pstarr wrote:Xenophobe wrote:Hubberts own example don't follow Hubberts decline, Ohio being the prime example of course. Dismissed as depleted by Hubbert(1956) it nearly achieved another oil peak in the 1970's, some 7 or 8 decades after its first peak.
So you found an exception. Big shit. Hubbert's method is a model. Do you know what a model is? It is a a hypothetical description of a complex entity or process. It approximates reality. Statistically, over the long run, Hubbert's model is useful in predicting the rise and fall of oil producing regions. Dipshit.
I didn't find A exception, I found that 75-80% of the worldest oil DOESN'T follow Hubberts concept. Your opinion on this fact is irrelevant, as it is with all other facts. They simply are, your endorsement of them is of no more value than your denial of them.
pstarr wrote:There are hundreds of oil producing fields, regions and nations that follow a classic Hubbert's curve. You are barking up the wrong tree.
I am not barking, and I stand by my earlier factual statement. Don't feel poorly about it, you aren't the only one who really makes mistakes when it comes to confusing production and reserves and what size aggregation follows what sized profile. Here is a classic example of Colin misrepresenting well production for example, in his Scientific America work:
The clue being, oil wells don't produce that way. Here is a reasonably relevant SPE paper on the topic. Not that I expect you to understand the math involved, but no one can say that I don't try and educate the most feeble.
http://www.pe.tamu.edu/blasingame/data/0_TAB_Public/TAB_Publications/SPE_028688_(Doublet)_Material_Balance_Decline_Type_Curve_An.pdfSo, for the feeble...pictures!
pstarr wrote:a) Oil production is measured by different standards. You know this because I have explained it to you a dozen times. C+C and All llquids are different metrics used by EIA, IEA and BP. Also oil production values are measured over different time periods. Averaged monthly,yearly, and for single periods. Of course there are different peak reported. Why don't you fix this and come up with a universal measure that applied to all conditions. Do it or shut the fuck up troll.
Why..how expressive of you! Fortunately, I have already attached Stuarts most recent analysis to the NEXT peak oil, and the metrics he, as an ex-TOD expert on the topic, has decided to use. Feel free to quote something of your to refute his analysis, or just revert to more foul language as a substitute for actual thought on the topic.
pstarr wrote:b) Regarding White: That one person was wrong in one particular ancient guess does not discredit the idea of prediction. WE all make our best attempts at predicting our own futures. I predict that you will go fuck yourself.
Goodness! Such anger and resentment!
Vicious ad hom deleted