by Graeme » Tue 20 May 2008, 06:25:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'I')'d like to put in a word of support for Graeme. Yes, his positions are sometimes unreasonably optimistic, but he's a sober and mature contributor and has done much good work here.
Don't attack Graeme, attack his ideas and biases. That's where the fair playing field lies.
Thank you Heineken. That's what I said earlier in this thread. Please discuss the topic of the thread. Boris did, and I have responded.
Obviously, peak oil "theory" is still highly controversial. The NZ government will not consider any other analysis from a group like this about when peak oil will occur. As I said earlier, they take their advice from the IEA. If this group has as different position that can be proved, then it is not communicating this to anyone of importance in government, ie people who are making decisions on this matter. I know that Roscoe Bartlett has made many presentations to the US Congress, but has anyone from this forum spoken to him? Also has any work on peak oil been published in scientific literature? If so, then this would be very powerful evidence that something needs to be done asap. I haven't seen anything lately except one published in
Science about the AAPG meeting.
This is a enormous contrast to the scientific literature published on global warming. Much more is known about this subject because of the very large number of scientific studies that I have reported in the global warming news thread in the environment forum. Now that the science is better understood and reported exhaustively by a UN panel over a period of many years, action is now beginning through the UN. Nothing of this sort is happening for peak oil. You have to ask yourself why?
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.