REAL LIBERAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH ON WHEN PEAK OIL AND PEAK POPULATION IMPLODE THE EARTH, BY EUROYANK

The following is my comment (headers added) to a recent post on EuroYank's blog: "When Peak Oil and Peak Population Implode the Earth," by EuroYank. February 21, 2009.

Again, I'm planning on using my comment on your site as the basis of a post on the RLCC site.

Hello EuroYank and All,

GREED AND NOT LACK OF INGENUITY IS THE PROBLEM

Greed is the problem and not that there are no human beings with the gift of ingenuity to bring forth truly clean, safe, alternative energy in greater supply than ever supplied by the oil industry. That said, many of the dire and urgent warnings in your post and cited-and-linked references are still valuable. I have written myself about the population explosion and peak oil.

While I don't hold with the view of many libertarian capitalists that the Club of Rome is any worse than are those libertarians (the Club of Rome being severely ridiculed by certain anti-NWO types (Austrian School [creed of greed] types for one) for worrying about unbridled population growth), I do though hold that technology developed solely out of a pure spirit of unselfishness is not inherently evil (is not an iteration of Nimrod's Tower of Babel). It's not the end-all-be-all, but it's not sin. I do believe metaphysical provisioning is there for the truly worthy.

SELFISHNESS DOES NOT AND WILL NOT WORK, EVER

I say all of this, because certain of the libertarians simply claim that selfish, capitalist technology to come will take care. Well, that's the "clean-coal" (no such thing, so far) hope. Why bother even trying though when there are so many obviously better choices [cheaper; proven now]? The reason is those who are already heavily invested in the coal supply-and-use chain. Also, we've seen what the technology of Monsanto has been doing - causing diseases and backfiring by aiding in rapid mutation (yes Darwin and more importantly Gregor Johann Mendel) for resistant pests, etc. The promises of Monsanto are all backfiring, because they are greedy.

The greedy spirit cannot bring forth good. It's impossible. A rotten tree with a rotten root does not produce good and delicious and healthy, wholesome fruit fit for human consumption - physical or spiritual.

If we were as one human race (which we are) to come together in the spirit of humble, loving service, there is no doubt in my mind that the answers would be supplied. The only blockage is selfishness that runs to hyper-greed. It is the private-profit motive that is the devouring spirit. It's the spirit of usury. It's the spirit of mammon and the medium of exchange versus just plain giving, as Jesus fed the five thousand from love absent all hypocrisy.

There is no real love in capitalism or any system of mundane money such as the U.S. dollar. Its mindset is short term. Most of the tycoons of the 1920's didn't give a damn about the people inheriting the Earth of 2009. They got theirs in the 1920's and on, are dead now, and not in Heaven, as a direct consequence of their spirits and deeds (including gross, intentional negligence).

DUMB COMMENTS?

I'm surprised you aren't inundated by anti-environmentalists. Are they just not commenting, or are you killing their comments because they are so stupid (you did write that you wouldn't allow dumb comments)? Of course, if you don't allow dumb comments, you don't get to refute them and thereby show your readers how to do that.

DEBATING RULE: A WORKING CONSCIENCE

The problem with opening the floodgates is knowing how and when to control them and to shut them off when they refuse to be convicted by a working conscience and just want to swamp a discussion with no debating rules. Many of them so far have actually refused to the bitter end to develop a working conscience. It gets in the way of private profits at the direct, negative expense of everyone else, as your more recent post clearly demonstrates. The rich get richer (in unrighteous mammon; hardly richer in the eternal spirit of righteousness) while the poor get poorer.

CREDIT WHERE DUE

This is a good post: Deserves credit on its level. I use the term "good" in the mundane here. Only one is good who is our Father (no sexism intended) in the real, New Heaven. I know this is not lost on you, EuroYank.

Blessings,

Tom Usher
The Christian Commons Project

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
    • Thomas James

      I have been talking to quite a few naysayers about the idea of using hydrogen as an alternative to petroleum and I could not believe the negative feedback I got. One person said he would never support hydrogen because it would be the end of the self service gas station and he would simply refuse to pay a professional to refuel his car because it would cost a few cents more than if he could do it himself. The more sensible alternative he said was to extract oil out of shale.

      • The dirty-fuel corporations are throwing everything they have at propaganda. They have a small army of so-called libertarians running around like chickens with their heads off claiming that burning oil and coal has no negative impact. These are the same minds that said tobacco was good for people's health even while they knew it causes cancer and heart disease, etc. Their greed is death. Those same libertarians complain about corporatism and cronyism, but they spew exactly what Exxon (a major corporation and one of the top players in crony capitalism) tells them.

        What do those libertarians think of Monsanto's terminator seeds and other evil, polluting, disease-causing inventions? It's telling that they talk trash about the bankers (sometimes) but kiss up to Exxon. Their all greedy. It's all evil. Their all going to pay the Devil.

        They learn that something is wrong, but they go right on ahead anyway. The right thing to do is stop, turn, and repent. Then one may be forgiven. Otherwise, payment (pain and suffering) will go on and on and on.

        The only souls who will correct the problems created by the greedy are their opposites (the opposites of the greedy). Only unselfish solutions correct problems caused by selfishness. That's fundamental.

        Sure, there a many variables involved in global warming and global cooling, but human burning of carbon is definitely not neutral. Anyone who says it is, is unwise whether or not he or she truly knows it's not neutral. Only the unwise knowingly continue promoting evil. That's the very definition of being as foolish as foolish comes.

        They're just selling their line for private gain in mammon. They often try to convince themselves that their still Christians, but it all comes down to mammon worship with them. No amount of trying to fake themselves out will work. They have their faith in mammon and not in righteousness and the metaphysical that I know exists. They think they're so smart, but they aren't being wise at all. Watch and see. Mark my words.

    • Thomas James

      What really gets me is that the Republicans are blasting Obama's funding for public transportation as pork barrel spending. One project that they are criticizing is the magnetic levitation railine between Las Vegas and Los Angeles. The have denounced the project as a crazy pipe dream that uses technology that simply will never work at least not in our lifetime. This is of course a flat out lie as other countries have been using this technology for many years because it eliminates wheel rolling resistance so that it allows faster trains that use less fuel than airplanes do.

      But the question is not whether or not something is the truth but rather is the lie credible? And unfortunately the answer to that question is yes the lie is more credible than the truth. The sad fact is that the average truck driver who is a conservative talk radio ditto head will refuse to believe and will adamently insist that there is no such thing as a magnetic levitating train and it is only some conspiracy to raise the taxes of the working man.

      • Well, Thomas, you are right that there is such a thing as magnetic levitation. You are right that the so-called conservative, AM radio talk-show hosts use the Big-Lie tactic. They are paid by the plutocrats to do so. The average truck driver should spend more time looking at who owns Exxon and the radio stations to which they are listening. They should spend more time following the money.

        As for the rail line itself from Disneyland to Las Vegas, it's easy to hate it. Whose idea was it and why? Follow the money again. Is it a long-term vision to encourage tourism from family entertainment to the place where there are no illusions that the house always has the odds on its side, short of divine intervention?

        Las Vegas was revved up by gangsters. Everyone knows it. There isn't enough water out there. What are they going to do about that?

        The time and energy put into a high speed, hi-tech train from Disneyland to Las Vegas would garner far more if it were put directly to bringing forth pure food and environmentally clean housing, etc., for the destitute, who could be employed doing just that.

        Anyway, I take your points; but while seeing through the neocon talking-heads, don't fall prey to just another breed of vulture.

        I trust you see that — no condescending tone intended here but rather genuine concern.

        Peace

    • Thomas James

      Yes of course the idea of a high speed rail line from Disneyland to Las Vegas would not be a good idea because it would effectively cut the commute time from 4 hours which is a long haul to 1 hour which shortens the virtual distance so much that it effectively legalizes gambling in Disneyland's backyard.

      I was only arguing that maglev is a proven technology that should be beyond ridicule because it is already in use. I could see that if funding were approved for a much more radical technology such as the supersonic 4000 mile per hour maglev train that runs in a vacuum tunnel (which eliminates wind resistance in order to achieve supersonic speeds with very little fuel) which was proposed by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology would indeed produce an uproar however this type of funding is usually hidden in so much technobabel that the average person would not have a clue what the funding is for. For example the arrivals and destinations of Las Vegas and New York would only be described using mathematical coordinates of latitude and longitude so as to be even more incomprehensible.

      As far as the Mob bosses or the Mafia supporting ecologically sustainable public transportation it is ironic that the children of light or so called Christian Conservatives would be opposed to public transportation because they consider it a moral failing because they insist that personal responsibility demands that every red blooded American drive his or her own car and not to be dependent on the government which is by the way ladies and gentleman Socialism which does not work because it transfers wealth from the producers to the non productive elements of society. On the other hand the Mafia does not have any such moral concern about personal responsibility so they welcome environmentally sound public transportation as well as clean hydro electric power from the Hoover Dam socialist public works project.

      On a further note it comes to my mind the banking industry where we compare the Christian banker to the Bank of Sicily. Assuming that both loans originated as predatory shark loans the Conservative Christian banker would immediately dump on the homeowner claiming that he broke the Ten Commandments by lying on his loan application and also that he coveted a house he could not afford.

      • Hi Thomas,

        I don't know why for sure, but your comment went to spam. You might want to take a look where you've left other comments recently to see whether they were approved. They might have been killed as spam by the blog or forum admin.

        I'll reply more later. I'm working on gaining unrighteous mammon to translate into the Commons right now, so I don't have time.

        Blessings,

      • Hi Again,

        I finally made it back. I had loads of projects to tie up.

        Well, Thomas, I did realize that you weren't advocating the particular route between Anaheim and Las Vegas.

        Yes, there are some people in the Mafia who are more enlightened than are many preachers in Southern Baptist churches, not that Southern Baptist preachers have a monopoly on distorting the message of Christ. Many Episcopalians, and others, do a major job of it too only in the other direction on the false political spectrum.

        The plutocrats are just a bigger, better-funded, vastly better-armed circle than are the Mafia. The Mafia is just a sub-branch. The "organized crime" propaganda was just a diversionary tactic. The Wall Street investment sharks taking orders from the secluded plutocrat bosses put the Mafia Dons to shame when it comes to the magnitude of their schemes and scams.

        It's the money, Thomas. Usury is the biggest evil followed by the very system of money itself. What a wicked mind devised it!

        If humanity doesn't turn from selfishness, it will be driven into extinction.

        Well, I'm just passing through unless this whole planet will wake up, turn, repent, and atone.

        Blessings,

        Tom

    • The global oil supply scene in particular is up for a dramatic review after recent finds not only in Latin America but also in Asia, Africa and Greenland and potentially large onshore gas finds in the Netherlands. This is because the finds all but cancel out a lot of recent theorizing about "peak oil" -- finite hydrocarbon resources -- and expert prognoses that the end is nigh for the world's oil bonanza.

      It also calls into question the theory that crude oil is dead vegetation and animal life rather than being something else produced deep within the Earth as many Russians and others have believed for a long time now.