ANWR drilling will save us 3 CENTS per Gallon, by 2027

[Godfearer]

Jesus will save us from mystery babylon.

hallelujah!!!

The LORD comes soon.

[The Lorax]

it's baloney. three cents a gallon lower huh? ROFL, i hate to be the bearer of truth here, but it's already dropped THIRTY cents a gallon and we haven't even begun yet. all it took was the suggestion of drilling. so the time article only serves to make those who buy into their load of garbage look incredibly foolish.

Bull. I dare you to find actual evidence for this. And no, your personal ideology driven speculation doesn't count as evidence.

for the record, i've worked directly with time magazine on an article in the past. i'm very familiar with their knack for spinning what they are told into what they want readers to believe.

The figures didn't come from Time. They came from the government. The EIA.

It amuses me that you put more faith in your own wild speculations than in actual information from professionals in government. It explains a lot.

[Guest LadyC]

bull? i'm confused. you want me to produce evidence of the immediate drop in pain at the pump? do you not own a car that you have to fill up periodically? or are you wanting some evidence of something else that i missed.

and published by time. i glanced over it. i didn't read thoroughly. i don't really have to read the entire thing to know what i'm talking about with regard to time magazine's ability to publish only the portions of any given report that they are interested in passing along. a link was not posted to the report on a government website.

and for the record, the "even mccain" remark is unnecessary. i don't put a whole lot of stock in what he says. i'm only voting for mccain in order to help millions of others try and stop obama from being elected. not that it matters much. regardless of which one of them gets in office, our country is headed for a meltdown.

[The Lorax]

bull? i'm confused. you want me to produce evidence of the immediate drop in pain at the pump? do you not own a car that you have to fill up periodically?

No. I want evidence that said drop has ANYTHING to do with "talking about drilling."

i don't really have to read the entire thing to know what i'm talking about with regard to time magazine's ability to publish only the portions of any given report that they are interested in passing along. a link was not posted to the report on a government website.

In the last two posts, you've shown me a great deal about yourself. You've shown that, when confronted with a fact you don't like, you will reject it. You will make up an excuse about the liberal media, even though the information didn't come from the liberal media.

Now, if you don't believe in government information just because it came to you through the liberal media, then the onus is on you to find the gov't report. But until you do, your automatic rejection of disagreeable information proves just how dogmatic your ideology is, and what a powerful bias it has on your perception of reality.

[Guest LadyC]

ya know, i was just in the midst of adding something more regarding the reliability of anything coming from the government when the computer i'm using shut down without warning in order to run it's auto updates. do you, lorax, trust what the government tells you about anything? they're the biggest spinning loom around. they inflate/deflate statistics to push an agenda that will serve whomever washes washington's back the most. it happens for everything from the so-called benefits of sunscreen to open border policy to second-hand smoke.

in the last two of your posts, you've shown me more about yourself than i already knew. you're throwing out accusations about me that reflect your own image in a mirror. i made nothing up about the liberal media, i stated that i know from personal experience with time magazine. you want proof? send me a pm with your mailing address sand i'll ship you a copy of the interview i did with them several years ago.

and if you have difficulty linking the immediate drop in gas prices with bush's encouragement to start drilling, tough beans. i have no onus to prove anything to you. bush made the statement, prices dropped. that is all the evidence i need.

however, if you'd like for me to provide you articles, reports, whatever that indicate that we could be producing oil there within as little as one year, maximum six years, (which i have no reason to doubt would dramatically lower what we pay), or if you'd like for me to produce links to information about libs wanting to raise the price at the pump by increasing taxes to the little people like you and i, i can certainly do that. and i'll be happy to do so.

but i'm warning you now that it may be after the first of the month before i do, BECAUSE i'm out of town and my time on the internet is very limited, and very precious. i run several websites, provide tech support on three message boards, and administrate one other forum, so being able to even spend time enjoying myself HERE when i'm not at home is a luxury. there are far more threads i would like to read and post in.

so if you'd like me to take time finding and posting links to articles and reports, send me a pm, and i'll comply with your request at my leisure. and then you can discount them just as i have discounted yours... and i know you will because i won't be posting from left-wing sources.

[The Lorax]

ya know, i was just in the midst of adding something more regarding the reliability of anything coming from the government when the computer i'm using shut down without warning in order to run it's auto updates. do you, lorax, trust what the government tells you about anything? they're the biggest spinning loom around. they inflate/deflate statistics to push an agenda that will serve whomever washes washington's back the most. it happens for everything from the so-called benefits of sunscreen to open border policy to second-hand smoke.

I trust non-political gov't agencies more than I trust the media. When it comes to energy, I trust the Energy Information Administration. Just like when it comes to weather, I trust the National Weather Service.

in the last two of your posts, you've shown me more about yourself than i already knew. you're throwing out accusations about me that reflect your own image in a mirror. i made nothing up about the liberal media, i stated that i know from personal experience with time magazine. you want proof? send me a pm with your mailing address sand i'll ship you a copy of the interview i did with them several years ago.

I don't doubt you. You know Gloucester, MA--where all the girls got pregnant? Time "broke" the story about Gloucester, my hometown. They sensationalized it greatly. Every network does this, and it's not about political bias; it's about ratings.

HOWEVER, the meat of the article was the statistic coming from the EIA, not from Time. That's why I said your rant about time is an excuse--it doesn't justify rejecting info from the EIA.

so if you'd like me to take time finding and posting links to articles and reports, send me a pm, and i'll comply with your request at my leisure. and then you can discount them just as i have discounted yours... and i know you will because i won't be posting from left-wing sources.

I'd rather not. But I do have a question for you:

Do you think Fox News is fair and balanced? Do you think it's politically neutral?

[Rick-Parker]

Hopefully by 2027 we will have renewable sources of energy and have moved away from oil.

[kat8585]

All I know is as soon as minute Bush lifted the ban, oil started to come down, and it hasn't stopped. Gas has come down a lot, too.

[Heiress2theKingdom]

One has to consider the source of the information provided.

it's baloney. three cents a gallon lower huh? ROFL, i hate to be the bearer of truth here, but it's already dropped THIRTY cents a gallon and we haven't even begun yet. all it took was the suggestion of drilling. so the time article only serves to make those who buy into their load of garbage look incredibly foolish.

Bull. I dare you to find actual evidence for this. And no, your personal ideology driven speculation doesn't count as evidence.

for the record, i've worked directly with time magazine on an article in the past. i'm very familiar with their knack for spinning what they are told into what they want readers to believe.

The figures didn't come from Time. They came from the government. The EIA.

It amuses me that you put more faith in your own wild speculations than in actual information from professionals in government. It explains a lot.

If you would rather read a research based/ peer reviewed article about what goes into creating our gas prices you may look here: http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/clrdocs/vol19issue4/tyson_slocum.pdf

There are also several research articles about Asymmetric Pricing if you look on Google Research.

To me, the evidence demonstrates that the price of gas has very little to do with the demand and rate of oil production, and very much to do with politics and public education.

Why is it that we are tolerating such high prices at the pump to begin with? They didn't in the 1970's with the last gas outrage. I believe it is because we now acknowledge that gas will run out at some point and we are all to willing to pay the high price for it because we are dependent on it. We are also taught to believe that prices are based on supply and demand. The demand for oil is high but production is supposedly low. This belief is what spurs on the acceptance of promises that if we drill more the prices will be lower.

Anyone who does considerable reading knows better. The prices are not based on supply and demand, but are based on politics, and part of the politics are the fact that the "little people" in the world power nations are ill educated and don't learn for themselves what is going on. The regulation of oil has decreased, the producers and manufacturers of oil based products have gained powers and made coalitions, and can inflate prices as they please. The time article agrees, the cnn article agrees, and the research based articles agree.

As for your thirty cent drop....you may wish to look at the cause of that and the result of it. Your prices now are about even with that where I come from (my sources say between 3.99 and 4.15). Whopp-de-doo its the same as the rest of us now! Secondly, that thirty cents may have been a reduction in taxes specific to your area. If your price reduction had anything to do with new drilling it would have effected all of us not just your locality.

[Guest LadyC]

ya know, i was just in the midst of adding something more regarding the reliability of anything coming from the government when the computer i'm using shut down without warning in order to run it's auto updates. do you, lorax, trust what the government tells you about anything? they're the biggest spinning loom around. they inflate/deflate statistics to push an agenda that will serve whomever washes washington's back the most. it happens for everything from the so-called benefits of sunscreen to open border policy to second-hand smoke.

I trust non-political gov't agencies more than I trust the media. When it comes to energy, I trust the Energy Information Administration. Just like when it comes to weather, I trust the National Weather Service.

in the last two of your posts, you've shown me more about yourself than i already knew. you're throwing out accusations about me that reflect your own image in a mirror. i made nothing up about the liberal media, i stated that i know from personal experience with time magazine. you want proof? send me a pm with your mailing address sand i'll ship you a copy of the interview i did with them several years ago.

I don't doubt you. You know Gloucester, MA--where all the girls got pregnant? Time "broke" the story about Gloucester, my hometown. They sensationalized it greatly. Every network does this, and it's not about political bias; it's about ratings.

HOWEVER, the meat of the article was the statistic coming from the EIA, not from Time. That's why I said your rant about time is an excuse--it doesn't justify rejecting info from the EIA.

so if you'd like me to take time finding and posting links to articles and reports, send me a pm, and i'll comply with your request at my leisure. and then you can discount them just as i have discounted yours... and i know you will because i won't be posting from left-wing sources.

I'd rather not. But I do have a question for you:

Do you think Fox News is fair and balanced? Do you think it's politically neutral?

since you also sent the question in a PM, which i read before catching up on this thread, i responded by pm.

as for government agencies, they're often no better than the media. the CDC and even the WHO have produced propoganda many times, and still do. again, i'm referring to things such as sunscreen, secondhand smoke, and other things. things that if you dig farther into their site than what they make easily accessible, you'll find that the reports most often read and quoted are full of skewed, very skewed statistics. you'd think those are non-political agencies. but everybody has an agenda. with the media, yes, it's ratings. with everyone else, it's money, votes, endorsements, something. we are much like sheep being led to the slaughter when we start putting more faith into any "source" other than God (and i'm meaning the bible, the leading of the Holy Spirit, prayer, the whole nine yards.)

what i do know, and i think you're probably intelligent and intellectually honest enough to admit, is that you and i (or anyone else) could produce link after link after link to back our own personal viewpoint of any given subject. and really, what is the point of that? nothing. it's simply a form of entertainment to bicker back and forth, using whatever source (expert or otherwise) we want, knowing full well that since WE Are not the experts, we really only know what we want to believe.