$5 a gallon oil in 2012

[Mr. H.]

Well, which is it? Oil company collusion or commodity brokers?

It can't be the former. There have already been numerous investigations over the years .

When you have a retired oil company exec come out and say it is going to happen. The media reports the crap out of it, without bothering to report the fact that there is no reson for the price to get that high, it enters into the lexicon and by hook or by crook it will become a self fulfilling prophecy. You watch, there will be ever more articles reporting on the impending price increases.

Yup. Buy the rumor, sell the fact.

 

[ABikerSailor]

What's the difference between the "Old stone age" and the "New stone age"?

I mean, did they discover non-stick stones or something?

Actually, I think it delineates between prehistoric and modern humans.

 

[westwall]

Well, which is it? Oil company collusion or commodity brokers?

It can't be the former. There have already been numerous investigations over the years .

When you have a retired oil company exec come out and say it is going to happen. The media reports the crap out of it, without bothering to report the fact that there is no reson for the price to get that high, it enters into the lexicon and by hook or by crook it will become a self fulfilling prophecy. You watch, there will be ever more articles reporting on the impending price increases.

Yup. Buy the rumor, sell the fact.

In a nutshell.

 

[RGR]

Peak as a religion is designed as a belief system so that this group of geologic incompetents (with human hater tendencies) can construct a nice, personally customized Rapture scenario for themselves. It has nothing to do with either the reality of resource depletion in general, or peak oil in particular.

It's basic statistics.

Peakers can't add up all the oil in the world because the number has too many zeros in it, to think they know anything about statistics is more than a stretch. Their religion doesn't permit knowledge of science, let alone the language of it (statistics).

If you wish to recycle Malthus, at least be honest about how HIS claims of overpopulation worked out before you rework the same nonsense to your own ends.

 

[Mr. Sauerkraut]

It's a shame only the upper middle class and wealthy can afford these fuel efficient automobiles. When's the last time you've seen the impoverished cruising around in a hybrid or fuel flex car?

there´s always a solution

 

[JiggsCasey]

Peakers can't add up all the oil in the world because the number has too many zeros in it, to think they know anything about statistics is more than a stretch. Their religion doesn't permit knowledge of science, let alone the language of it (statistics).

If you wish to recycle Malthus, at least be honest about how HIS claims of overpopulation worked out before you rework the same nonsense to your own ends.

LOL. It's the same thing with you, no matter who you engage. Baseless personal insinuation, followed by ZERO counter argument to the graph presented. In fact, you punted to the Malthus straw man. Nice touch.

You run your mouth about your self-proclaimed superior grasp of statistics over and over again, but you're not fooling anyone here. You have yet provide a single statistical reference. That's because the statistics are not on your side of the argument at all. Sorry. ... And they can't be bribed, spun, or discredited... So that leaves you in quite a fix.

Once again. Where is the oil? How much is left? You know, right, stat king?

See you next week. Can't wait.

 

[editec]

FYI

EXCEPT for immigration (both legal and illegal) the USA reached ZERO POPULATION GROWTH waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back in the late 1960s.

The world can blame Americans for a lot of things, I'll admit.

But having too many children is NOT one of our faults.

 

[RGR]

If you wish to recycle Malthus, at least be honest about how HIS claims of overpopulation worked out before you rework the same nonsense to your own ends.

LOL. It's the same thing with you, no matter who you engage. Baseless personal insinuation, followed by ZERO counter argument to the graph presented. In fact, you punted to the Malthus straw man. Nice touch.

Malthusian predictions of human Doom through overpopulation do not require additional explanation. Doomers generally do not KNOW things, they parrot what they have heard from others. Factual information does not require a "counter", it simply is. Human population HAS grown quite a bit since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

The graph provided certainly didn't not detail where current estimates say that growth will end, or deny any of the continued functioning of the mechanisms which have allowed humans to grow their population as far as they already have, or to use those same techniques to grow our population to its expected maximum.

You have yet provide a single statistical reference.

I haven't needed to. The graph provided wasn't a statistic expression, it was just data on a Cartesian graph.

Once again. Where is the oil? How much is left? You know, right, stat king?
See you next week. Can't wait.

We have already began discussing this elsewhere. Certainly you have already demonstrated that you have "favorite" oils, just like Peakers do. Until you can even define what YOUR particular definition of oil is, that can be a difficult question to answer. Not that I have any intention of using an oil definition conceived by yet another peaker, but we have to start somewhere to determine your overall level of ignorance on this topic.

 

[HUGGY]

I don't care if the Germans are paying 7 bucks a gallon for gas. If it wasn't for us they would still be speaking German!

 

[zzzz]

It's a shame only the upper middle class and wealthy can afford these fuel efficient automobiles. When's the last time you've seen the impoverished cruising around in a hybrid or fuel flex car?

there´s always a solution

Mopeds

 

[Mr. Sauerkraut]

It's a shame only the upper middle class and wealthy can afford these fuel efficient automobiles. When's the last time you've seen the impoverished cruising around in a hybrid or fuel flex car?

there´s always a solution

Mopeds

the french´s answer

and they wonder why their car industry is going down...

 

[westwall]

Peakers can't add up all the oil in the world because the number has too many zeros in it, to think they know anything about statistics is more than a stretch. Their religion doesn't permit knowledge of science, let alone the language of it (statistics).

If you wish to recycle Malthus, at least be honest about how HIS claims of overpopulation worked out before you rework the same nonsense to your own ends.

LOL. It's the same thing with you, no matter who you engage. Baseless personal insinuation, followed by ZERO counter argument to the graph presented. In fact, you punted to the Malthus straw man. Nice touch.

You run your mouth about your self-proclaimed superior grasp of statistics over and over again, but you're not fooling anyone here. You have yet provide a single statistical reference. That's because the statistics are not on your side of the argument at all. Sorry. ... And they can't be bribed, spun, or discredited... So that leaves you in quite a fix.

Once again. Where is the oil? How much is left? You know, right, stat king?

See you next week. Can't wait.

Answer my question Jiggs. Are RGR's numbers correct as regards the supplies now?

 

[westwall]

FYI

EXCEPT for immigration (both legal and illegal) the USA reached ZERO POPULATION GROWTH waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back in the late 1960s.

The world can blame Americans for a lot of things, I'll admit.

But having too many children is NOT one of our faults.

And this is true for the MAJORITY of First World nations. Even some Third World countries are levelling off. Something that no one thought would ever happen.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Answer my question Jiggs. Are RGR's numbers correct as regards the supplies now?

Link to what you're asking please. I may have missed it.

I'll be happy to take a look.

 

[westwall]

Answer my question Jiggs. Are RGR's numbers correct as regards the supplies now?

Link to what you're asking please. I may have missed it.

I'll be happy to take a look.

1970's oil reserves 690 billion barrels. Today the reserves are estimated at 1025 billion barrels of oil.

 

[JiggsCasey]

1970's oil reserves 690 billion barrels. Today the reserves are estimated at 1025 billion barrels of oil.

That's painfully vague. I asked you to link to the post you're referring to.

Reserves of what? Recoverable or technical? Proven or estimated?

More important, is there any mention of the exponential demand growth curve since the 1970s? Probably not.

 

[RGR]

1970's oil reserves 690 billion barrels. Today the reserves are estimated at 1025 billion barrels of oil.

That's painfully vague. I asked you to link to the post you're referring to.

Reserves of what? Recoverable or technical? Proven or estimated?

More important, is there any mention of the exponential demand growth curve since the 1970s? Probably not.

Proven reserves, EIA, 1980, 644 billion barrels.
Proven reserves, EIA, 2007, 1317 billion barrels.

Approximate consumption between 1980 and 2007, 716 billion barrels.

In 27 years we consumed 716 billion, and found not only that 716 billion, but another 601 billion to boot.

Sure we find more than we consume. Doing it all the time. And of course reserves have nothing to do with demand growth, exponential, hyperbolic, harmonic, in either a positive or negative direction. Go find someone who knows something about this topic, and at least parrot THEM instead of whatever ignorant peaker you listened to to come up with this nonsense.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Proven reserves, EIA, 1980, 644 billion barrels.
Proven reserves, EIA, 2007, 1317 billion barrels.

Approximate consumption between 1980 and 2007, 716 billion barrels.

In 27 years we consumed 716 billion, and found not only that 716 billion, but another 601 billion to boot.

Sure we find more than we consume. Doing it all the time. And of course reserves have nothing to do with demand growth, exponential, hyperbolic, harmonic, in either a positive or negative direction. Go find someone who knows something about this topic, and at least parrot THEM instead of whatever ignorant peaker you listened to to come up with this nonsense.

Again, you arrogant asshat... Link your claim. Why is that so troubling for you guys?

Let's agree on a starting point of what is being said, not your fraudulent assessment of what is being said.

You're right that I should find someone else who knows about this topic to debate with, because it surely isn't you.

 

[Old Rocks]

Answer my question Jiggs. Are RGR's numbers correct as regards the supplies now?

Link to what you're asking please. I may have missed it.

I'll be happy to take a look.

1970's oil reserves 690 billion barrels. Today the reserves are estimated at 1025 billion barrels of oil.

Typical. Blind assertation, nothing at all to back it up. Anyone knows that there are reserves and there are 'reserves'. Recoverable at what price is the whole point.

 

[RGR]

Proven reserves, EIA, 1980, 644 billion barrels.
Proven reserves, EIA, 2007, 1317 billion barrels.

Approximate consumption between 1980 and 2007, 716 billion barrels.

In 27 years we consumed 716 billion, and found not only that 716 billion, but another 601 billion to boot.

Sure we find more than we consume. Doing it all the time. And of course reserves have nothing to do with demand growth, exponential, hyperbolic, harmonic, in either a positive or negative direction. Go find someone who knows something about this topic, and at least parrot THEM instead of whatever ignorant peaker you listened to to come up with this nonsense.

Again, you arrogant asshat... Link your claim. Why is that so troubling for you guys?

I do apologize. I assumed even a parrot knew how to find the EIA website, what with all of 3 letters to enter into google. My bad for assuming you were a smart parrot.

Energy Information Administration - International Petroleum (Oil) Reserves and Resources Data