By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's paper

[tsetsefly]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

I watched this documentary and the guy hit the nail on the head with some of his predictions and has it right with fiat money and peak oil. He also has some validity imo, when he uncovered that the cia was involved in drug smuggling operations (something no on should doubt) and he also uncovered the tillman story...

I disagree with him on his views of human adaptability and ingenuity when it comes to facing future problems...

If anything the documentary is actually very good regardless of whether you believe what he says...

[Rajiv]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

If anything, the documentary is actually very good regardless of whether you believe what he says...

embedded for your viewing pleasure

Part -1

Part - 2

Part -3

Part - 4

Part -5

Part - 6

Part - 7

Part - 8

[Chris]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's paper

If this man is correct, then you may be reading the most important story in today's paper.

Please stop. You're killing me.

[cmalbatros]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's paper

"We can't foresee yet what alternatives, what amazing creativity, people will come up with when prices really rise and the profit motive works its magic." It's ALL about profit, when there is enough profit to be earned from an alternate energy source, then it will come, but before that, those who control the resources and make the most profit will NOT give it up lightly and will fight to the bitter end until it is wrested from their greedy mitts.

[don]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's paper

i just finished his book, Collapse. Seen through an energy nexus, outsourcing of heavy industry takes on a different hue. Grabbing military control of the energy sources needed for those states outsourced to, does as well.

[Mn_Mark]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

Without a miraculous discovery, hundreds of millions, if not billions, will die in the next century. If we did not have nuclear weapons or had a good way to defend against them, I would love to have a massive world war that would wipe out the pudgy, overindulged masses on this planet. But, the reality of the situation is that we can have population controls, nuclear war, famine, or disease.

There are no other solutions.

That is a contemptible thing to wish for. Sickening.

[Mn_Mark]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

1962: "Silent Spring" predicts a future with no bird or animal life left, because all died from pesticides.

Actual result: awareness was raised and problem was addressed.

1960s: Predictions of no oil left by the 1980s, massive starvation, no breathable air left, dwindling resources that will be depleted by the 1980s and 1990s.

Actual result: As Julian Simon predicted, resources would be cheaper than ever (he won a famous bet with doomster Paul Erhlich over it). Air quality is great. Population is considerably larger, fed by hugely larger crop yields. Why? Awareness was raised and the problems of air pollution were addressed, and human ingenuity found new ways to grow or find new resources, and use existing resources more efficiently.

1970s: Predictions of a new ice age in the decades ahead.

Actual result: No new ice age. Now it's predictions of catastrophic human-caused global warming.

1990s: Y2K will bring civilization to a halt. The problem is too wide-spread to fix.

Actual result: Awareness was raised, the problem was addressed, and nothing happened.

2000s: Oil will run out and civilization will come to a halt, with massive starvation and end-of-the-world consequences.

Actual result: Do you see a pattern here? Given that pattern, what is most likely to happen? I suggest this: awareness is raised, creativity is applied, new solutions we can't even imagine now are discovered, and Peak Oil doomsters turn out to be as wrong as the other predictions of imminent, mathematically unavoidable catastrophe.

[Mn_Mark]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

Having watched the first ten minutes of this movie now, I begin to understand why the lefties find it so credibly alarming. I find it unintentionally hilarious.

The "expert" being interviewed in the movie starts out by establishing his credentials: the CIA tried to recruit him to smuggle drugs into the country in the 1980s, and he refused, so "they started shooting" at him. Riiiiiiiight. But I guess to lefties, if you've claim to have been involved with nefarious CIA (cue doom music) doings, you must be a man who knows the real scoop, the stuff that's being hidden from us.

So far, that's all this guy has to put forward as his credentials for being interviewed on this subject. That the CIA tried to get him to smuggle drugs. Oh, and he's done a lot of reading. So believe him when he says civilization is about to end, with no possible way out!!!!

Oh, and EVIL EVIL DICK CHENEY had a super-secret energy task force! See? If EVIL EVIL DICK CHENEY was involved, you know there's got to be something fishy going on!

[Rajiv]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

Actual result: awareness was raised and problem was addressed.

MM,

You are right about that. The purpose of raising an alarm about the potentiality of disaster is to get people to rise to the occasion and act avoid the occurence of that potentiality. It is predictive only in the sense of pointing out the eventuality of certain courses of action.

Let us take the example of two persons and a small fire. A sleeping person who hears the fire alarm, and turns and goes back to sleep. A second person hears the alarm, wakes up and puts out the fire. The person who went back to sleep wakes up in the morning, and congratulates himself on making "the right decision." The person who put out the fire also wakes up in the morning and congratulates himself on "making the right decision."

So who actually made the right decision?

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

The purpose of raising an alarm about the potentiality of disaster is to get people to rise to the occasion and act avoid the occurence of that potentiality.

That would be a benevolent purpose.

Sometimes there is a sinister purpose instead or as well, such as controlling people through fear.

I for one can't tell whether Michael Ruppert is (knowingly or unknowingly) raising the alarm for (benevolent or sinister) purposes. If I had to hazard a guess right now, it would be unknowingly sinister.

[tsetsefly]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

Having watched the first ten minutes of this movie now, I begin to understand why the lefties find it so credibly alarming. I find it unintentionally hilarious.

The "expert" being interviewed in the movie starts out by establishing his credentials: the CIA tried to recruit him to smuggle drugs into the country in the 1980s, and he refused, so "they started shooting" at him. Riiiiiiiight. But I guess to lefties, if you've claim to have been involved with nefarious CIA (cue doom music) doings, you must be a man who knows the real scoop, the stuff that's being hidden from us.

So far, that's all this guy has to put forward as his credentials for being interviewed on this subject. That the CIA tried to get him to smuggle drugs. Oh, and he's done a lot of reading. So believe him when he says civilization is about to end, with no possible way out!!!!

Oh, and EVIL EVIL DICK CHENEY had a super-secret energy task force! See? If EVIL EVIL DICK CHENEY was involved, you know there's got to be something fishy going on!

I imagine you are assuming im a "leftie" since i brought up this topic again, couldn't be farther from the truth but lets go into what I said I agree about this documentary, but first, you are wrong about silent spring, it was complete bullshit.
As for the documentary:
1. The CIA has been involved in illegal operations for many years, including drug smuggling, it would be naive not to believe this...
2. The pat tillman story cover up.
3. Fiat money is not good (I dont know how this is leftist, but okay, I mean Ron paul is its biggest detractor in congress)
4. Peak Oil (he is right about peak oil, I disagree on the effects it will have)
5. The government has no idea what to do with the economy.
6. The Iraq war was for oil
7. Its not about republicans or democrats, they are basically the same thing (cant see who can disagree with that)

[Mn_Mark]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

I imagine you are assuming im a "leftie" since i brought up this topic again, couldn't be farther from the truth but lets go into what I said I agree about this documentary, but first, you are wrong about silent spring, it was complete bullshit.
As for the documentary:
1. The CIA has been involved in illegal operations for many years, including drug smuggling, it would be naive not to believe this...
2. The pat tillman story cover up.
3. Fiat money is not good (I dont know how this is leftist, but okay, I mean Ron paul is its biggest detractor in congress)
4. Peak Oil (he is right about peak oil, I disagree on the effects it will have)
5. The government has no idea what to do with the economy.
6. The Iraq war was for oil
7. Its not about republicans or democrats, they are basically the same thing (cant see who can disagree with that)

1. Bald assertion. You evidence that the CIA had a policy of smuggling illegal drugs into the country, please. This smells like left-wing conspiracy theory bullshit.
2. Trivial.
3. Agreed.
4. Open question.
5. That's news?
6. Bullshit. More left-wing conspiracy theories.
7. Mostly true, but the left-wing Democrats running the country right now are very different from the right-wing Republicans. Obama, Pelosi, Frank, Franken - this is the far left of the political spectrum. Having them running the country is not the same as having centrists or Republicans running it. It's overstating the similarities in the parties to argue that it is.

Roger Ebert is a lefty. He breathlessly reviews a documentary featuring some guy sitting in a sharply-lit dank room under harsh light, smoking cigarettes, and talking about the evil Bush-Cheney oil conspiracy while silly "urgent urgent DOOM" music plays in the background. And who is this guy, who the whole movie revolves around? What is his source of expertise that compels us to give him a precious hour of our lives to listen to his monologue? Why, it's because he claims he was once a Republican cop who was solicited by the CIA to help smuggle in drugs, and when he refused, they started shooting at him. That's it. Give me a break. This is left-wing, Cheney/oil obsessed doomer porn.

[tsetsefly]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

1. Bald assertion. You evidence that the CIA had a policy of smuggling illegal drugs into the country, please. This smells like left-wing conspiracy theory bullshit.
2. Trivial.
3. Agreed.
4. Open question.
5. That's news?
6. Bullshit. More left-wing conspiracy theories.
7. Mostly true, but the left-wing Democrats running the country right now are very different from the right-wing Republicans. Obama, Pelosi, Frank, Franken - this is the far left of the political spectrum. Having them running the country is not the same as having centrists or Republicans running it. It's overstating the similarities in the parties to argue that it is.

Roger Ebert is a lefty. He breathlessly reviews a documentary featuring some guy sitting in a sharply-lit dank room under harsh light, smoking cigarettes, and talking about the evil Bush-Cheney oil conspiracy while silly "urgent urgent DOOM" music plays in the background. And who is this guy, who the whole movie revolves around? What is his source of expertise that compels us to give him a precious hour of our lives to listen to his monologue? Why, it's because he claims he was once a Republican cop who was solicited by the CIA to help smuggle in drugs, and when he refused, they started shooting at him. That's it. Give me a break. This is left-wing, Cheney/oil obsessed doomer porn.

1. I can provide many links and a simple google search can lead to many documents, some have even been declassified. But you will bat them down as leftist drivel. So I just as this question, knowing the CIA has been involved in murders its not a stretch to assume they would be involved in other illegal activity.
2. Not that trivial, especially to the US government who went to great lengths to cover up the story...
5. Sadly it is, to many.
6. Really? would say at the very least its debatable.
7. meh, after the bush administration I would say its a tie. No one expanded the wlefare state as much as they did in over 30 years. 2 wars, government expenditures exploded, civil liberties los (patriot act) and complete mismanagement of the crisis (with huge leftist like bailouts included). Obama has just continued this policies.

[Jay]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

That's a fine video, if I do find him a bit self absorbed. Three things I noticed:

1) I wish he had been more forthright when asked why, when in the 1970's when doomerism was in the air, we had another 3 decades of growth. Maybe he doesn't see the link with the FIRE economy as clearly as he might or just didn't elucidate it. That would have been a nice addition.

2) He mentions global warming. Can we put that to bed, please? He's doing the bidding of those he rails against there. Are we having an effect on the climate, likely yes, do we have any idea what the effect is or its magnitude, no.

3) He professes little faith in knowledge leading the human race out of a peak cheap oil straight jacket, he would rather rely on community farming, independence, and positive thinking. While these are good things and will likely have an increasing place going forward during a transition phase, and the solution to peak cheap oil isn't obvious at the moment, the industrial revolution wasn't obvious at the time either. I don't necessarily believe that the global community MUST be faced with the collapse of all centralized structure due to lack of growth going forward. While we may get complete collapse, I think there is a place to at least discuss the possibility of technological solutions if you are being honest. And, yes, I know that a gallon of gas can do the work of like a hundred horses or some such, and you can get it by sticking a straw in the ground. I get it.

[wayiwalk]

Re: By Roger Ebert: If this man is correct, you may be reading the most important story in today's p

That's a fine video, if I do find him a bit self absorbed. Three things I noticed:



3) He professes little faith in knowledge leading the human race out of a peak cheap oil straight jacket, he would rather rely on community farming, independence, and positive thinking. While these are good things and will likely have an increasing place going forward during a transition phase, and the solution to peak cheap oil isn't obvious at the moment, the industrial revolution wasn't obvious at the time either. I don't necessarily believe that the global community MUST be faced with the collapse of all centralized structure due to lack of growth going forward. While we may get complete collapse, I think there is a place to at least discuss the possibility of technological solutions if you are being honest. And, yes, I know that a gallon of gas can do the work of like a hundred horses or some such, and you can get it by sticking a straw in the ground. I get it.

Good comment Jay. Agreed that we tend to underestimate the power of our scientists and engineers to come up with newer, better ways of doing things.

I don't buy a collapse based on oil. I do buy one based on world leadership steering all ships of state into the toilet though....