at current oil prices,” wrote Cowen & Co. analyst Christopher Walling yesterday, adding that “liquidity is a growing concern.” Goodrich shares are down 70% in six months. The oil industry is a study in contrasts. When you look at the financial statements of Exxon Mobil XOM -4.17%, you see a fortress — the company generates more than enough cash to pay all its capital spending and still have $20 billion a year left over for dividends and buybacks. Exxon will survive the downdraft just fine — its shares are down just 7% this year. Contrast that with the small shale-only drillers, which have been borrowing like crazy to acquire acreage and deploy fleets of rigs. They may post net income every quarter, but their profitability is only an accounting illusion. Their capex has outstripped cashflow generation year in and year out. Without big borrowing (backed by rosy forecasts of future production growth) they are toast. So who’s in the worst shape? The companies with a combination of high debt, high costs and relatively poor acreage, like Goodrich. Another early casualty could be Swift Energy, which has piled up $1.2 billion in debt in recent years to drill high-cost wells on marginal acreage. Swift’s investors are clamoring for change as shares have plunged 50% this year. Swift’s net debt has climbed to more than 3 times estimated 2014 EBITDA, or more than 80% of enterprise value. According to data from U.S. Capital Advisors, other operators with high leverage that are living well outside their means include SandRidge, which has debt of 2.6 times EBITDA and 51% of enterprise value; EXCO Resources XCO -12.5% with debt 4.3 times EBITDA and 83% of enterprise value; and Magnum Hunter Resources MHR -16.67%, with debt 4.8 times EBITDA and 38% of enterprise value. |
||
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|