Anyone going to EI Oil Depletion event, 24th Nov?

[RGR]

You're very skilled at this debating lark RGR - ever though of going into politics?

[Catweazle]

Telling people that a reasonable solution to the problem is using less, and paying more for what they do use, all in the name of something as ephemeral as climate change somewhere else, or depletion, or so developing countries can have the extra's, is hardly a way to win an election in the US.

My understanding of the oil supply situation is that we will have to use less and pay more. We agree on something after all, except that I think it will cause problems.

Do you seriously want to take the position that if a bad computer program adds 2+2 and gets 5 as an answer that having more computers make a bad calculation makes the answer right?

Computers malfunction, by looking at the results of 100 computers and seeing that 99 make it 4 and 1 makes it 5 we can make a reasonable assumption that the answer is 4.

I'll stick with "science isn't run by consensus".

On the contrary, with unproven theories (like "Peak Oil") consensus is very much the order of the day.

[Vortex]

"Maximillian, I worry for you. The authorities are becoming over-interested in your Reserve Growth theories."

[RGR]

[quote="Catweazle"]

[Vortex]

I don't mind the idea of collective intelligence at some level or another, but when that collective spends its time pondering bad information, paying attention to made up sources, misunderstanding the basic workings of the systems involved, can you honestly say that just because they have MORE people reviewing nonsense that somehow the quantity of people reviewing the nonsense means they will understand its nonsense and analyze accordingly?

RGR, I feel that you have decided that only you (& maybe one or two colleagues) know The Truth.

This allows you to assess other peoples contributions as being less valuable than they really are.

The oil industry professionals & analysts that I met at the Energy Institute events - especially the 2006 sessions - are NOT dumb, and I assume do know their industry.

Their assessments were diverse - but all pointed in the same direction.

If you were to attend similar events as a speaker, your arguments could be evaluated together with all the others. It is probable that all speakers would be on a level playing field, all with good industry experience and with the right academic backgrounds.

Now, let's be honest: do you really think that everyone would close up their folders following your presentation saying "Heck, I've wasted my time attending. This guy has shown that everything will be totally fine."

I think that we know what would REALLY happen ... so you need to go on a web crusade, where your persistence & 'salesman skills' give you unwarranted leverage & traction.

Most people in this situation would start a web site e.g OilTruth.com or somesuch ... but you use a different strategy ... you roam around fora & blogs like a virulent virus.

God alone knows what motivates you to spend all that effort spreading The Word.

[RGR]

[quote="Vortex"]

[Vortex]

RGR, how disappointing: you're pulling low grade cultist tricks now. I had thought better of your interlocutorary skills.

My professional body, the SPE, is better than your Energy Institute.

My oil industry associates are better than your oil industry associates

My domain speciality is better than that of your energy generalists.

My professional competence is better than your professional competence.

I am in a niche so I am more right than you.

I am very rare - I am special.

Well, me old mate, me old mucker, that's all total rubbish. Has to be said.

You can't keep reframing the problem just so that you stay in the right.

As for your praise of that lightweight piece at that website, just feel lucky that the credit crunch has eclipsed Peak Oil, Climate Change - and almost every other worry with a time horizon longer than 24 hours.

People won't worry about something which will affect us around 2012 when they risk losing their savings, houses and jobs.

The bright side of all this that maybe you will start 'helping' people at financial doomer sites now that PO has been blown away.

[RGR]

[quote="Vortex"]

[J. R. Ewing]

We have been using less and paying more, similar to the 70's and early 80's. Once consumption habits rebalance against available demand, we'll probably have a price crash later, everyone will forget how important energy is, and we'll do this entire mess all over again.

Maybe so but we'll hit the ceiling very quickly, which will be repeated and repeated, all the while that ceiling will be getting lower and lower. This is of if countries still have the cash to even buy cheaper 'Oil' has the economic crisis worsens due to over borrowing in the expectations of ever cheaper future energy.

[MacG]

My posting activity is way down now that nearly all PO sites have had a drop off in traffic, and a refocusing on economic issues.

Pfhh... Amateur! I recall having a conversation with Matt Savinar on this issue some four years ago, and we were both pretty certain that PeakOil would become rather uninteresting as soon as the economic consequences started to hit - most people will just be to occupied with day-to-day realities to bother about any big-picture issues. Give it another year and these sites are probably pretty much deserted.

[Andy Hunt]

My posting activity is way down now that nearly all PO sites have had a drop off in traffic, and a refocusing on economic issues.

Strange that your interest in the matter should be directly related to its popularity. Do you have quotas to hit or something?

[SunnyJim]

The only real thing which appears in dispute is if it MATTERS

Why on earth would it not matter? We have a huge investment in infrastructure associated with liquid transport fuel. Just look at the adoption of LPG in the UK. It is half the price of deisel or petrol, but is a minority fuel due to the lack of stations selling it.

Cost is a driver for change, but knowledge and education is an equally important driver. To enable a realistic change to a new transport fuel type education is needed encorage consumers to suffer inconvenience or capital expenditure in order to move to a new fuel type.

This is but one example, of how we have a huge investment that has been spread across many many years, that encorages us to stay with fossil fuels, even when price encorages elsewhere.

Remember that markets are re-active, not pro-active. Education is pro-active.

Would you like to explain why you think PO (and its affects on the economy, balance of economic power, military power, goverment popularity, increased chances of war and social discontent) would not matter becase I for one simply cannot see it, although it is obviously the key premiss that your organisation works on!

[RGR]

[quote="MacG"]

[RGR]

[quote="Andy Hunt"]

[MacG]

My posting activity is way down now that nearly all PO sites have had a drop off in traffic, and a refocusing on economic issues.

Pfhh... Amateur! I recall having a conversation with Matt Savinar on this issue some four years ago, and we were both pretty certain that PeakOil would become rather uninteresting as soon as the economic consequences started to hit - most people will just be to occupied with day-to-day realities to bother about any big-picture issues. Give it another year and these sites are probably pretty much deserted.

Matt will be bummed when he doesn't have any gullible nitwits lined up as a ready pool to try and sell freeze dried foods to.

I'm still waitiing around for the peak oil from 2000 to kick in, let alone the 2005 and 2008 ones...I found some old versions of LATOC's front page...Matt had some dire predictions WAY earlier than I originally thought.

Not that I can see what your comment has to do with the context, but Matt has huuuge advantage over you: He is at least honest. Making a living by peddling some freeze-dried as long as things stay glued together seems like a pretty minor offense compared to many other things people engage in to earn a living.