ralfy wrote:Econ101 wrote:Peak oil is a political scheme vision_master not a joke. It is being used to gain political power and wealth by those employing the myth in their propaganda arsenals.
The refinement of the gas engine is not an indicator of overall oil reserves. It's not an indicator of anything except improved engineering.
Peak oil = peak politics.
Since much of the wealth of TPTB consists of money, then it's the other way round. It's not peak oil but peak oil denialism that is a "political scheme." That's because the value of that money can only be retained by increasing production and consumption of goods, and given a mass manufacturing system heavily dependent on oil can only be achieved by consuming more oil. Increasing oil price does not help because it also increases the cost of living and oil production cost.
That's why some of your arguments which do not show that peak oil is debunked (such as "improved engineering," which is actually a response to lower oil supply) are connected to a global economy that requires increased production and consumption. (It's falsely assumed that more efficiency leads to less consumption, but that doesn't apply to a global capitalist economy that involves competition.)
Econ101 wrote:Yes, Barack Obama is the leader, the EPA are the strong arm thugs. The enviro nuts are the angry villagers demanding action and the media serve as the damaging gossip of the old ladies spreading the rumors and lies fueling the peak oil political movement.
Econ101 wrote:
Improved efficency is not a response to lower supplies, it is a natural business reaction to rising costs threatening increasing profits. Successful business enterprises are always becoming more efficient. Thats how profits are created. Its absurd to try and rethink that fact.
The evidence is clear we have rapidly expanding new recoverable oil reserves around the world adequate for our needs well beyond our lifetimes. The response of peak oilers is to increase public preassure on fracking, sick the EPA on the producers with an infinity of rules, regulations and fees trying to make it too expensive and/or slow it down dramatically.They also prohibit access to rich federal lands. There are a lot of votes riding on the peak oil myth proving out to be true.
Beery1 wrote:Econ101 wrote:Yes, Barack Obama is the leader, the EPA are the strong arm thugs. The enviro nuts are the angry villagers demanding action and the media serve as the damaging gossip of the old ladies spreading the rumors and lies fueling the peak oil political movement.
I have to ask you seriously, might it be time to get yourself evaluated by a psychiatrist?
dbruning wrote:"it is a natural business reaction to rising costs threatening increasing profits"
Why are costs rising? If we are swimming in so much excess surely the costs of everything will go down, right?
It doesn't matter how much oil costs, just that there is a bunch of it available? I wonder when they will start factoring in hydrocarbons surrounding planets in our solar system for their reports...after all, there is a lot of it just floating around for the taking.
Ahhh, good times here we come!
Econ101 wrote:Peak oil is politics. The misinformation campaign called peak oil is propaganda used to secure a politcal base. That is the purpose of propaganda. It was used effectively by Stalin too.
Econ101 wrote:Im sorry ralfy but your responses are disjointed and your logic fails.
We will have all the oil we need. We have always had all the oil we need. Statistics used to project shortages into the future are all flawed or worse yet misrepresented for political purposes.
Eroei for example is a manipulative idea used to support the propaganda of peak oil. 25:1 is a better estimate of the ratio of BS to facts concerning our energy future. It in no way can be considered a measure of anything meaningful. That is why it is rejected by the mainstream and only mentioned within political contexts like this forum. It is a political tool like global warming. Its used to secure the base, like ralfy, by stiring up their emotions not their minds.
Peak oil is the refuge of crack-pots. It was created by a person that in retrospect knew little or nothing about the future of oil production in the USA or the world. He made a prediction based on his own limited, and now known to be ignorant, point of view. But facts arent important to people that have dogma on their side and are continually reinforced through a mass media propaganda effort being employed by political forces to secure a base.
NKVD arrest squads were probibly more important.Econ101 wrote:Peak oil is politics. The misinformation campaign called peak oil is propaganda used to secure a politcal base. That is the purpose of propaganda. It was used effectively by Stalin too.
An assertion without any back up.Peak oil is politics.
Other than small parties like the Greens and so on, no major political organization even recognized peak oil. Until a couple of years ago to talk about it was considered a crankish idea outside of professional petroleum geologists and environmentalist (two groups not exactly on the best of terms with each other). So where is the authors asserted "political base"?The misinformation campaign called peak oil is propaganda used to secure a political base.
Econ101 wrote: That is why it is rejected by the mainstream and only mentioned within political contexts like this forum. It is a political tool like global warming.
Alchemy, turning pure irony into comedy gold.But facts arent important to people that have dogma on their side
Which mass media?and are continually reinforced through a mass media propaganda effort being employed by political forces to secure a base.
Econ101 wrote:If the past is any indication we will do just fine as long as we dont sucumb to the type of idiocy that caused the uswashed masses to destroy the libraries at Alexandria and Constantinople.
Econ101 wrote:Peak oil is the refuge of crack-pots.
It was created by a person that in retrospect knew little or nothing about the future of oil production in the USA or the world.
He made a prediction based on his own limited, and now known to be ignorant, point of view.
Dybbuk wrote:There's some data I would like to see, and maybe I can find it if I look a little harder around this site.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests