News Palin pick an insult to our intelligence

  • Thread starter Thread starter physucsc11
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Intelligence
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the impact of Sarah Palin's selection as the vice-presidential candidate for John McCain's campaign. Initial reactions highlighted her appeal to women, but the conversation quickly shifted to criticisms of her qualifications and the controversies surrounding her, such as her daughter's pregnancy and various ethical issues. Despite these controversies, many supporters remained loyal, attributing her popularity to her charisma and ability to connect with conservative values. Critics argue that her lack of substantial experience and knowledge in complex political matters undermines her candidacy. The dialogue also touches on the broader implications of the election process, suggesting that it has devolved into a popularity contest rather than a serious evaluation of candidates' qualifications and policies. Participants express frustration over the perceived ignorance of voters who support candidates based on superficial traits rather than substantive issues, leading to concerns about the future of democracy and informed decision-making in elections.
  • #1,001
Proton Soup said:
why, whose oil was it to begin with?
The oil companies! If they own the land on the oil is located at, they own the oil!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #1,002
Karl G. said:
The oil companies! If they own the land on the oil is located at, they own the oil!
Normally, oil companies don't own land like that. They buy leases from the government and start extracting oil. It's lots cheaper that way.
 
  • #1,003
Karl G. said:
The oil companies! If they own the land on the oil is located at, they own the oil!
Not necessarily. One can own land, but not the mineral rights, which is often the case west of the Mississippi River. In many parts of the west, the US government retained the mineral rights.
 
  • #1,004
thanks for correcting my error ... learn something new every day
 
  • #1,005
Karl G. said:
thanks for correcting my error ... learn something new every day
Many people do not realize this, and that is why it is important to read the deed/title to one's land in order to find out what is included in the land. I have the mineral rights to my property, which prevents anyone coming on my land to mine it or drill for oil or gas.

In Texas, Colorado, and other western states, people are sometime surprised to find oil or gas exploration sites on their property or on a property adjacent to theirs. I've seen oil drilling structures between houses in the middle of a city neighborhood. I'm glad it wasn't mine.

In some cases, the US government did grant mineral rights to corporations, e.g. the railroads as an incentive to develop their rights of way. The history of the western US is quite interesting. Sometimes it's worth a visit to state or federal archives to look at the legal documents, contracts, mergers and acquisitions of corporations, particularly the railroads. It's interesting what one finds.
 
  • #1,006
Come to think of it, I remember when I was 5, an oil company was looking for deposits on our land (I live in Texas). But at that age, I thought they were planting bombs on our land, lol.
 
  • #1,007
Karl G. said:
Come to think of it, I remember when I was 5, an oil company was looking for deposits on our land (I live in Texas). But at that age, I thought they were planting bombs on our land, lol.
They were. My former brother-in-law used to do this for a living. He'd place charges, and the mapping companies would position large trucks (with extendable outriggers with telescoping lifts and seismic sensors in the bodies) at strategic locations. The charges would be set off, and the data from the sensors in the trucks would be used to create 3-D maps of the stuff under the ground. Usually, they were looking for salt-domes to tap for natural gas and underlying oil. This is very old technology, and I don't know what has replaced it, these days.
 
  • #1,008
Interesting...
 
  • #1,009
Astronuc said:
Not necessarily. One can own land, but not the mineral rights, which is often the case west of the Mississippi River. In many parts of the west, the US government retained the mineral rights.
In Texas anywhere there is even a hint of oil, the oil companies own the mineral rights.

When I bought my first house near Clear Lake Texas, I actually bought the land from Exxon. I had to agree that any time they wanted, they could erect a derrick on my land and drill and there wasn't a thing I could do about it.
 
  • #1,010
Evo said:
In Texas anywhere there is even a hint of oil, the oil companies own the mineral rights.

When I bought my first house near Clear Lake Texas, I actually bought the land from Exxon. I had to agree that any time they wanted, they could erect a derrick on my land and drill and there wasn't a thing I could do about it.
When I lived in College Station, there were a couple of neighborhoods in which an oil rig was placed on a lot between two houses. I think in one case, a house was actually demolished to put in the rig and subsequent gas well.

If we opened the windows at night in our apartment, one could hear the noise from one of the rigs as the pipes for the drill string were clanging. I can't imagine what it was like in the neighborhood or next door.

South of I-610, there were a lot of oil fields. I used to drive with my dad down to Brazoria each Sunday, and we passed a lot of active wells.
 
  • #1,011
Evo, with your eagerness to lock threads that have gone off topic on this board, one may wonder why you haven't done so with this one, which has so obviously gone off topic.

:rolleyes:
 
  • #1,012
Werg22 said:
Evo, with your eagerness to lock threads that have gone off topic on this board, one may wonder why you haven't done so with this one, which has so obviously gone off topic.

:rolleyes:
It's the 3 post rule. If a thread has 3 sequential on topic posts and doesn't degrade into a flamewar the topic then becomes open. Many Op hijack their own threads once the original topic has run it's course.
 
  • #1,013
This thread is soooo '08. Can't we all just MoveOn(.org)?

Really? 64 pages of bile and hatred for this woman, mostly by a handful of posters. A real feather in our cap!
 
  • #1,014
The thread is officially dead.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
71
Views
10K
Replies
22
Views
8K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
129
Views
20K
Replies
153
Views
18K
Back
Top