Michael C. Ruppert is the author of "Crossing The Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil". Published in September 2004, it is the second-largest selling book about the attacks of 9/11 after the Keane Commission report. "Rubicon" is the only book to show that U.S. policy since then has been consistent with Peak Oil imperatives. Mike is also the publisher/editor of "From The Wilderness", a newsletter read in more than 50 countries around the world. Mike is a highly sought after lecturer on Peak Oil, having spoken in ten countries. Mike's current focus is on individual and community preparedness for the challenges now facing us all. Mike is a former LAPD narcotics investigator, whistleblower and a 1973 Honors Graduate of UCLA in Political Science.
>From: jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Abiotic Oil vs. Peak Oil
>Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 18:08:44 -0600
>
> > On Thursday, January 05, 2006 3:23 PM [PDT],
> > Chip Berlet <c.berlet at publiceye.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The headline can be:
> > >
> > > Two Cranks Case Oil
> > >
> > > -cb
> > >
> >
> > Mike Ruppert has the background and the ability [LAPD detective] to
> > do a reasonably structured analysis of any issue he'd care to tackle.
> >
> > How about you Chip? Do you even KNOW what abiotic oil is?
> >
> > Credentials please?
> >
> > Leigh
>
>Ruppert is a bit off. Is there a topic he doesn't consider himself an
>expert or near-expert on?
>
>Being an LAPD detective hardly qualifies one to pontificate on petroleum.
>The ability to do detailed
>stuctural analysis would certainly be helpful for a detective but to
>imagine that it is an inherent ability of
>police detectives is wishful thinking. I have known some detectives whose
>ability to analyze much of
>anything was pretty dismal.
>
>I know what abiotic theory oil is. I have Dr. Golds book but I just started
>it (yes I know it's a few years old
>but I don't always get to read things as soon as I'd like) and cannot yet
>comment specifically on it. It is an
>interesting theory that suffers from some problems a few more than the
>currently held theory.
>
>It's seems unlikely to be accurate but stranger things have happened. Maybe
>I'll be persuaded it isn't
>extremely improbable as a theory by Gold's text but I'm going in skeptical.
>He's not a geologist so he is a bit
>out of his element.
>
>Even if I believed the abiotic oil theory was correct the "Two Cranks Case
>Oil" comment would still be funny
>and accurate. Corsi is really nuts and it's being charitable calling
>Ruppert just a bit off. The debate on
>abiotic oil is certainly worth engaging in but nothing of significance will
>be added by these two.
>
>John Thornton
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk