Rant: 'The sample of 1' problem

[kenneal - lagger]

I look forward to a day when:
a: All posters are identifiable

You could practice what you preach, Mr Vortex. Or is it Vortex .....?

I, too, agree about the younger generation's lack of English; especially when the exam results are supposedly getting better every year.

[fifthcolumn]

The problem is this vortex:
That the global reserve of light crude oil is limited is a provable fact.

That the same light crude production will rise, peak and decline is less provable but still fairly likely.

That you can predict the exact shape of the decline curve is less likely.

That you can predict any substitutes is less likely still.

That you can extrapolate the effect on the world economy is less likely still.

There are so many variables that the "one true peak oil" mantra that many believe in with almost religious fervour is ludicrous.

But nevertheless, there it is.

[Vortex]

You could practice what you preach, Mr Vortex. Or is it Vortex .....?

Many long term posters/lurkers here know my name - I don't hide it with the efficiency of an MI5 agent!

I just like a tad of privacy because the Web is currently 'broken' as I noted in my original post.

The use of a 'nickname' is an indication for such a desire for privacy.

This is why RGR's identify isn't splashed all over the site, although some here know who he is. We respect the convention of using a nickname for privacy purposes.

Longer term however perhaps we should be aiming for less reliance on nicknames and unwritten rules.

In an ideal world I would be happy to show my full details all the time - as long as everyone else is doing the same!

Interesting aside: apparently even those who DO show their full identity on the web can STILL exhibit over-agressive and 'non real world' behaviour.
That's why I included the second point:

B: The validity of their posts etc can be scored.

This would allow us (or our software) to screen out posters who don't have valid contributions to make.

[Vortex]

There are so many variables that the "one true peak oil" mantra that many believe in with almost religious fervour is ludicrous.

Probably true.

However the unlikelihood of a 'point event' such as the oil wells all drying up at 15:12 on 12th June 2017 does NOT mean that supply problems are not looming.

As noted elsewhere, I have discussed Peak Oil OFFLINE with REAL oil & gas industry people. Their surprisingly calm & restrained but pessimistic view of our mid/long term oil supply future was enough to convince me that my children might see PO related problems later in their careers.

Does it matter if the decline starts in 2012 or 2022?
Does it matter if the decline rate is 2% or 8%?
Does it matter that new natural gas sources might reduce the impact of problems in some countries for 20 or 30 years?

I doubt it: it seems that the Age Of Plenty will soon be over. We should plan for eventual fossil fuel 'energy descent'.

Add Mad Max or Rural Idyll scenarios according to taste.

[Catweazle]

it seems that the Age Of Plenty will soon be over. We should plan for eventual fossil fuel 'energy descent'.

This is so obvious that I fail to see why anybody would argue against it. Really, we don't need any more PO discussion; just a lively swapping of ideas on how best to cope with the inevitable.

[Jakell]

On the subject of anonymity. I believe it is possible to create a cohesive online persona that truly represents you by being consistent, and where you are unsure or ambiguous, be open about it.

You name, location, gender, age, personal history etc. may be factual but may not accurately represent you at this time, but what you actually say over a period of time may be more representative.

There are several instances of what I think of as Sub-Trolls, who regularly dip into trolling, but smarten up ( or disappear for a while) when it looks like they will be outed, however their inconsistency is noticeable.

[PS_RalphW]

There are several instances of what I think of as Sub-Trolls, who regularly dip into trolling, but smarten up ( or disappear for a while) when it looks like they will be outed, however their inconsistency is noticeable.

I can't imagine who you are thinking off!

EDIT

I'm sure I fixed that spelling as soon as I posted this. I think I must be going senile!

[RogerCO]

I look forward to a day when:
a: All posters are identifiable

Indeed. I've never posted anything, anywhere in cyberspace without using my real name and usually in a form where it wouldn't take long to find my real world address. I've never been too impressed by the arguements in favour of annonimity, though maybe others have something to hide that I don't know about.

Yes, I agree with biffvernon, vortex and RGR on this one. If you are not prepared to put your name to what you are saying then it is probably not worth wasting time on.
In places like this a core of stable nicknames with more or less well known real identities behind them are ok, but much of the web is completely useless.
Vortex's original point seemed spot on - but maybe we just need to learn to be more discriminating and discount anything that is either not identifiable or not referenced. Is there an opportunity for a successor to google here - some piece of software that, for example, automatically filters out 99% of comments on newspaper sites, leaving only the valuable ones.

[Vortex]

Some web sites such as The WELL use scoring for the blogs.

You can set you 'ignore prat' level to eliminate 10%, 50% or even 95% of posts.

The scoring can be 2-dimensional in that a poster is scored but the post itself is also scored.

This allows users to automatically skip the rare post that you make when drunk or angry, even if you are regarded as a generally good poster.

[Adam1]

I look forward to a day when:
a: All posters are identifiable

You could practice what you preach, Mr Vortex. Or is it Vortex .....?

I, too, agree about the younger generation's lack of English; especially when the exam results are supposedly getting better every year.

Shouldn't it be "You could practise what you preach..."?

[Vortex]

It's just SO easy to find someone via the Internet that I feel that little bit safer having that veil of anonymity, however thin (after all the Govt. is watching everything we do in the Internet anyway).

Yep, it's easier than you might imagine locating people on the Web.

I once received an abusive email in response to a local politics protest I was helping with.

It appeared to come from the (anonymous) home email address of a Polish migrant worker.

However after some hours of work tearing the email source code apart I found that it actually originated from a specific office PC terminal in the firm that I was moaning about.

I presented the data to the police, saying that they could check the factory CCTV records to identify who the threatening emailer was. (I had the precise time and computer ID).

Hah ha. I was nearly charged under terrorism laws - if the email had indeed been sent by a Polish worker and not by a daft office worker then I would have been inciting mayhem by complaining about the email!

I complained to my MP who got a letter from the Police saying 'tough luck, the case is now closed'.

It's a funny old world ...

[fifthcolumn]

As noted elsewhere, I have discussed Peak Oil OFFLINE with REAL oil & gas industry people.

I work in oil & gas.
I live in the oil patch.
I talk about depletion with insiders every day.
Does that count?

Does it matter if the decline starts in 2012 or 2022?
Does it matter if the decline rate is 2% or 8%?
Does it matter that new natural gas sources might reduce the impact of problems in some countries for 20 or 30 years?

Damn straight it matters if decline starts in 2022 or 2012.
My company puts it about 2015. Though they don't use the term "decline". It's described as "difficulty in replacing reserves".

Damn straight it matters if the decline rate is 2% or 8%.
2% can probably be mitigated without a collapse. 8% is getting dicey.

And last but not least: a natural gas glut is the bridge to a renewable future. If we screw that up we have no more easy options.

[Blue Peter]

Damn straight it matters if decline starts in 2022 or 2012.
My company puts it about 2015. Though they don't use the term "decline". It's described as "difficulty in replacing reserves".

Is that just your reserves? or the world's reserves?

Damn straight it matters if the decline rate is 2% or 8%.
2% can probably be mitigated without a collapse. 8% is getting dicey.

And last but not least: a natural gas glut is the bridge to a renewable future. If we screw that up we have no more easy options.

Is there a Euro/Asian natural gas glut?


Peter.

[PS_RalphW]

Damn straight it matters if decline starts in 2022 or 2012.
My company puts it about 2015. Though they don't use the term "decline". It's described as "difficulty in replacing reserves".

Damn straight it matters if the decline rate is 2% or 8%.
2% can probably be mitigated without a collapse. 8% is getting dicey.

And last but not least: a natural gas glut is the bridge to a renewable future. If we screw that up we have no more easy options.

Agreed that these matter a whole heap - assuming we make use of them to adapt.

Given the geopolitical system in this country and most of the world, it won't make a blind bit of difference

[fifthcolumn]

Damn straight it matters if decline starts in 2022 or 2012.
My company puts it about 2015. Though they don't use the term "decline". It's described as "difficulty in replacing reserves".

Is that just your reserves? or the world's reserves?

Just ours.
Most of the world's reserves are in the hands of government owned outfits.

Is there a Euro/Asian natural gas glut?

North American, Middle Eastern and Asian.

Europe has some but it's in a relatively weaker position.

Norway, however, has just discovered a brickload of nat gas in it's Northern Block which should give a couple years breathing room, though.