Joined: May 26, 2004 Posts: 1190 Location: Zoorope
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 4:53 am Post subject: Rebuttals
Any idea on how to answer to this?
"What's the purpose of keeping it secret and doing nothing? *They* will be affected too if we do nothing. *They* can't hide themselves forever in a bunker. So *they* will simply solve the problem when finished to make money over oil."
_________________ **no english mothertongue**
--------
Objects in the rear view mirror
are closer than they appear.
"What's the purpose of keeping it secret and doing nothing? *They* will be affected too if we do nothing. *They* can't hide themselves forever in a bunker. So *they* will simply solve the problem when finished to make money over oil."
I don't think it is so hard to understand. The concept of PO is hard to swallow and easy to deny. Politicians and businessman are normal people just like us. They have got kids a future and a carrier. They also don't want PO to be true. The mind can be very deceptive when it comes to realizing the truth.
Looking at documentaries on the prelude of WWII it is hard to understand why anyone in their right mind would think that Hitler would not have a shot at conquering Europe. Yet most political leaders were convinced that he wouldn't. Just one single day day before the invasion our minister of foreign affairs gave a historical speech in which he told that there would be no aggression from Germany. He must have felt pretty stupid the next day.
The reality is that he didn't aim to misguide the people, he just didn't want want an invasion. Hope springs eternal, but hope can blur your vision. It can distort the facts to such an extend that you are not able to recognize the truth even though it is staring you in the face.
I don't understand the use of the word "secret". Secret is something kept from the knowledge of others or shared only confidentially with a few.
It's just common sense that if a finite resource is used, the remaining supply declines and if the process continues long enough the supply will be exhausted.
Information about the amount and useage of oil are widely reported, with tons of information in public view. Not being aware of this information is ignorance, not secrecy and disbeliveing it is denial.
Joined: Feb 01, 2005 Posts: 162 Location: Devon, UK
Posted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 7:40 am Post subject:
This site has a good FAQ which gives simple explanations as to why we should be taking the issue of decline of oil production seriously.
But until the issue goes mainstream (if ever!) some of us are likely to be seen as fruitcakes or end of the world doomers by our friends and even loved ones.
This is the reward for bringing to attention something that is most likely to be the biggest issue that person (and our civilisation) will ever face!
The aim of this thread (I believe) is to get ideas on how to debunk (or at least get people to think a bit about):
1) “Flat-Earth” assumptions that the future will be “more of the same” or “Bigger, better, faster, more”.
2) Myths surrounding the alternatives that will supposedly make #1 happen. (e.g. Abiotic oil / Nuclear Fusion / Methane hydrates etc etc).
Now before you say “We’ve already done that in other threads, dummy!”, the idea of this thread is to come up with explanations that the AVERAGE JOE could understand. Which obviously means detailed technical stuff needs to be trimmed right down.
I know most (if not all) of you have had trouble convincing people that there really is a problem coming up. You are the guys/gals who should post the reasons why people won’t listen, and what they’ve said.
So what did they say? (I’m going to coin an acronym here)
Peak Oil is Not a Problem Because… (PONPB)
Let me start with a couple of examples, and give some example rebuttal ideas.
1) PONPB: New energy technology is here. But it is being kept secret, whilst money is still to be made out of oil. This ensures MAXIMUM PROFIT is made before our replacement is switched on. Then the future will be “more of the same”.
Now, this is a frustrating one because it implies that you need to debunk ALL possible alternatives INCLUDING THOSE THAT DO NOT EXIST !?!?!. This is because that person has seen too many sci-fi shows, and imagines a lab somewhere (possibly Area 51 or the Cheyenne mountain complex) that is holding all manners of wonderful secret technology.
I accept that it’s easy to dismiss these guys as fringe-nutters, and ignore them and work on those who haven't seen too much x-files.
However, if you can find ways of debunking this mother-of-all pieces of madness, then you could probably debunk anything!
My 1st suggestions were:
If we had the scientific capability to develop something new, like nuclear fusion for example, it would be impossible to keep secret because:
1a) IMPORTS. We would no longer be reliant on imported oil. In fact, Japan is almost 100% reliant on imports. If a viable replacement for oil were available, the Japanese would bring it online ASAP. America and now the UK are over 50% reliant on imports. Why rely on foreign oil, when we could be 100% self-reliant?
1b) SCIENTIFIC CAPABILITY. No single country would be that far ahead of other countries in terms of scientific capability. So if say, America, kept it secret: Japan or a European country would bring it out. And vice-versa.
1c) COMPETITION. An energy company wouldn’t hold it back. Doing so would mean possibly losing out to competition, when being the 1st means you would be world leader (and most likely mega-rich!).
Does anyone have any more ideas / examples / counter examples?
2) PONPB: New energy technology is nearly here. So we need oil for the meantime, but switching over will not be a problem. Then the future will be “more of the same”.
Here one simple generic answer could be:
2) Currently, there is no resource in development that is as potent or as versatile as oil. It is likely that we will not find / develop a replacement before the decline in oil production bites.
Also looking at each of the candidates and coming up with simple explanations as to why there is no panacea. No small job. I’ll personally take a look through the alternatives and try (still searching the tons of info on this board!). However, if you have any good ideas, post them up.
3) Oil won’t run out! (I hear there are people who actually believe this). Or: The world as a whole has massive oil reserves on tap, with more continuing to flow from up from the earth's mantle…
3a) If oil was essentially infinite, then would the industry allow oil production in the USA to decline to its current levels?
3b) If oil were infinite / replenishable, why are oil fields left abandoned?
3c) IMPORTS: (Again) Why rely on foreign oil?
4) Reserves. PONPB: We’ll find more oil once we start searching the deep Atlantic etc…
4) You don’t count your chickens before they hatch. Trouble with this is there probably isn’t even any eggs… (How to explain the fallacy of relying on pure hope?)
Time to hand the floor to you guys / gals. What else have you heard? Here’s a starter list of things we can comment on.
Peak oil is a myth to promote world depopulation.
The peak oil theorists are only in it to make money out of book / film sales.
Peak oil is environmentalist / conservationist propaganda.
There’s enough oil left for over 40-50 years…
The data is no good. You can’t accurately predict when the peak will happen (so why should I bother worrying?).
The NIMBY’s won’t let us explore / produce on {East / West coast USA / other location}. If we did that, we’d be ok.
But of course, some people are probably not worth the effort:
It’s not my problem…
I’ll be dead by then…
Our children can sort it out…
Joined: May 26, 2004 Posts: 1190 Location: Zoorope
Posted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:46 am Post subject:
Very good post, GD.
Unfortunately, sometimes you are forced to make the effort, when you're trying to convince parents, close friends, partners and so on!
Anyway, this is something else I had to hear:
- Peak Oil is a scam from US govt to promote war on resources
- TV said there's enough oil to last until 2100. (How can I be more believable than TV???)
- If it's true, so why newspapers doesn't mention it?
- What are going to do the rich and famous?
- Liquified coal will solve it. It's cheap and easy to make.
- My dad/brother/friend/cousin works in an oil company and knows nothing about this.
But the best of all:
-We all must die, sooner or later. _________________ **no english mothertongue**
--------
Objects in the rear view mirror
are closer than they appear.
Posted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 10:26 am Post subject: Re: Rebuttals
Barbara wrote:
Any idea on how to answer to this?
"What's the purpose of keeping it secret and doing nothing? *They* will be affected too if we do nothing. *They* can't hide themselves forever in a bunker. So *they* will simply solve the problem when finished to make money over oil."
If it is "secret", then why are the guys in the black helicopters allowing this board to exist?
I suspect that what you really mean by "secret" is that it has not been media hyped like the OJ Simpon trial.
Quote:
Information about the amount and useage of oil are widely reported, with tons of information in public view. Not being aware of this information is ignorance, not secrecy and disbeliveing it is denial.
I think this is the real reason. It is very common for people to try and ignore bad news. The Jews in Hitler's Germany did not believe in concentration camps either.
Joined: Feb 01, 2005 Posts: 162 Location: Devon, UK
Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 10:54 am Post subject: Further simple rebuttals
Ok, time to offer a few more of my own. By the way, I'm thinking along the lines of answers that sometimes form questions themselves, therefore getting the PONPB'er to think for themselves about the issue.
5)PONPB: Peak Oil is a scam from US govt to promote war on resources.
5)The fact that production cannot meet demand does not promote anything. It helps explain / understand policy, not promote it.
6)PONPB: [TV said] there's enough oil to last until 2100.
6)The problem is not HOW MUCH oil there is left. The problem is HOW MUCH OIL WE CAN PRODUCE COMPARED TO HOW MUCH OIL IS NEEDED. When there is a shortfall, it gets more expensive.
7)PONPB: [Liquified coal / Methane Hydarates / other fossil fuel] will solve it. It's cheap and easy to make.
7)The real problem is basing our way of life on fossil fuels. Replacing one unsustainable strategy with another only puts the problem back a while. Don't you think we need to pursue a strategy that will last?
8)PONPB: My dad/brother/friend/cousin works in an oil company and knows nothing about this.
8a)Can he compare how much oil his company is finding nowadays to how much they found in, say the 1950's , 60's and 70's?
8b)Does he know the reserves of all of the oil companies?
9)So what if oil gets more expensive, I think it would be nice to live without cars for a few years.
9a)Expensive oil will leave our econmomy shrinking. Sustained shrinkage will leave our lives in ruins.
9b)Could you live without food for a few years?
This is all for now. I'm also looking into the fallacies of reliance on other / unproven technologies. Suggestions welcomed. Cheers, GD _________________ We have no Plan B. Haven't we?Discuss!
It is less "secret" per se, rather than all influential parties benefit in the short term from ignoring it.
Consuming governments don't want the populace to realize the follow or some of their main policy positions
Oil Companies/Producing companies: want ppl to continue to consume oil as their main fuel source as long as possible. suggesting you need another fuel source now is bad for business in the medium term, as they see it. Yes the oil companies have bought up some alternative tech patents, i.e. solar, but they know thats no replacement for oil.
1b) SCIENTIFIC CAPABILITY. No single country would be that far ahead of other countries in terms of scientific capability. So if say, America, kept it secret: Japan or a European country would bring it out. And vice-versa.
This isn't historically correct.
The Manhattan project during WWII -- with a huge pool of scientific genius -- is the most obvious super secret project that remained secret for most of its life.
Hitler's military buildup was less secret but most people just didn't believe it, especially in the UK.
Japan, aided by US blunders, certainly pulled off a major super secret project when they bombed Pearl.
No one thought the Soviets were even close to launching Sputnik when they did.
1b) SCIENTIFIC CAPABILITY. No single country would be that far ahead of other countries in terms of scientific capability. So if say, America, kept it secret: Japan or a European country would bring it out. And vice-versa.
This isn't historically correct.
The Manhattan project during WWII -- with a huge pool of scientific genius -- is the most obvious super secret project that remained secret for most of its life.
Hitler's military buildup was less secret but most people just didn't believe it, especially in the UK.
Japan, aided by US blunders, certainly pulled off a major super secret project when they bombed Pearl.
No one thought the Soviets were even close to launching Sputnik when they did.
Are you saying the Govt is secretly working on the answer to Peak OIL?
There was reason to fear that Germany might win the race to produce the bomb. Fission had been discovered in Germany, and German scientists were at least as able as anyone else to assess its significance. Moreover, it seemed ominous that Germany had stopped the sale of uranium ore from the rich mines in Czechoslovakia.
Ditto for the space race as mentioned above.
Is there a recent historical precedent of one nation being a clear quantum leap ahead of the other?
Also, we are talking about here a modern day Manhattan project. Don’t forget, the Manhattan project was a “develop and use ASAP” not “develop and hide for profit’s sake”. Wouldn’t it be easier to simply “not develop for profit’s sake”?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
