midnight-gamer wrote:It seems short-sighted to come on here and make blanket statements about who was right and wrong ten + years ago.
Would you prefer 20, when Colin Campbell was declaring peak oils? Or 30 years ago when Jimmy was claiming running out? Or 80 years ago when Hubbert was claiming peak oil in the US by 1950? The point is when do people LEARN from those bad calls, and update their ideas to better reflect what we now know is the reality of peak oil claims...without the peak oil part coming true.
midnight-gamer wrote:To my knowledge, Peakoil.com circa 2005-2008 didn't have a unified opinion about the future -- the predictions were as diverse as the posters themselves.
No they weren't. Daring to say that peak wouldn't happen got folks booted. Go look at those who were, and the ideas they dared to advocate..you know...like MAYBE peak doomer claims wouldn't work out as planned. That's all it took. Now, if you are thinking only of the fast and slow crashers, cannibals versus gold bugs, gardeners and gun collectors, well sure, there was HUGE diversity. But you weren't allow to question the premise. And slow crash meant a couple years, you know, years before NOW, as we sit here in glut and new supply.
It is called herdthink. 2005-2008 was a wonderful example of it.
midnight-gamer wrote: I believe it's reasonable to have concluded that a fast crash was *one* possible outcome based on the available data at that time; Fracking, an emergent technology, came out of left field, from a bit player I might add.
People HERE were talking about fracking back then, it wasn't from out of left field. And those people were banned for daring to know this information. It was only out of left field for the myopic. Or doomers, who want NOTHING to do with highly visible things happening..RIGHT NOW. See my sig line for exactly the next round of change that doomers so desperately want to avoid discussing.
midnight-gamer wrote:Additionally, it seemed just as likely that oil-holding nations might opt to hold onto their reserves rather than selling it even faster.
The Saudi's have SPECIFICALLY chosen the opposite path. Defending market share is there game..and you want to know what they are afraid of? Watch Tony Seba's video in my sig line. Quaking in their boots, they should be.
midnight-gamer wrote:If posters here are to make unbiased predictions, then their arguments ought to build on truth and be careful not to misrepresent that truth. Finally, the future is not one set path, rather a number of possible outcomes. Perhaps we simply got lucky -- it's rude to come in after the fact and say I told you so.
It isn't about rude, it is about LEARNING. Doomers are proving they can't, even when faced with their bad calls. Science is all about learning from experiments, doomers can see the results of their ideas playing out in the real world around them, and you know they can't learn when they just repeat the same mantra, and hope that this time it works out, rather than learning WHY it didn't work out last time, and adjust their dogma accordingly.
Plant Thu 27 Jul 2023 "Personally I think the IEA is exactly right when they predict peak oil in the 2020s, especially because it matches my own predictions."
Plant Wed 11 Apr 2007 "I think Deffeyes might have nailed it, and we are just past the overall peak in oil production. (Thanksgiving 2005)"