by Nano » Tue 17 Aug 2010, 20:07:25
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Xenophobe', 'I') like the chart. I like the singularity argument as well. A tough one to make because its at a different level than the main peak oil debate, but its a solid one.
The theory of infinite fossil fuels is similar to the theory of infinite knowledge. It is foolish.
I once heard:
"As the circle of light increases, so does the circumference of darkness around it"
... which to me implied that developing more knowledge means that more new knowledge becomes available to be developed. However, during my life as a scientist (mechanical engineering thermodynamics), I tend now to think it may be the other way round. The knowledge we are hunting for in science is like a black spot that we are approaching from all sides, rather than a circumference of darkness. Eventually, we will have reduced the sized of the dark spot to a pin prick. And after that, we will 'know everything'. I think it will happen pretty soon, perhaps within a few generations. But it will not be a spectacular 'singularity' event. It will probably go largely unnoticed. We'll simply come to realise we have knowledge of everything there is to know, when the only thing worth doing in science will seem to have become literature research, in order to make a living applying said knowledge in practice. I think we are almost there, speaking from experience as a scientist. Yes, I have added to scientific knowledge in my narrow field, but it was a new method of modelling and analysis I developed, not a new principle of operation. Far from it. I could draw on the work of authors of the 1940's already for the principles. It was just the method (supported by computers) that was my contribution. but new scientific or technological *principles* being discovered? I don't see it happening faster in the next 100 years than in the past 100 years.
Carlhole, you're arguments can be rewritten to be: "peak oil, etc. will CAUSE breakthroughs in renewable energy, etc. to solve the problem over time". I tend to agree with that! But it is unlikely that such breakthroughs will prevent growing competition for energy resources sparking (extremely) elevated global conflict and socioeconomic strife in the *next few decades*. This elevated level of conflict will start feeling like 'doom' for millions of people, perhaps billions, pretty soon! Try to tell those people that they are emotionally broken fools for being 'doomers'! If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, maybe it is ... a duck! So yes, in perhaps 100 or 1000 years there will likely be something like a techno-utopia, after we picked up the pieces. I agree its porbably inevitable! It is just the next couple of decades (or bad luck: centuries!) that I am thinking will not be all that pleasant, requiring hard work and a lot of sacrifice and spilling of sweat, blood and tears. While working hard and sacrificing, I can understand that people will not want to hear about silver bullits and pipedreams too much...
Sure wish I had bought more. So sad. 
