Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Improving Peak Oil Credibility

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby shortonsense » Sat 03 Apr 2010, 09:03:52

Loki wrote: An honest historian would never make a claim like this without a mountain of evidence.


And when such a ridiculous claim is made in a peak oil forum...there goes the credibility again.
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mcgowanjm » Sat 03 Apr 2010, 09:57:28

OKIE DOKIE.

First, Starvation taking place in America. I can't convince
you of 9/11, the Federal Reserve is a RICO, Climate Change, World PO in 2005, US PO in1971,
the Sixth Extinction, or that the US is an Empire.

you even believe the US Economy is Recovering.

Again, how would I be able to prove that Famine was hitting
the US:

A) Obesity is out of control (Again, you think being obese
is as far from Starvation as is possible.
B) 54+ Million w/o Health Care
C)Food Stamps (Totally inappropriate for a Month's Food needs
(and completely skewed to processed AgBiz) are at a record.
D) Food Banks, Pantries, Kitchens overwhelmed.
E) 92 million below/at/w/in200% of a 'Failed' Poverty Line.
F) The State will do everything in it's Power to keep Mass
Famine out of the News/History Books.

Which brings us to Past Famines. How many people
realize that the British Empire was engaged in at least Three
Famines (Irish and Two in Punjab/Bengal).
mcgowanjm
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri 23 May 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mcgowanjm » Sat 03 Apr 2010, 10:24:03

mcgowanjm wrote:Bwahahahaha This really is too much. Science just isn't you.


And I've still seen nothing but Ad Hominems. Nothing refuting my claims. Again. How would you know Starvation. Especially when the State will do whatever it takes to hide the fact. See Stalin and the Ukraine/Chechens for details on quelling domestics.

You even believe to this day that last year's Harvest was the Second Largest in US History.

shortonsense wrote:I told you before, I tested your assumptions on starvation on large groups of Americans and couldn't find them.


And I replied then that that you hadn't. You claiming to be
A Gallup/Rasmussen/Pew Researcher now?

Give me your paper or STFU on 'testing my assumptions'.
Until then, you did no such thing. :evil:

"Couldn't Find them." You can't find your ass with both
hands so what doe that mean?

shortonsense wrote:Please provide the evidence of starvation which was supposed to take place during March of 2010.


Post above(Letters 'A-E')
And while you're perusing the Post above:

[quote=="shortonsense"]
Certainly such a ridiculous claim wasn't mine, and certainly I just finished a 10 state trip and couldn't find a one. Think among the hundreds of people I interacted with, all the starving ones were hiding somewhere?[/quote]

"Hundreds?" You talked with Hundreds on a 10 State Trip?
At least 250 people on 10 days = 25 per day. Busy man.
Problem: You could not do that and travel as rapidly as you evidently have and get anywhere off the beaten trail, so to speak.

The Ghettos of LA, Phoenix, Tucson, El Paso, the backwaters of
the Inland Empire, Mogollon Rim, Ruidoso, Panhandle of TX/OK

and that's just the SW US.

[quote=="shortonsense"]
Loki(has handled shit-I've seen no effort at any documentation-
just like 9/11 AAMOF) seems to have handled your nonsense on this one already.

Why don't you work on finding a current starving American somewhere, that might lead you to his 49 million buddies which seem to be invisible.[/quote]

The word "Buddies" says it all. Anyone not in your Cultural/
Income Bracket is not your "Buddie", not even anywhere in your life. You could not possibly have interacted with anyone near Poverty (well over a 1/3 of America, unless they were serving you). You're as clueless as a French Bourbon in 1789 of
what your Nation has become.

Finally, as our Nation's Real Unemployment as our Energy Growth
has been stopped dead in it's tracks, per John Williams Shadow Stats, is now 22%, you can tell us all, Sos, just how an
Unemployed Person eats in America today.

Where is YOUR Evidence. :-x :twisted: :badgrin: :roll: 8)
mcgowanjm
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri 23 May 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby davep » Sat 03 Apr 2010, 11:33:57

Have we been hacked? Why is this redirecting to gulfstarproductions.com?

They both seem to have the same IP address (peakoil.com and gulfstarproductions.com). Maybe Aaron or Dan has messed up a tomcat server.xml file...

I guess not, because it's the links that have already had their domain name changed. Whereas posting buttons haven't.
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4569
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 02:00:00
Location: Europe

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby shortonsense » Sat 03 Apr 2010, 16:55:34

mcgowanjm wrote:OKIE DOKIE.

First, Starvation taking place in America. I can't convince
you of 9/11, the Federal Reserve is a RICO, Climate Change, World PO in 2005, US PO in1971,
the Sixth Extinction, or that the US is an Empire.


You don't need to convince me of 9/11, it was on the telly, climate change is a fact and has been happening for eon's, of course the world peaked in 2005, everyone knows that, and as far as extinction or whatever your definition of empire might be, thats still more than a little up in the air based solely on your past postings.

And associating all of this with peak oil in 2005 is exactly why PO suffers in the eyes of some in terms of credibility.

mcgowanjm wrote:you even believe the US Economy is Recovering.


Ain't that awful, being stuck with this reality?

mcgowanjm wrote:A) Obesity is out of control (Again, you think being obese
is as far from Starvation as is possible.


Make up your mind, either 1 in 6 Americans starved in March of 2010 according to your christmas prediction, or they are fat. I suggest you pick a reality, and stick with it, prior to making my point for why it would be nice if such things weren't automatically linked to PO by any crazy with a keyboard and hair brained idea.
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby JustaGirl » Mon 05 Apr 2010, 16:45:51

I have to wonder how "great" the depression would have been if the dust bowl had not happened. 27 states were severely affected by it. Just a thought.
Only those who can see the invisible can do the impossible.
JustaGirl
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Wed 09 Apr 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Petoria

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby Ludi » Mon 05 Apr 2010, 18:24:30

Update on peakoil.com's credibility:

VMarcHart wrote:Here's the belated tally through March: 181 predictions, 5 rights, 50 wrong, 126 open. The theme of March was famine, hunger, empty shelves, etc. Didn't happen.

There are only 3 predictions for April, and then most of them are for December 31.

Yep, listen to this board.



http://peakoil.com/open/bold-prediction ... 5-315.html
User avatar
Ludi
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 18585
Joined: Mon 27 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Darkest Dumfukistan

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby AAA » Mon 05 Apr 2010, 18:52:21

Ludi wrote:Update on peakoil.com's credibility:


LOL I thought about posting the same thing earlier today.

The bold predictions thread is a disgrace to po.com
How can Ludi spend 8-10 hrs/day on the internet and claim to be homesteading???
User avatar
AAA
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed 12 Nov 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby Ludi » Mon 05 Apr 2010, 19:17:33

AAA wrote:The bold predictions thread is a disgrace to po.com



But it is one of my very favorite threads! :lol:
User avatar
Ludi
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 18585
Joined: Mon 27 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Darkest Dumfukistan

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby shortonsense » Mon 05 Apr 2010, 19:49:16

JustaGirl wrote:I have to wonder how "great" the depression would have been if the dust bowl had not happened. 27 states were severely affected by it. Just a thought.


I am confused....to what comment are you referring? And how does your comment relate to the credibility of peak oil when lumped in with various forms of crackpottery?
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby shortonsense » Mon 05 Apr 2010, 20:17:41

AAA wrote:
Ludi wrote:Update on peakoil.com's credibility:


LOL I thought about posting the same thing earlier today.

The bold predictions thread is a disgrace to po.com


I don't think so. I think the thread highlights the obvious...and it isn't a po.com critique, its more like, predicting stuff is hard, especially the future. (paraphrasing a Dane)

What REALLY causes peak oil credibility problems, in general, is that the crackpottery brigades tend to have a high volume level, they make up cool sounding and sometimes plausible scenarios, and then they try and one up each other until a perfectly predictable result occurs.....the loudest and most ridiculous wins.
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby Loki » Mon 05 Apr 2010, 23:18:51

shortonsense wrote:What REALLY causes peak oil credibility problems, in general, is that the crackpottery brigades tend to have a high volume level, they make up cool sounding and sometimes plausible scenarios, and then they try and one up each other until a perfectly predictable result occurs.....the loudest and most ridiculous wins.


Can you post some quotes of this crackpottery? This would both illustrate your point and cause me to be entertained. A double win!
A garden will make your rations go further.
User avatar
Loki
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00
Location: Oregon

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby shortonsense » Tue 06 Apr 2010, 08:24:43

Loki wrote:
shortonsense wrote:What REALLY causes peak oil credibility problems, in general, is that the crackpottery brigades tend to have a high volume level, they make up cool sounding and sometimes plausible scenarios, and then they try and one up each other until a perfectly predictable result occurs.....the loudest and most ridiculous wins.


Can you post some quotes of this crackpottery? This would both illustrate your point and cause me to be entertained. A double win!


Are you seriously suggesting you have never seen any? The faked moon landings and real moon landings hiding aliens over at "the other place" seem to be the perfect example of how a given newby would wander into a peak oil site and be confronted with this kind of stuff. Around here there is a pretty strong 9/11 contingent, "there is no evidence a plane hit the pentagon!", you haven't bumped into this around here? Seems kind of difficult to avoid.....
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mcgowanjm » Tue 06 Apr 2010, 08:58:30

shortonsense wrote:
Loki wrote:
shortonsense wrote:What REALLY causes peak oil credibility problems, in general, is that the crackpottery brigades tend to have a high volume level, they make up cool sounding and sometimes plausible scenarios, and then they try and one up each other until a perfectly predictable result occurs.....the loudest and most ridiculous wins.


Can you post some quotes of this crackpottery? This would both illustrate your point and cause me to be entertained. A double win!


Are you seriously suggesting you have never seen any? The faked moon landings and real moon landings hiding aliens over at "the other place" seem to be the perfect example of how a given newby would wander into a peak oil site and be confronted with this kind of stuff. Around here there is a pretty strong 9/11 contingent, "there is no evidence a plane hit the pentagon!", you haven't bumped into this around here? Seems kind of difficult to avoid.....


You can give us that quote of somebody besides a Corny linking 'Faked Moon Landings' with
9/11 and PO.

Of course you'll never do such a thing because only the Disinfo Artists here link the above.

Never do we get some CT like Greenspan/Federal Reserve/ Housing Bubbles/
9/11/Afghan/Iraq Invasions for Resources . Oh No, cause that's much too close to BAUReality.
close to reality.
mcgowanjm
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri 23 May 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mcgowanjm » Tue 06 Apr 2010, 09:04:54

SoS wrote:"there is no evidence a plane hit the pentagon!"


And you can give us the Proof that Flight 77 did
hit the Pentagon.

Because the Only planes I've seen proof of around the Pentagon on 9/11 at/around 9:30 am are as follows:

Venus 22(Gulfstream), Venus 77 with Brent Scowcroft circling
WH, Word 31 (Another E-4b :!: ), Gopher 06 (following something into the Pentagon, then same ID'ing Flt 93 'site', Bobcat 14 and Bobcat 17.

With NORAD Still not providing a Timeline that makes sense and not one military individual
punished.

9/11 the US enters Bizarro World. War for Resources begins. Strange that.
mcgowanjm
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri 23 May 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby shortonsense » Tue 06 Apr 2010, 22:20:39

mcgowanjm wrote:
SoS wrote:"there is no evidence a plane hit the pentagon!"


And you can give us the Proof that Flight 77 did
hit the Pentagon.

Because the Only planes I've seen proof of around the Pentagon on 9/11 at/around 9:30 am are as follows:


This thread is not meant to be yet another rehashing of the crackpottery in question.
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby bl00k » Fri 09 Apr 2010, 07:51:58

Everybody knows what ticks people off when talking about peak oil. It's the unrealistic sounding doomer prediction. People don't like to be told something extremely negative which contradicts or shocks them to their very core. It's a major case of cognitive dissonance.

Thats human nature apparently so no use in discussing.

The solution lies in toning down the negativity without lying. It lies in refraining from sounding very certain while making (doom-)predictions. It lies in letting the people decide for themselves whats wrong and whats not. You have to talk in terms of what is important to the people or in terms of what they fear.

Take for instance the anti-muslim sentiment which is apparent in most Western countries. Everybody knows a lot of oil producing countries are mostly Islamic countries and most Western countries import oil from them one way or another. This means that Western consumers are funding these Islamic countries and their corrupt leaders by consuming oil (truth is not important, it's the beliefs people hold to be true). I always like to point out that my country (Netherlands) imports oil from Iraq (not much, but still), clearly supporting some 'bad' people financially. Apart from that it's country specific what will work and what wont. The Netherlands has a sizeable support for environmental movements, which obviously holds the same views against consuming oil.

OK, so thats an argument for ending our oil dependence. I don't think you can make a convincing enough point to prove that oil will peak or has peaked until it actually is clear and is felt directly by the people. I fear only an oil shock will be enough to get things started right now. I'm talking 1973. A slowly increasing gasoline price is far less impressive, annoying as it is for most motorists.

As far as association with 'conspiracy theorists' I think we'll just have to be careful. For instance, when talking about Iraq. Whats weird about a country wanting to secure resources anyway? It's the most basic strategic move anyone could make. Furthermore it's not like America is 'stealing' oil, it has to pay like all other buyers of Iraqi oil. Just as the US has invaded Iraq, Russia bullies Georgia for having an alternative route for Caspian Sea oil.

The main thing here is to stop condeming these actions too clearly. Try being more neutral while still remaining authentic.
The man who moves a mountain begins by carrying away small stones.
User avatar
bl00k
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Sat 17 Sep 2005, 02:00:00
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mcgowanjm » Fri 09 Apr 2010, 09:24:43

^
^
^
l
l___
The solution lies in toning down the negativity without lying. It lies in refraining from sounding very certain while making (doom-)predictions. It lies in letting the people decide for themselves whats wrong and whats not. You have to talk in terms of what is important to the people or in terms of what they fear.


But then you go full circle. No need to do anything.
We've already decided our fate. Like Lovelock saying we've already pulled the trigger, we're just awaiting the results.

The conversation you wish for should've taken place between Carter's Malaise Speech and Bush/Reagan's October Surprise (Iran Hostages released 25 minutes after Reagan Inaugurated).

Heinberg wrote:The “party” was humanity’s one-time-only opportunity to fuel economic growth and technological innovation with a bounty of cheap, abundant energy from fossil fuels. The harvesting of oil, coal, and natural gas has inevitably proceeded on a best-first or low-hanging fruit basis. While the Earth still possesses a wealth of unexploited energy resources, the cheapest and easiest-accessed of those resources have by now already been used. All of these fuels are in the process of becoming more expensive, and the various energy alternatives are limited in one way or another in their ability to replace hydrocarbons. That means we are currently seeing the end of economic growth as we have known it. The impacts for transportation, globalization, and world food supplies will be serious indeed.
mcgowanjm
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri 23 May 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mos6507 » Fri 09 Apr 2010, 12:15:25

mcgowanjm wrote:But then you go full circle. No need to do anything.


If we're just delivering a death sentence then there is little to be gained in telling people. You'd be better off letting them be blissfully ignorant for as long as possible.

Everyone's got to decide for themselves how much opportunity remains for better outcomes if people change their behaviors collectively. If we're going to go the way of lifeboat ethics and musical chairs, then there is no strategic advantage in doomerism becoming mainstream. It will only touch off a stampede for the lifeboats, heavily disturbing the lay of the land as far as land values and which areas are at or over carrying capacity. There will be no way to predict whether you're doomstead will remain in some bucolic neighborhood or chioked out by new development.

Sometimes I think the only impulse to spreading the word is the psychological need for social acceptance, rather than having these thoughts remain compartmentalized.
User avatar
mos6507
permanently banned
 
Posts: 9499
Joined: Fri 03 Aug 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Boston Suburbs

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 09 Apr 2010, 13:41:54

mcgowanjm wrote:The conversation you wish for should've taken place between Carter's Malaise Speech and Bush/Reagan's October Surprise (Iran Hostages released 25 minutes after Reagan Inaugurated).


The conversation DID start back then. It resulted in things like hybrid vehicles being rolled out during the last crash in gas prices in the US (1999), freed up the interstate transportation of natural gas at prices more profitable to producers, led to research into shale gas which powers the market today, and continues through this very day. Only someone who never leaves their cave could miss these things being in places where they weren't just 5 years ago.

Image


And don't even get me started on the Volt.
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests