[radon1]

I do not understand the madness at Desu. He is doing a very useful thing imho. While outright lunatics spam the site with wordwalls of nonsense and no one says a word.

Those who criticize Desu - don't be so self-centric. There are always new people coming to the website, and it is always helpful to have a relevant peak oil thread or two or more on the front page, well explained and set out in the opening post - which he bothers to do very well.

Seeing such headlines is much better than immediately hit some insane "Mother of hundred is sentenced for life in Russia for not looking sufficiently happy while eating Ukrainian children".

[Hawkcreek]

Ditto to what Radon1 just said.

[Quinny]

I can understand that some people feel the same old arguments are being re-hashed, but he's a young lad and if you ask me more power to his elbow.

[dinopello]

I agree, and think its funny that anyone would get 'mad' at the postings that while redundant and prolific are mostly spot on topic. I used to suspect him being a bot but no longer. One of his other commonly used names on other message boards has 'bot' in the name after all.

Some of his posts have spurred me to search the site and it is interesting seeing what one thought on these topics 10 years ago. This one, for example has been discussed a lot over the last 10 years.

[DesuMaiden]

I'm sick and tired of educating people about peak oil. They think I'm crazy. They think peak oil is going to be another failed end of the world prediction. First of all, peak oil is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence. And the consequences of peak oil are absolutely dire. It does mean the collapse of industrial civilization because there is currently nothing that can replace oil. Even if we do invent something to replace oil in the future, it is already too late because peak oil is happening RIGHT NOW. Like Michael Ruppert once said, you need to prepare for peak oil at least 20 years in advance to avoid serious economic consequences. To prepare when it happens will lead to catastrophic economic consequences. Unfortunately, peak oil is happening right now, and we (as a society) have made ZERO preparations for it. Nothing. Ditto. So yes, peak oil will cause the economy to collapse. Yet most people remain totally unaware of this.

[dinopello]

So yes, peak oil will cause the economy to collapse. Yet most people remain totally unaware of this.

I'm curious - do you think it would be better for you if everyone in the world was fully aware that the economy was going to collapse ?

[dolanbaker]

So yes, peak oil will cause the economy to collapse. Yet most people remain totally unaware of this.

I'm curious - do you think it would be better for you if everyone in the world was fully aware that the economy was going to collapse ?

Campers and bears! If there was a real risk of a collapse that would cause a breakdown in normal day to day living, I would be inclined to only inform those I would like to keep after such a scenario.
Let the bear get the slowest camper in other words.

[jedrider]

I find it useful to understand that our present situation is built upon quicksand and can fail at any time. It gives one a perspective to other things in life. It is not a good perspective, but for anyone reality based, it is a perspective that one will arrive at anyway, at some point, at least.

I think it is a WASTE educating others unless they WANT to be educated, but it NOT a waste being a store of REALITY. In the schools, they can educate because they have mostly blank, receptive minds and that is good.

[careinke]

You all complained because Desu was starting too many threads so we agreed he would only start one a day. Now you are complaining because he starts threads about peak oil?

Missed that, my apologies. If you check my posts, you will find I support desu 99% of the time.

[SeaGypsy]

Desu, you are learning fast. Although us rusted on recalcitrants tended to find you a bit of a pain, your input here is healthy in that you bring up all the key psychological stages & make us review our positions. If you put up with us long enough you too can look forward to becoming bored with peak oil as the primary issue of our era. By then you may take after Loki & go become a real live dirt farming peaker. Or like me, a gypsy traveller peaker, or like most people here in pretty major ways rewrite your life story & plan.

We are here to share, nobody here long term believes we are changing the world in some big way. Despite peak oil, learn, grow, prosper, according to your sensibilities.

[Dybbuk]

It's definitely a waste to actively seek out people to tell about peak oil.

Probably the best way to pass on information is to let it casually come up in conversation. Then talk about it like it's a well-established fact, but that the specifics surrounding it are vague (which they are--the when and how bad, etc.). Don't pounce on the chance to discuss it with a wild gleam in your eye, just treat it like it's another area of interest for you. If the other person is interested, they'll look into it on their own.

[KaiserJeep]

I believe Desu wastes our time and his in "Preaching to the Choir". I keep Hubbert's paper and several other references in my E-Reader, and take it everywhere I go, and never need a refresher in the basics of PO.

Although he has every right to do what he is doing, we as other PO members also have every right to our opinions about what he does in this Forum. Soon enough another noob will appear, and Desu will understand our frustration from the other side.

[dinopello]

Soon enough another noob will appear, and Desu will understand our frustration from the other side.

Actually, you could probably write a pretty good bot that worked by harvesting posts from Desu (or others) and rehashing them 5 years from now. Assuming the world hadn't collapsed by then, the reactions would possibly be similar enough to parse out pretty good responses to a limited number of comments. Bots have trouble with direct questions though, especially when you probe their feelings about things. Fortunately, for the bots, people mostly like to preach and spout off their own opinions rather than probing others to learn more about theirs.

[Timo]

I believe Desu wastes our time and his in "Preaching to the Choir". I keep Hubbert's paper and several other references in my E-Reader, and take it everywhere I go, and never need a refresher in the basics of PO.

Although he has every right to do what he is doing, we as other PO members also have every right to our opinions about what he does in this Forum. Soon enough another noob will appear, and Desu will understand our frustration from the other side.

KJ, if this is truely the way you feel, then don't read the threads he starts. If he's a waste of your time, then don't waste your time reading what he posts. Simple, but very effective.

I will take a stab at his question, though, and posit that it is, indeed, a waste of time trying to educate others about PO. Most people will listen politely, but they will either a) dismiss you as a lunatic, b) assume your argument is basically correct, but that the timeframe is well beyond our lifetimes, c) assume the argument is correct, but will also cling to the belief in the magic techno genie that will miraculously emerge to save us all from oblivion, or 4) politely change the subject. The reasons for the most common reactions is that any true understanding and acknowledgement of PO requires the self-indictment that every last one of us in the civilized world has been living the wrong way, and that WE are the cause of our own destruction. This doesn't go very well in casual conversation. Most people aren't scientists, and any inclusion of techno jargon in the conversation is the fastest way to lose the argument your trying to make. It just doesn't register. In one ear, and out the other. From the political POV, well, Nope. Don't even bother trying to sell the understanding of PO to a politician. Doom and gloom is the fastest way to lose the next election. Then there are the people who actually want to engage you in the discussion, and are hell-bent on disproving the entire argument, once and for all. My brother-in-law is a perfect case in point. He honestly believes that the oil wells in Texas that were pumping so much oil back in the 70s have since replenished their reserves, like an aquifer. In his mind, the peak will never occur because all we need to do is give the empty wells time to recover their supply. Meanwhile, we have other reserves that are filling the gap, so we can simply put all of the world's oil production on a 20 or 30 year rotating schedule, and let nature take its course. End of discussion.

I honestly wish i was making that last part up.

[dolanbaker]

He honestly believes that the oil wells in Texas that were pumping so much oil back in the 70s have since replenished their reserves, like an aquifer. In his mind, the peak will never occur because all we need to do is give the empty wells time to recover their supply. Meanwhile, we have other reserves that are filling the gap, so we can simply put all of the world's oil production on a 20 or 30 year rotating schedule, and let nature take its course. End of discussion.

I honestly wish i was making that last part up.

words fail me.

[Dybbuk]

Most people will listen politely, but they will either a) dismiss you as a lunatic, b) assume your argument is basically correct, but that the timeframe is well beyond our lifetimes, c) assume the argument is correct, but will also cling to the belief in the magic techno genie that will miraculously emerge to save us all from oblivion, or 4) politely change the subject.

Maybe they fit within your #4/d, but I think you left out the biggest group: those who don't care. There's a huge segment of the population who proclaim the mantra "live each day like it's the last day of your life" and don't give any thought to the future whatsoever. To think about the future is to "take things too seriously". For instance, investing money is considered to be for nerds. And dwelling on future catastrophes is for weirdos.

[Timo]

Well then, call me an investing for retirement weirdo. I am taking retirement planning rather seriously, and am attempting to build enough money to live another 20 or 30 years. After all, climate change and end of the civilized world could be just a load of crap. If it is, i'll have enough cash to live sorta well, depending on location. If it's not crap, well then, game over, regardless. I'm calling my retirement savings my hedge fund. Believe it or not, I have been wrong before. I'm diversifying my bets on the end of the world.

[DesuMaiden]

Most people find it inconceivable to believe that our modern civilization could collapse. But it is about to collapse soon. The evidence for this collapse is overwhelming. There are currently no substitutes to oil, and it is likely we will never find a substitute for oil. These people will only believe the collapse is happening when food and fuel shortages start to happen.

[Timo]

I've been thinking, which only occasionally has dangerous consequences, about collapse, and TEOTWAWKI. Collapse had multiple variables and degrees. To most Americans and Western World inhabitants in general, a visit to a 3rd world country, where the same standards for quality of life and government controls that we have in the US don't exist, that would be a real eye-opener. If those same lower or more lax standards suddenly became the norm in our 1st world culture, most people up here would consider that to be the definition of collapse. Yet, life goes on in those countries quite nicely, and people do manage to enjoy life in spite of the unrealized extent of governement controls or commercial or government services. No phone service? No problem. Take a walk down to that person's house and talk to them. No arugala for your salad? Eat romaine, instead. Make do with what you've got. No internet? Do something productive with your time, instead. No car? Take the bus!

My point is that most of the world lives quite well in lesser standards than we're used to, so the very idea of "collapse" is very relative. How much? Is the loss of the internet collapse? Is the loss of gasoline to fuel your car collapse? Is it the cessation of mail delivery? The end of all government, local, state, and Fed? Martial law? I've lived under martial law, and that doesn't come close to fulfilling the definition of collapse. Hell, 30 years ago, the internet didn't even exist! 130 years ago, the automobile didn't exist? Global trade to fill the shelves of the supermarket didn't exist. Commercial air travel didn't exist. Is the loss of any of these luxuries collapse? Is the loss of any two or three luxuries in tandem collapse? Are we looking at a future Mad Max world, or just a simpler, less convaluted way of life? I started a thread asking people to define their own personal expectations of the future. This is a big part of that. Define collapse. How low will we go? How chaotic will things get? I'm not asking for personal enecdotes of prepping for that event. I'm asking for everyone to define that event.

OK. I'm done. Thanks for listening.

[jedrider]

It's definitely a waste to actively seek out people to tell about peak oil.

Probably the best way to pass on information is to let it casually come up in conversation. Then talk about it like it's a well-established fact, but that the specifics surrounding it are vague (which they are--the when and how bad, etc.). Don't pounce on the chance to discuss it with a wild gleam in your eye, just treat it like it's another area of interest for you. If the other person is interested, they'll look into it on their own.

I agree. To ignore it is not honest to oneself or to the other. But, just short and matter-of-fact is sufficient and, then, move on. I am actually bothered by those who dwell on the topic as if it is stuck in their throat. That is not a good perspective either and will only make the person sick, mentally, physically, or both.