threadbear wrote:Peak date is very relevant. Running out tomorrow is far different than running out in a decade or two.
I said it was irrelevant because it is impossible to know the date with any reasonable precision. I'd agree that if we could work out the date to within a year or two, with certainty, then it would be relevant. As we can't determine the date, the question of date is completely irrelevant. We would do well to just assume that it is sometime soon.
threadbear wrote:Also, the poster expressed scepticism about Darwinism. I've provided very solid information that the skepticism is deserved.
I completely disagree, but that's OK. Evolution by natural selection of random mutations deserves very little skepticism, since it is the best explanation for the life we see today.
threadbear wrote:Science is a dynamic evolving process itself, and it's contemproary theories often turn out to be no more than handy working hypotheses. Darwinism is limited by those who think that it stands alone in explaining how and why animals change.
Not at all. It is the best explanation we currently have. Every theory that we have today could turn out to be wrong, but being skeptical about every theory is not a useful stance; some grounds for skepticism are required.
threadbear wrote:I'm more convinced than ever that the forums are providing a home for fundamentalist thinkers, who can't see shades of grey and simply don't understand the philosophy of, or spirit of scientific inquiry.
Isn't that the sort of comment one would expect from a fundamentalist thinker?
threadbear wrote:The best evidence for peak oil is actually intuitive and anecdotal. We can use reason to discern that if oil has run out in the US, it is a finite resource and will run out elsewhere.
There is nothing wrong with arriving at this conclusion, even if it isn't supported, at this point, by iron clad scientific evidence.
Nothing has iron clad scientific evidence. But is there good reason to be skeptical that there will be a peak? If so, I've yet to hear it. As I've said, even the abiotic theory (patchy as it is) would result in a peak. We can see from oil production that fields and regions peak. The earth is finite, so its resources are finite. You may think that the evidence is anecdotal but I can't see how you can falsify that the earth is finite and any process within it is finite. Peak
will happen; we don't know and can't know when, so let's deal with it.
threadbear wrote:It IS wrong to slime people who question your "scientific"conclusions.
Whatever "sliming" people is, I very much doubt that I've done it to anyone here.