[sparky]

.
how does the meme of "porn doomerism" has a connection with the theory that Peak oil is debunked ?
is it thread drift , is someone pulling the discussion like one's beloved pulling the blanket on a cold night ?

[AdamB]

Those who choose to ignore StarvingLion do so at their own peril.

You, me, even StarvingLion, we live in this reality, even if he can't see it.

Out of almost all the posters here, StarvingLion is the most accurate poster when it comes to rapid collapse. He is right about the nigh part, too.

So when you go down to the corner store to spend your worthless dollars, they don't hand you goods or services in exchange for them? Where might this place be, where StarvingLions accuracy is so obvious?

"The entire Peak Oil narrative is wrong. There is no decline, just instant collapse."
~StarvingLion

That is what I have been saying for years.

Little problem with that "instant" part then. How many years (in the case of peak oil, decades now) can we continue to wait for "instant"?

[ennui2]

Out of almost all the posters here, StarvingLion is the most accurate poster when it comes to rapid collapse. He is right about the nigh part, too.

Before you even joined, StarvingLion was already viewed by all concerned as a run of the mill internet nutcase not worth anyone's attention. For you to throw your arms around him says a lot about your critical-thinking skills (or lack thereof). He has nothing informative or useful to offer. All he wants to do is shake his proverbial fist and anything and everything. Kind of a mindless misanthrope.

[Whatever]

how does the meme of "porn doomerism" has a connection with the theory that Peak oil is debunked ? is it thread drift , is someone pulling the discussion like one's beloved pulling the blanket on a cold night ?

What you call "porn doomerism" is just the natural counter argument to the topic of this bullsh*t thread. Sorry to wake you from your peaceful slumber.

Out of almost all the posters here, StarvingLion is the most accurate poster when it comes to rapid collapse. He is right about the nigh part, too.

So when you go down to the corner store to spend your worthless dollars, they don't hand you goods or services in exchange for them?

StarvingLion is saying that the system is rotten to the core and about to collapse rapidly. You are just trying to play one of your stupid word games.

Where might this place be, where StarvingLions accuracy is so obvious?

Here on this site. It's a relative thing. Compared to the constant stream of rah rah, BAU, bullsh*t peak oil denial that generally emanates from this peak oil denial website, StarvingLion's accuracy on the topic of rapid collapse is a real standout. I thought all that was pretty obvious from my sentence construction. You should read better to understand more.

"The entire Peak Oil narrative is wrong. There is no decline, just instant collapse."
~StarvingLion

That is what I have been saying for years.

Little problem with that "instant" part then. How many years (in the case of peak oil, decades now) can we continue to wait for "instant"?

So since it hasn't happened yet, we can safely assume that it never will? That makes no sense, Adam. Learn some basic logic and then apply it.

Before you even joined, StarvingLion was already viewed by all concerned as a run of the mill internet nutcase not worth anyone's attention. For you to throw your arms around him says a lot about your critical-thinking skills (or lack thereof). He has nothing informative or useful to offer. All he wants to do is shake his proverbial fist and anything and everything. Kind of a mindless misanthrope.

Like I said, compared to the usual peak oil denial crap on display here, StarvingLion's comments are an occasional breath of fresh air. Much of what he says sounds a little hysterical, but he is much closer to the truth than you are.



---Futilitist

[ennui2]

Sorry to wake you from your peaceful slumber.

Hmm.. Where have I heard that tone before. Oh, right.



And of course, this old chestnut.



Holding onto some "secret knowledge" to make yourself feel superior to everyone else, mayhaps?

StarvingLion is saying that the system is rotten to the core and about to collapse rapidly.

No, what he's saying is that the system is about to collapse because he thinks it's rotten and wants it to collapse, not because there's actual evidence of imminent collapse. If and when it does collapse, it won't be because of any evidence he puts forth because all he does is make hellfire-and-brimstone pronouncements.

So since it hasn't happened yet, we can safely assume that it never will?

Forcing us to prove a negative again? Really? Have you learned nothing about that fallacy? Occam's razor. Occams razor....

Like I said, compared to the usual peak oil denial crap on display here, StarvingLion's comments are an occasional breath of fresh air. Much of what he says sounds a little hysterical, but he is much closer to the truth than you are.

Well, considering that the site's domain is peakoil.com, if you think people here are in denial maybe it's not so much denial as an accurate depiction of the status quo and you're holding onto outmoded overly doomy ideas.

Starve is a rational

Pretty desperate of you to be rushing to the defense of an undiagnosed mental-patient, PStarr. You seemed like you had a brain once, before 2008.

[Whatever]

So since it hasn't happened yet, we can safely assume that it never will?

Forcing us to prove a negative again? Really? Have you learned nothing about that fallacy? Occam's razor. Occams razor....

"Occam's razor. Occam's razor...." You are like a child, ennui. And you are very confused about this one. Sometime when I have nothing better to do, I will dissect your illogical gibberish on this. For now: Occam's razor is about parsimony. The concept is unrelated to the concept of extraordinary proof being required for extraordinary claims. Also, I am not asking you to prove a negative. This is not a debate about Bigfoot or UFOs. Why do you say "forcing us"? Why don't you just answer simple questions without playing games? Who is "us"?

Like I said, compared to the usual peak oil denial crap on display here, StarvingLion's comments are an occasional breath of fresh air. Much of what he says sounds a little hysterical, but he is much closer to the truth than you are.

Well, considering that the site's domain is peakoil.com, if you think people here are in denial maybe it's not so much denial as an accurate depiction of the status quo and you're holding onto outmoded overly doomy ideas.

Or perhaps this site's domain name was chosen specifically to fake people out. Basic astroturfing.



---Futilitist

[Whatever]

ennui keeps posting his stupid insulting art in place of cogent arguments. He should be banned and you whatever need to be praised. What a breath of fresh air. Someone who understand the peakoil predicament here at the peakoil website. How novel. Are there others? Seems not.

whatever, thank you for raising the bar here.

Thanks Pstarr. You and I are a pretty rare breed around here. What we do is a public service. We should tag team these denier b*tches! At least that is what I want to do. But with the apocalypse now fast approaching, I am finding it harder and harder to devote the time necessary to such a useless project. I will soon be forced to sign off forever. Oh well.



---Futilitist

[dissident]

Earlier in the thread there was a post on Hubbert's paper. If Hubbert thought that the future production after the peak would have a longer and thicker tail then he was sadly mistaken. There is no production symmetry between the past and the future regardless of new discoveries. The rate of extraction increases with time due to demand which grows every year. So any new reserves are developed and produced faster going into the future. The effect of this obvious pattern is to distort the Gaussian production distribution pulling the future tail towards the present. This gives a plateau "peak" and a step-function-like decline sometime after the peak. There is still some tail into the future, but it cannot be thicker and longer than the tail running into the past. Such a pattern would require that demand shrank after peak faster than it it increased before the peak.

The curve does not look like a skewed Gaussian. Instead it results from an area-preserving transformation that compacts the the post peak half of the Gaussian towards the peak time.

Of course the effect of the global Ponzi finance system collapse on the curve could be profound. But that is was not under consideration in Hubbert's article.

[AdamB]

ennui has improved my game, I've learned how to deal with amateurish unscientific b@llsh@t. I've learned how to respond to idiocy with kindness, patience and humor.

Haven't we all? My recent adventure to visit Drake's well, and the location of the first shale gas produced in the US, led me across the great NE, where I encountered this at some "need somewhere to send the 4H kids who can't get into tough schools" university that stopped me in my tracks, I nearly died laughing. Across the street from this place was a tattoo parlor, so fitting for the 4H kids, but the real killer was this:



Certainly, kindness, patience, but most of all, HUMOR.

[ennui2]

I am not asking you to prove a negative

Of course you are. Anytime you word something along the lines of "prove it can't happen", you're proving a negative. Anything can happen, including bigfoot appearing in front of the White House next to UFOs and Jimmy Hoffa. But is it LIKELY? Regardless of your interpretation, most know Occam's Razor as just that, extraordinary claims (i.e. the end of the world as we know it to happen suddenly and very nigh) require extraordinary proof, of which you've provided none.

Having now mentally racked up quite a few bad doomer calls of this ilk over the last 10+ years of hanging out here, forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of this method of arrogant doomer prediction. I've suffered everything from Supervolcano doom to a broken internet cable being taken as a "sign" that the US would strike Iran.

So it takes more than the likes of a madman like StarvingLion and his ilk simply stating matter of factly that everything's a scam and the end is nigh to raise my pulse.

Or perhaps this site's domain name was chosen specifically to fake people out.

So you're back to the paid-plant conspiracy theory narrative?

Sorry, we're quite real and whatever viewpoints we have are authentically ours and not the Illuminaughties. I've even met a couple of the posters here.

I am finding it harder and harder to devote the time necessary to such a useless project. I will soon be forced to sign off forever. Oh well.

Disaffected users already created a rival site in the past (malthusia). Rather than tilting at windmills maybe you and PStarr should go start your own. Or maybe build out The Hills Group since that page still (as I've said many times) looks like it was erected by someone who got on the internet via a free AOL disc and a 56K modem.

[Whatever]

Anytime you word something along the lines of "prove it can't happen", you're proving a negative. Anything can happen, including bigfoot appearing in front of the White House next to UFOs and Jimmy Hoffa. But is it LIKELY?

If I had said that falling total energy will eventually cause Bigfoot to appear at the White House, that would be an extraordinary claim. But that is not what I said. I said that falling total energy must eventually lead to a rapid collapse because complex, highly networked systems cannot scale down uniformly. A critical hub like the financial system will fail and cause the rest of the system to rapidly collapse. This is supposed to be a peak oil website. Falling total energy should be expected to coincide with peak oil, so this is not an extraordinary claim.

I did not word anything along the lines of "prove it can't happen". This is not about whether rapid collapse is possible or not. It is not even about whether it is likely or not. Given the conditions of falling total energy, a rapid collapse is simply inevitable. I am asking you to prove that the inevitable won't happen. You obviously can't do that, can you? It must be very frustrating for you.

Regardless of your interpretation, most know Occam's Razor as just that, extraordinary claims (i.e. the end of the world as we know it to happen suddenly and very nigh) require extraordinary proof, of which you've provided none.

The Etp model combined with the Korowicz paper makes a for pretty strong case. But you can't seem to deal with either one. You refuse to even address the Korowicz paper, and instead you hide behind this garbled extraordinary claims/Occam's razor/proving a negative bullsh*t. Since we can expect that total energy will decline due to peak oil, and I have presented lots of evidence that total energy is already falling, then you are the one making an extraordinary claim by claiming that rapid collapse would not be the obvious outcome. Given the expected condition of falling total energy, how could a rapid collapse be avoided?

I am finding it harder and harder to devote the time necessary to such a useless project. I will soon be forced to sign off forever. Oh well.

Disaffected users already created a rival site in the past (malthusia). Rather than tilting at windmills maybe you and PStarr should go start your own. Or maybe build out The Hills Group since that page still (as I've said many times) looks like it was erected by someone who got on the internet via a free AOL disc and a 56K modem.

Both you and AdamB seem to be suffering from some serious reading comprehension problems. I said that due to the rapidly approaching apocalypse, I would soon be signing off. I have spent the last 12 years gaining a sophisticated understanding of the timing of collapse. I tried my best to share some of that with you, but it is now time to apply what I have learned so that I can personally avoid dying in the apocalypse. You, ennui, will die sitting at your keyboard, like a deer in the headlights, denying the obvious all the way. Good luck.



---Futilitist

[Whatever]

ennui and adam must enjoy insults and humiliation. Otherwise there is no other explanation for their persistent hollow comments, stupid and illogical put-downs. I am thinking a psychological meme?

I am thinking California F scale.

Authoritarian Personality --- a cluster of personality traits reflecting a desire for security and order, for example, rigidity, highly conventional outlook, unquestioning obedience, scapegoating, desire for structured lines of authority.

Because neither has even submitted reputable thermodynamic, economic, geologic (or even magical arguments) to contradict peak oil. All they offer is snide comments, and stupid pictures. weak stuff

They don't care about the truth and they will do anything to win.



---Futilitist

[ennui2]

falling total energy must eventually lead to...

Eventually != nigh. SL is all about nigh.

Given the conditions of falling total energy

You mean the current glut?

I am asking you to prove that the inevitable won't happen.

I've never claimed collapse won't happen. How soon and how fast is an open debate.

you can't seem to deal with either one.

This has gone on for hundreds of pages and plenty of people have rebutted your points.

it is now time to apply what I have learned so that I can personally avoid dying in the apocalypse. You, ennui, will die sitting at your keyboard, like a deer in the headlights, denying the obvious all the way. Good luck.

So sayeth the dodos: doom on YOU!

I find this "I'm better than you because I'm gonna be the last man standing" schtick says a lot more about the person who plays that card than the target of the bash.

Besides, if doom doesn't happen soon enough, are you even going to still be around? You're already retired. What kind of long-term future do you need at this point? Maybe rather than bragging about canned beans and precious metals it would be best to kind of just deal with mortality in general. The doomer prep pissing contest is really childish in the grand scheme of things.

ennui and adam must enjoy insults and humiliation.

Says the guy who got his account suspended by the mods.

[AdamB]

ennui and adam must enjoy insults and humiliation. Otherwise there is no other explanation for their persistent hollow comments, stupid and illogical put-downs. I am thinking a psychological meme?

Because neither has even submitted reputable thermodynamic, economic, geologic (or even magical arguments) to contradict peak oil. All they offer is snide comments, and stupid pictures. weak stuff

The idea that universities are now offering stoner instruction was pretty funny I thought, like kids in the modern world aren't even smart enough to fight up their own reefer.

As far as contradicting peak oil, there is no need, reality did that for us.

How many cycles of oil production peak rates might there be in the future? We've got 2, anyone voting for 3? Perhaps 5?