[shortonsense]

It is reasonable to ask how many CURRENT prognostications are nonsense as well. If it isn't obvious to you, it certainly is to me, some people are quite wrapped up in their prognostications, and have no sense at all about how poorly such things has worked out in the past.

"Some people" I can accept. But tarring the majority of the board with the same brush as these people is wearing a bit thin.

I do not aim at tarring the majority of the board, I tar crackpots in general. Airline is trying to determine at this very moment what the mix of peaker versus Doomer versus cornie of THIS board. Certainly it is unreasonable for any of my general comments to be taken as applying to only this board when its quite obvious that the real crazies tend to reside elsewhere. However, the general public, coming into contact with peak oil, is not guaranteed to only see THIS board, they see the other places as well. Certainly it is the height of hubris to think that only the mix around here matters in the credibility versus peak oil debate.

[shortonsense]

...individuals on the forums, pushing the nonstop 9/11 trivia, the faked moon landings...

It was from reading people like Colin Campbell, Richard Heinberg, Mike Ruppert, Barrie Zwicker, etc. - all Peak Oil luminaries - that I became interested in the link between the events of 911 and the problem of depleting fossil fuels - with all the accompanying wars and geopolitics. Maybe you should bitch at the PO movers and shakers at the top?

I think it is reasonable to point out that belief in crackpottery is not necessarily correlated with intelligence. The psychological components which make up a true believer would undoubtedly be a wildly interesting doctoral dissertation. Of course, we don't need peakers to define what true believers are, we have plenty of religious examples of the same issue.

With respect to Colin,when he veers off into standard, blame it on vast hyper efficient impenetrable shadow groups acting as puppet masters of the world while ignoring all evidence to the contrary, he is no better from a credibility standpoint than if he was advocating the same faked moon landing and hidden alien nonsense taken so seriously at LATOC.

[shortonsense]

Thanks for proving my point pstarr.

I could not have done it better if I tried.

I was about to say the same thing myself.

[mos6507]

why didn't peak go as predicted?

This is your Building 7 argument. It fails to look at the issue of limits to growth as a unit. The incomplete logic that was used to predict $300+ oil and zombie hordes in the oil runup is no different from you predicting a mild crash based on the fact we're still standing.

[shortonsense]

why didn't peak go as predicted?

This is your Building 7 argument. It fails to look at the issue of limits to growth as a unit.

Limits to growth contains within it the science work that Hubbert did. Peak oil is a subset of Hubberts work, because Hubbert actually quantified all sorts of things, whereas peak oil is obviously...oily.

If crackpottery were as closely associated with, say, the club of rome ideas, then I would have a beef with that association as well. And some have certainly tried to expand peak oil concepts into other areas, but the crackpottery seems to revolve primarily around the peak oil side.

The incomplete logic that was used to predict $300+ oil and zombie hordes in the oil runup is no different from you predicting a mild crash based on the fact we're still standing.

I think the only prediction I've made has been to offer odds on a double dip recession. And I don't NEED to randomly make up scenarios, my habit is to defer to historical examples. For peak oil, there is an excellent one, the 1979 peak oil. Price spike, US recession, unemployment, inflation, double dip, and the entire mess took more than half a decade to sort out.

[davep]

Certainly it is the height of hubris to think that only the mix around here matters in the credibility versus peak oil debate.

That's a bit grandiose. This is the only PO site I tend to frequent, so this is the one where I see you banging on and on about doomers. We get the message.

[shortonsense]

Thanks for proving my point pstarr.

I could not have done it better if I tried.

This snarky, self-referential, poorly-parsed mindburp is not really a response. Is it?

If you are to succeed at restoring PO.com credibility than you had better apply yourself.

PO.com credibility is not the topic. For those with ADHD, the topic is that peak oil itself, in its resource depletion context, is an important topic and yet, because of its association with crackpottery, suffers in the credibility department.

Advocating or even mentioning the words "peak oil" in front of a normal audience is as likely to get polite giggles as it is any serious consideration. Because resource depletion is a real issue, with real consequences (particularly economic ones) I find it irritating that even a subset of the overall debate ( oil depletion ) is besmirched by the cross pollination of crackpottery from other areas.

[davep]

Thanks for proving my point pstarr.

I could not have done it better if I tried.

This snarky, self-referential, poorly-parsed mindburp is not really a response. Is it?

If you are to succeed at restoring PO.com credibility than you had better apply yourself.

PO.com credibility is not the topic. For those with ADHD, the topic is that peak oil itself, in its resource depletion context, is an important topic and yet, because of its association with crackpottery, suffers in the credibility department.

Advocating or even mentioning the words "peak oil" in front of a normal audience is as likely to get polite giggles as it is any serious consideration. Because resource depletion is a real issue, with real consequences (particularly economic ones) I find it irritating that even a subset of the overall debate ( oil depletion ) is besmirched by the cross pollination of crackpottery from other areas.

I've never had a negative reaction when I've discussed peak oil with people IRL. Maybe because I don't go off on other theories, but just stick to what I see are the facts and implications. Some may not wholeheartedly agree, but they don't dismiss what I'm saying as if I were bonkers.

[AirlinePilot]

All other ranting aside...this is an interesting thread. Back on topic folks...

I believe PO has little credibility for one major reason.

The majority of people in the US and more so the rest of the world, are not equipped to grasp the greater picture of resource depletion. There are barriers thrown up around it by many institutions and governments. They don't have the time, the intelligence, nor the desire to move outside of their daily grind of existence to allow them to understand what it means. They do not possess the free time required to wade through the text, the science, nor the opinions of experts. Another large stumbling block I see is Fear. Western Economic culture has successfully perpetuated the meme of unlimited growth. We all have grown up thinking things would always get better and technology is an ever growing and all encompassing panacea for any problems which stand in the way of that paradigm. Any crack in that picture creates Fear. Fear of the unknown and fear of the potential destruction of that paradigm. Fear leads towards denial in all but the few stronger and smarter folks out there who are not afraid to grasp what may be coming and see the real path we may be on.

A precious few of us have that ability,coupled with the time, the intelligence, and also the DESIRE to know what may befall us with regards to resource depletion. Specifically what Peaking Global Oil production might mean for our futures. We are not afraid of that and it allows us a measure of clarity that i believe few will posses as this knowledge means the loss of much that we have come to know and enjoy in this present resource rich world. That clarity will only be brought to the masses by pain. Until that time, we live in a shadow world of conspiracy theory, tinfoil, and "fringe" websites.

We are the boy who cried Wolf. That's just the way it is.


As to my poll, I did it honestly to see if we really are a "crackpot site". We will see I guess.

[davep]

The majority of people in the US and more so the rest of the world, are not equipped to grasp the greater picture of resource depletion.

Why more so the rest of the world? Europe? No. Africa? Increasing population does not equate to a lack of understanding of resource depletion. I don't understand why you said this. You don't hear leaders of other countries saying their way of life is non-negotiable.

And nowhere else has as far to fall in per-capita resource use as the US.

[Loki]

Whiney noises.

Just because the conversation doesn't go the way you planned doesn't mean anyone hijacked anything. You clearly intended to brag about your salary, as usual, but frankly I find your chest beating about money money money to be tiresome. I also don't see what it has to do with peak oil.

PO.com is a web forum, not a peer-reviewed academic journal. People come here to shoot the shit. Even so, the level of conversation is much higher than most forums.

I do miss some of the old timers, though, most of whom Shorty and AAA would consider tinfoil crackpots who reduce the credibility of this site. The site they helped build.

[Loki]

I believe PO has little credibility for one major reason.

The majority of people in the US and more so the rest of the world, are not equipped to grasp the greater picture of resource depletion.

Agreed. Cornucopianism has been drilled into us from birth (us = Americans, and probably to a lesser extent Europeans, Aussies, Japanese, etc.). To reject this and incorporate the concept of peak oil into one's life is a wrenching experience. Why not just go with the flow and spend one's time obsessing about the new iPad?

I also think most people don't really have a good understanding of how important oil is to our way of life. They just assume it can be easily substituted.

But does it really matter? Do we really expect our government, or our society for that matter, to make a serious attempt at mitigating peak oil? I don't. We will respond to peak oil when it punches us in the nose and forces us to acknowledge it, not one second sooner. "Credibility" of the concept will be irrelevant at that point.

Same goes for global warming.

This is not a good thing, IMHO, just being realistic.

[AirlinePilot]

Why more so the rest of the world? Europe? No. Africa? Increasing population does not equate to a lack of understanding of resource depletion. I don't understand why you said this. You don't hear leaders of other countries saying their way of life is non-negotiable.

And nowhere else has as far to fall in per-capita resource use as the US.

The "rest of the world" comment was probably a bit too broad brush but overall I think its accurate. Europe, Canada, Japan and one or two of the wealthier Asian countries aside, most other places spend far too much of their day just getting by and dont have the time nor the tools(internet) to delve into the subject.

I agree completely that the US will suffer more once depletion sets in for any length of time without large efforts at conservation and mitigation

[AAA]

Whiney noises.

Just because the conversation doesn't go the way you planned doesn't mean anyone hijacked anything. You clearly intended to brag about your salary, as usual, but frankly I find your chest beating about money money money to be tiresome. I also don't see what it has to do with peak oil.

PO.com is a web forum, not a peer-reviewed academic journal. People come here to shoot the shit. Even so, the level of conversation is much higher than most forums.

I do miss some of the old timers, though, most of whom Shorty and AAA would consider tinfoil crackpots who reduce the credibility of this site. The site they helped build.

First you misquoted me.

Second I never mentioned my salary in the thread you are referring too and I got the idea from theoildrum.com

Third the thread was created to help younger po members or those thinking of career changes. Ludi has helped me understand that not all peak oil members are old and gray like Pops. I'm 27 and apparently there are a few other youngsters out there.

Fourth I work in the oil industry, invest in the oil industry, and focus much of my free-time research on peak oil.

Fifth I'm one of the few that actually have a 10 year plan and will have the same income as I do now in case the "collapse" doesn't happen I'm not SOL and have no money and no job.

Sixth if you want to get into a pissing match then we can. Ive worked hard and have stuff to prove it.

[davep]

Fifth I'm one of the few that actually have a 10 year plan and will have the same income as I do now in case the "collapse" doesn't happen I'm not SOL and have no money and no job.

Cheeky whippersnapper!

We all had ten year plans when we were young.

As for having the same income in 10 years time, who knows what the future holds?

May I humbly suggest that getting out of debt, owning your house and land, having the means to feed yourself and your family with some surplus whilst embracing sustainable practices, and actually wanting to prove that we can live sustainably without a life of drudgery are the kind of things an aware POer should be aspiring to? Same salary? Christ, I earn nearly 200k (dollars) and I yearn for the day I can leave to spend my time with my wife and daughter, living life simply but productively for the future of the human race.

It may work, it may fail. But we are privileged people in that we know the society we live in will not be there for much longer in its current guise. What better way to live your life than to help, in whatever small manner, to show the way forward in the small amount of time we have while resources are still relatively abundant?

[Ludi]

Ludi has helped me understand that not all peak oil members are old and gray like Pops.

That's weird...why me specifically?

<<<<< totally hijacking this thread

[Loki]

Ludi has helped me understand that not all peak oil members are old and gray like Pops.

That's weird...why me specifically?

<<<<< totally hijacking this thread

No worries, Boomers won't be hijacking threads any more once ObamaCare is implemented. I heard Rangerone was recently appointed to the Death Panel....

[Loki]

snip

Lighten up Francis, this is the internet, grow some skin.

But so as not to further hijack this thread, maybe you can riddle me this. What does it matter if the concept of peak oil has "credibility" or not?

There's a degree of evangelicalism amongst peakers, some feel the need to "spread the word." Why? Do you honestly think the .gov or Joe Sixpack are going to do squat about PO until their backs are against the wall?

[shortonsense]

Certainly it is the height of hubris to think that only the mix around here matters in the credibility versus peak oil debate.

That's a bit grandiose. This is the only PO site I tend to frequent, so this is the one where I see you banging on and on about doomers. We get the message.

Perhaps it is because this site has more of an even balance than the others?

[shortonsense]

Perhaps it is because this site has more of an even balance than the others?

Why don't you go over to Theoildrum.com and tell them just how unbalanced they are.

A) This thread isn't about a particular sites perspective on the overall topic
B) Read first, that way you won't make it so easy to insult your alma mater
C) I do post at the Oildrum
D) Their problem isn't the balance but the format, which has nothing to do with the topic at hand.