Fox News Schooled By Nebraska Farmer on Keystone XL Pipeline

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
1) I saw no schooling
2) Your quoted material is hack, at best
3) You don't want to live in Nebraska, like mountains, yet you live in Kansas - which is even flatter
3) Why is your avatar the sculpture of a foolish girl about to be gored by a wild animal?

This is disgracefully disingenuous. You and I both know that I live right across the state line from YOU, and that it is anything but "flat."

And you freaking know that. Posing does not become you.

Deflection from rebuttals, that's what you got? Have you been to Nebraska? It is not flat, especially on the eastern side.

And why do you want to see little girls trampled by huge animals?

originally posted by: olaru12
An yet oil companies still get subsidies paid for by the US taxpayer.

Not really relevant to my point and I am also against any and all corporate subsidies.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
We can live without each other's resources having to be traded.

The United States is the largest net exporter of refined petroleum, the rest of the world cannot live without our products.

So, maybe we should stop bombing the Middle East where that is all they have.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Have you been to Nebraska? It is not flat, especially on the eastern side.

Please return to the OP and start over. Yes. I have family in Nebraska. Already said that. Albion. Newman Grove. Norfolk. Lincoln.

You damn well know that you and I both live along the Missouri river, where it is NOT FLAT. You know that! So why are you trying to insist I live in some flat place like Manhattan, KS or Wichita? YOU KNOW THAT IS A LIE.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
So, maybe we should stop bombing the Middle East where that is all they have.

The Middle East was never a top exporter in refined petroleum. None of those countries even cracks the top five.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I'm a little confused about a couple of things.

First, the ecological destruction issue. I think everyone agrees that oil spills are devastating, but a maintained pipeline shouldn't leak. Leaking oil is money wasted. I know there have been instances of improper maintenance (Deep Horizon was at least partially due to BP installing a surplus safety valve), but isn't this one of those areas where regulations would be welcome?

Also, isn't there a much smaller chance of a spill from a pipeline than from a tanker? Canada is going to sell that oil to someone, if they have to pump it to the West Coast and tanker it to China. The US is the best customer, yes... we have a huge demand, our own refineries, and are right next door... but if the best customer won't buy the obvious next step is to find another buyer. China is actively seeking energy supplies.

Finally, we won't be selling oil to other countries... but we might be selling oil products. The countries we export to typically don't have sufficient refining ability themselves, so they buy refined products from us. That dynamic won't change over a pipeline. The only thing that will change is that we will be importing less oil from the Middle East and more from Canada. Exports won't be affected. So what's the real issue?

Just trying to understand the realities...

TheRedneck

yes, 35-50 is the number of permanent jobs to be created for maintenance of the pipeline. The jobs that everyone seem to forget about are the hundreds of refinery jobs in southeast Texas (Nederland and Houston).

a reply to: JDeLattre89

Devil's advocate here...

Will those refineries produce any more after the pipeline is finished? I was under the impression we were already running close to 100% production.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Have you been to Nebraska? It is not flat, especially on the eastern side.

Please return to the OP and start over. Yes. I have family in Nebraska. Already said that. Albion. Newman Grove. Norfolk. Lincoln.

You damn well know that you and I both live along the Missouri river, where it is NOT FLAT. You know that! So why are you trying to insist I live in some flat place like Manhattan, KS or Wichita? YOU KNOW THAT IS A LIE.

Implying that Manhattan is flat is also a lie.

But there are construction jobs while it's being put in a new refining jobs to be had after the pipeline is done.

Maybe, they might even be able to build new refineries or refurbish the old ones to keep up with supply.

Never driven through the Konza, have you? ;p

So it has no real effect on America being self-sufficient in terms of needing to import. North America, maybe, but not the United States herself.

No real effect.

How bout freggin HYPOCRISY ?

The US got to put a pipeline through Canada, but the US can't be bothered to reciprocate!

Yeah.

Alright then.

originally posted by: neo96

So it has no real effect on America being self-sufficient in terms of needing to import. North America, maybe, but not the United States herself.

No real effect.

How bout freggin HYPOCRISY ?

Where?

The US got to put a pipeline through Canada, but the US can't be bothered to reciprocate!

Yeah.

Alright then.

Post sources. Defend your opinion.

a reply to: ketsuko

Flint hills are not flat. They just have no trees, and rely on the Ogalala Aquifer. Holy cow ---- to what lengths will you all go to try to attack me? Your husband accuses me of living in flatlands. I provide evidence that he is spreading ignorant lies.

Then you come on here and .....what? Show how people In Manhattan aren't living in flatlands either? What is the bloody point of all of that strawposturing????

good gawd. This is why I do not respond to you two. Thanks for playing. Check out NPR.

You live in KC. McClatchy is a balanced and intelligent news source. Kansas City MO just made progress toward marijuana tolerance. Westboro is pretty much dead. So is Brownback's agenda. You don't even live in Kansas anymore.

That's a bunch o' fail creds and factoids.


So....what else you got?

a reply to: neo96

No. I need evidence that you know anything at all factual and serious about what you are talking about.

a reply to: amfirst1

That's the Dakota pipeline and it's up and running, the Keystone is being constructed I have a good friend working on it. will be done by late fall.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: neo96

No. I need evidence that you know anything at all factual and serious about what you are talking about.

And you wonder why nobody respects you.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

"My administration is committed to advancing scientific research that leads to a better understanding of our environment and of environmental risks," Trump said. "As we do so, we should remember that rigorous science depends not on ideology, but on a spirit of honest inquiry and robust debate. "

Absolutely.
NOT IDEOLOGY.
Robust SCIENCE.
So we agree - cutting political hacks out of the EPA is GOOD!

Perhaps the EPA can now focus on real environmental problems, such as zinc contamination in rivers from mines on properties of unscrupulous operators:

www.informationliberation.com...

...Oopps....

Flat state smack.

Your state is flat.
No, your state is flat!
Your state is flatter than mine!

I was against it from the beginning. I knew the pipeline was only going to create 75 permanent jobs, at best, not the "thousands" that they were trying to sell the American public on. I also was aware that this country wasn't even going to see any of the refined product from the pipeline. I also was aware of the environmental risk the pipeline poses. So, yeah, I was against it from the beginning. However, it's all for naught now; it's going to happen. Shrug. All of the arguing and identifying of facts is for naught because average Joe Blow and Sue Pue aren't interested in any of that. They'd rather live in the fantasy that "continuing to do what we've always done" is sustainable. They're in for a very rude awakening. I digress. Over and out.