[ROCKMAN]

"You are implying that "daters" ever claimed that geology based supply was related to price.". No I didn't. Didn't imply anything. Thought I clearly PROCLAIMED the Daters way over emphasized the importance of the PO date with respect to any meaningful metric out there. And the dynamics over the last 15 years appear to prove my assertion.

Same point about the PO date I've been making here for years

[AdamB]

"You are implying that "daters" ever claimed that geology based supply was related to price.". No I didn't. Didn't imply anything. Thought I clearly PROCLAIMED the Daters way over emphasized the importance of the PO date with respect to any meaningful metric out there. And the dynamics over the last 15 years appear to prove my assertion.

Same point about the PO date I've been making here for years

Well, okay. You are right, you did imply that peak oilers are ignorant of economics and the supply response to price. I can agree with that. And it isn't just the last 15 years, go look at all the price cycles in the past, the one the Etp model and others can't backcast because they don't get economics any better than the peakers did.

So now that it is obvious they need to learn some economics, do you think they will, or will they just keep doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result?