Still 'In Denial'?

Main Page | Report this Page

Science Forum Index » Energy Forum » Still 'In Denial'?

Page 1 of 1

Author

Message

Daniel J. Lavigne

Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2003 8:14 pm

Guest

Still 'In Denial'? The information available at:

http://www.state.hi.us/dbedt/ert/symposium/zagar/

might help you to clear the web of deception that
surrounds the growing energy crisis. Dare you take
a chance and risk learning that it can't be avoided?

If so, please share your views as to how families and
individuals can start their 'personal survival' plans.

DO IT!! . . .

Add your voice to reason's call. Join the Tax Refusal.
ACT ON YOUR DUTY TO REFUSE TO SUPPORT A SOCIETY
that would be party to Mass Murder.

DO IT!! . . .

Help wake the world to the need for societies based
on values, principles and personal responsibilities.
***********************************************
http://www.taxrefusal.com http://www.dieoff.com
***********************************************
"Never doubt that a small group of committed individuals can change
the world; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead

Tequila

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:11 pm

Guest

So what.
When crude oil runs low, transportation will be fueled by
methanol, which can be made from coal.

"Daniel J. Lavigne" wrote:

Quote:

Paul

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:16 pm

Guest

"Tequila" <Tequila@nowhere.com> wrote

Quote:

So what.
When crude oil runs low, transportation will be fueled by
methanol, which can be made from coal.

Please notice that these posts are NOT tax related. Please trim out the
*.taxes newsgroups from your replies. Only you can help stem the tide of
abusive posts that generally are initiated by one individual.

Thank you for your help in easing the amount of crap on the internet.

*.taxes groups trimmed from this reply.

--
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
taxman at negia.net

Daniel J. Lavigne

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 11:55 pm

Guest

Paul A. Thomas, posing as "Tequila", wrote:

Quote:

So what.
When crude oil runs low, transportation will be fueled by
methanol, which can be made from coal.

Of course, Paul A. Thomas / "Tequila" is unable to post any figures or
accepted studies that will support the above claim. He can say that the coal
based production of methanol will be able to support a small fraction of our
present requirements after the now unavoidable costs and consequences of "The
Peak Of Production Of Conventional Oil" are upon us. But he offers an outright
lie when he suggests or otherwise claims that "everything will be okay". They
won't be. I am predicting that we will be in a state of worldwide anarchy by
2012. What, 'then', will be the value, to you, the reader, of the 'taxes' that
you paid, for so many long years, to a society that would be party to mass murder?

Of course, the true intent of such as "Paul A. Thomas" is clear:

They don't want anyone to hear about the fact of their right and duty to
refuse to support societies that would be party to mass murder, as they would
then have to find some other source of employment, due to their carreers as
"Tax Twiddlers" having come to an end due to the Tax Refusal and its message
to the world. Thank you.
*******************************************************
Daniel J. Lavigne first wrote in the post:

Re: In Denial...
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 18:43:38 -0500 . . .

"Perry Arnett" <pjarnett9939@msn.com> wrote:

Similarly, one might ask:

1) if you had lived in Pompeii, and had known for sure that Vesuvius was going
to erupt and destroy Pompeii, and you knew that to within lets say, 6 months
accuracy,

a) knowing that information, would you have changed your life in any way? and

b) what might you have done?

The same questions could be asked about events like the Nazi policies in 1932
against the Jews; would you have left Germany? if so, when? How bad would it
have to have gotten before you would pick up and leave?

So the point I'm trying (not very well) to make here is that even with the
facts and the information about energy resource depletion et al, or any other
major life-altering event, reasonably and readily available to most who want
to find them, how many of us would be willing to make significant changes in
our routines and lives as a consequence of knowing that information?

First comes knowing, but then comes acting on what one knows. Somewhere in
here lies 'denial' - either of the facts, or of the behavioral changes
necessary to act on those facts.

Perry in Utah

----- Original Message -----
From: bradfordfour
To: energyresources@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 1:54 PM
Subject: [energyresources] Re: In Denial...

I have been hammering about this for the last several months among
family, friends and professional colleagues (yes, I even have
professional, research interest in this and that is how I picked up
on the news...didn't ignore it as irrelevant).

Most are in denial and would rather not speak to me about it ever
again. Some are coming around and are considering how it may change
their lives, but they haven't fully internalized it like I have.

Today, most astonishingly, a close colleague said to me "for a long
time I thought you were nuts, but now I think you are just a year
ahead of the curve." I replied that I never thought I was nuts, just
that the rest of the world was ignorant and in denial. Always good
to hear you've been removed from the "nuts" to "plausibly sane"
category by a close associate and friend!

Now the people I tend to associate with are extremely well educated,
scientists, engineers, doctors, teachers, lawyers, policy folks...so
the fact that it is so hard for these people to understand what I am
talking about is discouraging. The other postings on this topic are
great!

Jason
***********************************************
(To which Daniel J. Lavigne offered to all readers):

If you are able to understand the significance of the above exchange, why
would you continue to pay taxes to socities that participate in plans and
preparations that are predicated on a sure and certain will and capacity to
commit mass murder, without demanding a reply to your concerns with respect to
how "you" will be able to deal with the severity of the costs and consequences
that shall follow "The Peak Of Conventional Oil Production" and the all-out
USE of all Nuclear and other Weapons Of Mass Murder as the world's "Civilized
Nations" start to attack and murder each other in order to maintain their
access to the last of that conventional oil??

If you are able to understand that which is posed immediately above, why
continue to support the madness of "The Status Quo" and the will of "Political
Leaders" to suggest that the murder of all Muslims might be "A Good Thing", IF
that would allow western nations a more secure access to the fast diminishing
supplies of conventional oil??

That aside, what happens when America confronts Europe with respect to its
decision to develop a Nuclear Force that will not come under NATO guidelines
AND will be used to enforce Europe's claim to some of that rapidly diminishing oil??

How many readers DARE to face up to the coming crisis? Will the vast majority
choose to remain "In Denial"? Will you?

Thank you.

Daniel J. Lavigne
****************************

Then, Daniel J. Lavigne, in the post " Still 'In Denial'? ", wrote:

Quote:

AND THEN ... Paul A. Thomas decided to respond to his own post wherein he used
the anonyMouse identity "Tequila", and offered:

" Please notice that these posts are NOT tax related. Please trim out the
*.taxes newsgroups from your replies. Only you can help stem the tide of
abusive posts that generally are initiated by one individual.

Thank you for your help in easing the amount of crap on the internet.

*.taxes groups trimmed from this reply. "

Unfortunately for such as Paul A. Thomas and other "Tax Twiddlers" who oppose
the spread of truth and the fact of their common right and lawful duty to
refuse to support a society that would be party to mass murder, ALL of my
posts fit the requirements of each and every newsgroup to which they are
posted.

Indeed, Paul A. Thomas and his ilk are truly and thoroughly upset because
other readers are starting to recognize the fact that sort dare not confront
the issue of the right and duty of all to refuse to support socities that
would be party to mass murder.

Note that they are equally upset that each and every one of my posts relate to
the politics behind the law that assures ALL of their right and duty to refuse
to support societies that would ber party to mass murder. Worse, to that sad
and useless crew, is their realization that their political masters have no
legal mechanism by which they may lawfully stop the Tax Refusal from spreading
its message of hope to a world that remains on the edge of an abyss; being the
total and ALL-OUT USE of all Nuclear and other Weapons of Mass Murder as
nations such as America do their utmost to secure the remaining oil for their
own purposes, politics and profits, including their determination to control
the flow of the remaining oil to the rest of the world.

Lastly, my posts fit the requirement of the various charters of energy groups
in that they place the reality of the growing energy crisis before everyone
who still has spine and integrity sufficient to face up to its special
challenge. Indeed! My offer to pay a $100,000.00 reward to the first to
"PROVE" that there will be sufficient alternative sources of energy to meet
our still growing needs for an energy source offering the same 'energy
density' AFTER the "Peak Of Production Of Conventional Oil" STILL STANDS. And
no one, including such as such as Paul A. Thomas, have made any claim upon it.

I suggest that it is the insurmountable reality of the nexus of related
applicability that permits my post to be offered to tax, political and energy
groups that so thoroughly scares such as Paul A. Thomas and other "Tax
Twiddlers".

Unfortunately, for that sad sort, and their inability to address / confront
the failure of the Canadian and American governments to openly deny the right
and duty of all to refuse to support societies that would be party to mass
murder (BTW, they can't lawfully do so.), they are then left to attack the
messenger, as they have no means of logically denying and defeating the
message that all HAVE a right, and a lawfully compellable duty, to refuse to
support societies that would be party to mass murder.

When you become tired of seeing your tax dollars used to support such as Paul
A. Thomas, and their desire to further the spread of societal insanity, simply
say 'ENOUGH!' to all such madness . . . .

DO IT!! . ..

Add your voice to reason's call. Join the Tax Refusal.
ACT ON YOUR DUTY TO REFUSE TO SUPPORT A SOCIETY
that would be party to Mass Murder.
***********************************************
http://www.taxrefusal.com http://www.dieoff.com
***********************************************
"Never doubt that a small group of committed individuals can change
the world; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead

Ashley Clarke

Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 5:15 pm

Guest

I guess most of here a illiterate and can`t understand
most of the waffle that goes on in these life-saving
Newsgroups - sadly. Maybe we should just leave it to the
Spammers n` Politicians?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Ashley Clarke

Quote:

If so, please share your views as to how families and
individuals can start their 'personal survival' plans.

Page 1 of 1 All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:14 am Science Forum Index