As a well established semi-doomer around here, I have struggled for many months to discover a loophole which would at least mitigate what appears to be a brick wall we are speeding toward.
With little success as my recent posts indicate.
I reference Simmons frequently since if he's right about anticipated depletion rates, little else will matter at least short-term.
In reviewing Simmon's material, I have been revisiting his calls for reserve transparency from oil producers. This topic has seen stupendous amounts of ink here in this forum, as well as a wide variety of both print and internet resources over the past couple of years.
I have posted a similar thread in the boards ancient past, which posits that knowledge of accurate reserves figures from oil producers is so important, it over shadows all other global issues.
After all, if the lies are big enough, this is the mechanism which may well uncouple our world from it's civilized moorings, with sweeping global conflicts.
I wondered, if a majority of our planets population understood the implications of our lack of hard numbers in oil reserves globally, would the public outcry be enough to "force" governments and businesses to release more accurate data?
In fact, if we believe that our reserves ignorance is a potential "deal-breaker" for humanity, does this not imply an obligation on the part of the informed to pursue reserves transparency by any means?
Since in my humble opinion peak oil boils down to a question of average depletion rates & schedules in the coming years, might not an accurate global assessment of oil reserves constitute our last, best hope of preventing a global catastrophe?
If this reasoning is correct, what are our responsibilities to our fellow humans?
Balanced against the monetary interests which obscure reserves reporting today, the fate of mankind supersedes these finical interests by an order of magnitude does it not?
Our dependence on hydrocarbon energy is poised to become a cruel taskmaster, which borders on tyranny.
The question is therefore... at what price freedom?
PeakOil is You
Oil Reserves Transparency Peak Solution
First unread post • 7 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Oil Reserves Transparency Peak Solution
by Aaron » Tue 31 May 2005, 11:23:04
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.
Hazel Henderson
Hazel Henderson
-
Aaron - Resting in Peace
- Posts: 5998
- Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Houston
by Carlhole » Tue 31 May 2005, 12:14:44
Reserve transparency IS of paramount importance. Hopefully a critical mass will have been reached soon what with books like Simmon's appearing, End of Suburbia and what not. I hear there's another peak oil documentary being filmed right now by Kelly Way called "Asleep in America" - it focuses on Kjell Alklett of ODAC.
I can only guess that the RAND Corporation, the CIA and other think tanks have already arrived at their own conclusions about the matter. Washington's silence about it and the lack of attention given the subject by the major media does NOT bode well for ordinary people.
As an exercise, pretend you were privy to the cold, strategic calculations of the intelligence agencies. Peak Oil arrives at 2010 for purposes of discussion.
Your clients are the elite. What would you recommend?
I can only guess that the RAND Corporation, the CIA and other think tanks have already arrived at their own conclusions about the matter. Washington's silence about it and the lack of attention given the subject by the major media does NOT bode well for ordinary people.
As an exercise, pretend you were privy to the cold, strategic calculations of the intelligence agencies. Peak Oil arrives at 2010 for purposes of discussion.
Your clients are the elite. What would you recommend?
- Carlhole
by OilsNotWell » Wed 01 Jun 2005, 04:18:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') can only guess that the RAND Corporation, the CIA and other think tanks have already arrived at their own conclusions about the matter. Washington's silence about it and the lack of attention given the subject by the major media does NOT bode well for ordinary people.
As an exercise, pretend you were privy to the cold, strategic calculations of the intelligence agencies. Peak Oil arrives at 2010 for purposes of discussion.
Your clients are the elite. What would you recommend?
As an exercise, pretend you were privy to the cold, strategic calculations of the intelligence agencies. Peak Oil arrives at 2010 for purposes of discussion.
Your clients are the elite. What would you recommend?
I would suggest to you that they have not, in fact, been silent at all.
The advice was already given and received and acted upon. It was:
1. Introduce a presidential candidate with deep ties to the oil industry and family and conflicting interlocks with deeply entrenched power centers.
2. Stack the deck with staff, nominees, and appointments who have many years in the oil industry
3. Rig the election if necessary (it was)
4. Hold a secret energy task force
5. Plan for the invasion of Iraq as a strategic pivot point in the ME
6. Voila! 911 'happens'
7. Shove through the Patriotic Act to stifle internal dissent, start a worldwide campaign against 'terror'.
8. Expand empire ruthlessly and control the last remaining oil...
9. Fix the case for war on Iraq
10. Caspian 'stan' shenanigans..
11. Rig another election if necessary (it was)
12. Lie, torture, bomb, arrest, disappear, rendition, etc.
I could go on and on...
-
OilsNotWell - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1202
- Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
by FatherOfTwo » Wed 01 Jun 2005, 13:27:52
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilsNotWell', '
')11. Rig another election if necessary (it was)
')11. Rig another election if necessary (it was)
proof please.
-
FatherOfTwo - Tar Sands
- Posts: 960
- Joined: Thu 11 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
- Location: Heart of Canada's Oil Country
by OilsNotWell » Wed 01 Jun 2005, 14:16:10
(sigh). Proof, huh. Well, if you know anything about numbers and statistics, and how skewed the exit polls were with the 'results', and frankly how much of an improbability this is will astound you.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'V')ote fraud confirmed: US Count Votes has come out with a remarkable paper authored by a committee of twelve, most of them highly-qualified mathematicians and statisticians from major universities. This study highlights the serious ramifications of the exit poll discrepancy while demolishing the "chatty Dem" theory (more properly known as the "reluctant responder" theory), which remains the official explanation for that incongruity.
The only possibility left is vote alteration.
Alas, this important scientific study has yet to make an impact. The media, distracted by the Pope’s death, hasn’t noticed that Uncle Sam is also facing the Reaper. The only significant coverage of this report has appeared in the Akron Beacon Journal.
For those of you who are paying attention, the full analysis is here. An "executive summary" is here.
And if you’d like an ultra-brief summary of the summary:
The exit poll discrepancy in the 2004 American presidential election was the largest in the poll’s history -- about five-and-a-half percent. The odds against the polls being so wrong are roughly one in a million. The "chatty Dem" theory is nonsense: Responses to the pollsters were higher in Republican strongholds -- where the exit poll discrepancies were widest.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'V')ote fraud confirmed: US Count Votes has come out with a remarkable paper authored by a committee of twelve, most of them highly-qualified mathematicians and statisticians from major universities. This study highlights the serious ramifications of the exit poll discrepancy while demolishing the "chatty Dem" theory (more properly known as the "reluctant responder" theory), which remains the official explanation for that incongruity.
The only possibility left is vote alteration.
Alas, this important scientific study has yet to make an impact. The media, distracted by the Pope’s death, hasn’t noticed that Uncle Sam is also facing the Reaper. The only significant coverage of this report has appeared in the Akron Beacon Journal.
For those of you who are paying attention, the full analysis is here. An "executive summary" is here.
And if you’d like an ultra-brief summary of the summary:
The exit poll discrepancy in the 2004 American presidential election was the largest in the poll’s history -- about five-and-a-half percent. The odds against the polls being so wrong are roughly one in a million. The "chatty Dem" theory is nonsense: Responses to the pollsters were higher in Republican strongholds -- where the exit poll discrepancies were widest.
http://ohvotesuppression.blogspot.com/
http://www.makethemaccountable.com/arti ... umbers.htm
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/archi ... fraud.html
http://www.uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis ... Edison.pdf
http://uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/US/ ... tofsky.pdf
(look at that graph of how many standard deviations from the norm the exit polls and the "results" were...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/a ... -live.html
http://commonwonders.com/archives/col290.htm
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')o far, the best analysis of this analysis comes from Newsclip Autopsy. Highly recommend reading.
Here’s an important excerpt:
The exit polls for the 2004 election not only tabulated views from the Presidential election. It also received information about the voters intentions for the U.S. Senate races. Guess what?! Yup. Strangely enough, the exit polls were far more accurate at determining who would win for Senator. As history shows us, there is no precedent for widespread "ticket-splitting" in other elections. That is, if you vote democratic for President, there is an overwhelming probability that you would vote democratic for the Senator. US Vote Counts summarizes this peculiarity this way:
"There is no logic to account for non-responders or missed voters when discussing the
difference in the accuracy of results for the Senate versus the presidential races in the same exit poll."
No logic, indeed. Unless this is a nation where "multiple personality disorder" is present in epidemic proportions!!! To allay that particular fear, this report confirmed another startling finding which was observed in a previous report by the same group. Exit polling accuracy was dependent on whether the election ballots were hand-counted or not!! This is a highly significant finding, considering that, in Ohio, only a non-random 3% of the ballots were hand recounted. Many of these instances had recounts which were different from the machine counts.
And how did Ken Blackwell, the corrupt Ohio Secretary of State, respond to all this?
"What are you going to do except laugh at it?" said Carlo LoParo, spokesman for Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, who’s responsible for administering Ohio’s elections and is a Republican candidate for governor. "We’re not particularly interested in (the report’s findings)."
There you have it: Laughter directed at science. Laughter directed at ten PhDs. As though placing the topic behind a curtain of guffaws replaces the need for a counter-argument.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nalysis points to election `corruption’
Group says chance of exit polls being so wrong in ’04 vote is one-in-959,000
By Stephen Dyer
Beacon Journal staff writer
There’s a one-in-959,000 chance that exit polls could have been so wrong in predicting the outcome of the 2004 presidential election, according to a statistical analysis released Thursday.
Exit polls in the November election showed Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., winning by 3 percent, but President George W. Bush won the vote count by 2.5 percent.
The explanation for the discrepancy that was offered by the exit polling firm -- that Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polling -- is an ``implausible theory,’’ according to the report issued Thursday by US Count Votes, a group that claims it’s made up of about two dozen statisticians.
Twelve -- including a Case Western Reserve University mathematics instructor -- signed the report.
Instead, the data support the idea that ``corruption of the vote count occurred more freely in districts that were overwhelmingly Bush strongholds.’’
The report dismisses chance and inaccurate exit polling as the reasons for their discrepancy with the results.
They found that the one hypothesis that can’t be ruled out is inaccurate election results.
``The hypothesis that the voters’ intent was not accurately recorded or counted... needs further investigation,’’ it said.
The conclusion drew a yawn from Ohio election officials, who repeated that the discrepancy issue was settled when the polling firms Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International disavowed its polls because Kerry voters were more likely to answer exit polls -- the theory Thursday’s report deemed ``implausible.’’
Ohio has been at the center of a voter disenfranchisement debate since the election.
``What are you going to do except laugh at it?’’ said Carlo LoParo, spokesman for Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, who’s responsible for administering Ohio’s elections and is a Republican candidate for governor. ``We’re not particularly interested in (the report’s findings). We wish them luck, but hope they find something more interesting to do.’’
The statistical analysis, though, shows that the discrepancy between polls and results was especially high in precincts that voted for Bush -- as high as a 10 percent difference.
The report says if the official explanation -- that Bush voters were more shy about filling out exit polls in precincts with more Kerry voters -- is true, then the precincts with large Bush votes should be more accurate, not less accurate as the data indicate.
The report also called into question new voting machine technologies.
``All voting equipment technologies except paper ballots were associated with large unexplained exit poll discrepancies all favoring the same party, (which) certainly warrants further inquiry,’’ the report concludes.
However, LoParo remained unimpressed.
``These (Bush) voters have been much maligned by outside political forces who didn’t like the way they voted,’’ he said. ``The weather’s turning nice. There are more interesting things to do than beat a dead horse.’’ Stephen Dyer can be reached at 330-996-3523 or sdyer@thebeaconjournal.com
http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/11284237.htm
by : Stephen Dyer
Friday 1st April 2005
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'h')ttp://www.madison.com/tct/news/index.php?ntid=30826&ntpid=1
Rob Zaleski: Voting glitches haunt statistician
By Rob Zaleski
March 4, 2005
Email this story to a friend
Retired UW-Madison statistics professor and Ohio recount volunteer Brian Joiner. (Photo by David Sandell/The Capital Times)
About Rob
Rob Zaleski is a 32-year veteran of the news business. His columns appear every Monday and Wednesday in the Communities section.
Email Rob
Brian Joiner wishes he could "just get over it."
He wishes he could ignore the thousands of reported voting irregularities that occurred in the Nov. 2 election, accept the fact that George W. is going to be around another four years and just hope that we haven't created even more enemies or fallen even deeper into debt by the time 2008 rolls around.
"I'm sure the Republicans would like me to forget all that stuff, just like they wanted everyone to forget all the strange things that happened in the 2000 election," the retired 67-year-old UW-Madison statistics professor said this week.
Well, sorry guys, but he can't.
There were, Joiner says, too many things that occurred on Nov. 2 that "still don't smell right." He can't just pretend everything is rosy, he says, when he reads that Steven Freeman, a respected University of Pennsylvania professor, says the odds of the exit polls in the critical states of Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania all being so far off were about 662,000 to 1.
But statisitcal evidence is one thing, and the other corroborating evidence of the Die-bold machines, the intensive and documented voted suppression efforts in certain areas, etc, is also quite strong.
But I'm not going to go on and on to convince you. Make up your own mind. I don't feel it's a republican v. democrat issue, the it's the rule of law issue.
Do you remember the coverage and how down the Bush camp was even until late in the day on election day, until the "actuals" started coming in. Exit polls have NEVER been that wrong. EVER. By the way, statistical evidence of this nature is admissable in court as "proof". But, we get what we deserve if no one says anything. Perhaps you are honestly searching for some evidence. Perhaps you are looking for a fight. I don't know, but I'm not going to belabor the point. Cheers.
