McGregory Buttes Oil Field Is Updated -- September 10, 2014

With the incredible wells Halcon is reporting in McGregory Buttes, it was time to update that field. Here are the most recent Halcon wells reported in McGregory Buttes:

• 25596, 2,706, HRC, Fort Berthold 147-94-2B-11-5H, McGregory Buttes, t8/14; cum 1K 7/14;
• 25597, 2,750, HRC, Fort Berthold 147-94-2B-11-4H, McGregory Buttes, t8/14; cum 1K 7/14;
• 26295, 2,569, HRC, Fort Berthold 148-94-35C-26-3H, McGregory Buttes, t8/14; cum 7K 7/14;
• 26294, 2,567, HRC, Fort Berthold 148-94-35C-26-4H, McGregory Buttes, t8/14; cum 6K 7/14;
• 26293, 2,769, HRC, Fort Berthold 148-94-35C-26-5H, McGregory Buttes, t8/14; cum 7K 7/14;  

***************************

Well, That's Embarrassing

It looks like even the professionals have problems with their graphics. Quick, see if you can spot the error in this Deutsche Bank graphic:

This is no surprise to regular readers of the blog. I talked about this at least a year ago. I believe I was the first amateur blog that has no advertising that discussed this issue.  In the graphic above, the arrow to the right is definitely in the wrong position, and the arrow to the left is in a less-than-optimal position (is the arrow on the left pointing to the British Empire -- dark blue -- or the USA (light blue)? Not only that, the chart doesn't even show "2010" on the x-axis. I think this is an old graph; the lower left-hand corner has a 2001 date. Wow.

***************************

For Investors Only

Trading at new highs: BTU, MDR, RIG.

Henry Blodget on Apple.  A customer and shareholder, but obviously not a fanboy. LOL.

************************

Chaos Theory

Some readers, I suppose, are familiar with chaos theory in which some say the flapping of a single butterfly's wings on one side of the world can eventually lead to a hurricane on the other side. Wiki even uses the same "analogy."

Hold that thought.

Today, there's an "op-ed" of sorts in The Telegraph:

There is a Russian proverb: “If you can’t face the wolf, don’t go into the forest.” The West has blundered into the Ukrainian forest and enraged the Russian wolf, only to discover that we cannot face him. We should now be looking for the path out.

Western policy has been built on two false premises. The first is that we must stop a revanchist Russia. As this narrative runs: yesterday Russia took Crimea; today Eastern Ukraine; tomorrow – who knows – Estonia, Poland? This precisely mirrors the Russian nightmare of predatory Nato expansion; yesterday Poland and Estonia, today Georgia, tomorrow – who knows – parts of Russia itself? The mutual suspicions of 1914 spring worryingly to mind.

In fact, before what the Russians (with some justification) saw as a Western grab last February for control in Kiev, there was no evidence of Russian revanchism. Those who point to Georgia are wrong – it was the Georgians who started the 2008 war. Meanwhile, Ukraine is a uniquely sensitive case for Russia; the countries are bound by deep social, cultural, and historical ties. Kiev is known as the “mother of Russia cities”. And even in Ukraine the Russians want influence, not actual territory.

The “we must stand up to Putin as we did to Hitler” line is pure schoolboy politics. Putin, of whom I saw a fair amount as UK ambassador to Moscow, is not an ideologically driven fanatic, but much closer to Talleyrand – the calculating, pragmatic rebuilder of his country’s status in the world. Certainly the seizure of Crimea was illegal and destabilising. But it was a panicky response to a unique set of circumstances, not the start of an attempt to rebuild the USSR. Of course we are right to reassure those who feel most threatened – as Nato has done with its decision to create a “spearhead force.”

We are right to condemn the destruction of MH17, which a report confirmed yesterday was almost certainly shot down. But the idea that sabre-rattling is necessary to convince Russia of Nato’s seriousness is ridiculous. If the Russians didn’t take the NATO security guarantee seriously, why would they be so worried about Ukraine joining? 

Regardless of how this all started, once it began, Vladimir Putin had to make decisions based on what he knew about President Obama. And he had to make those decisions quickly.

Now, hold that thought.

One thing that Putin knew about President Obama: the latter is a deep thinker. He takes time to make his decisions. He won't react quickly. The president even describes himself or his administration as "No Drama Obama."  He's a Harvard graduate, among the best and the brightest. President Obama studies issues "to death." He wants to see Harvard-quality well-thought-out university case studies on his desk before making a decision.

The butterfly that flapped the wing that ultimately led to where we are in the Ukraine might be traced as far back as July, 2010, when the Obama administration effectively killed the Keystone XL. It was at that moment Putin realized that President Obama was a deep thinker, not quick to making hasty decisions. Since then, over and over, Putin has seen a dozen (or dozens) of examples when President Obama delayed a decision, or drew a "red line" in the sand (or the water) and then let it blow away (or wash away). The news that he will delay his immigration "decision" is just one more example.

Chaos theory and the butterfly effect.

On another note, as Germany falls deeper and deeper into another recession, to some degree exacerbated by the sanctions placed on Putin over his handling of the Ukraine, Ms Merkel will probably come back to read this article in The Telegraph. Even she has heard of another proverb: "don't cut off your nose to spite your face."