by OilsNotWell » Mon 31 Oct 2005, 15:15:56
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') disagree somewhat. Obviously, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, but it would be a proverbial very bad thing if someone just finding out about Peak Oil happened on this thread and thought that the best the peak oil crowd had to offer in response were one liners.
and
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')lease accept my compliments for your wisdom and insight. Also, for your diplomacy. I considered a reply to the original post, but concluded it would be grossly inappropriate to post what I wanted to write.
Thought about that too. But...well, the tone of first--time ever posts almost always give it away...it if walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...
And look, how obvious (flame-baiting, use of tired attempts to equate PO with Y2K, alien invasion, Yellowstone caldera, etc, impugning the motives of Simmons and others (just like some who attacked LATOC Matt so unfairly)...it was:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')hink it's fair to say that it's time to say nite nite to peak oil.
It can be put ino the same box room as a yellowstone volcanic eruption, a meteor strike, aliens landing and planet X.
All are theoretically possible but very unlikely within the next 100 years.
Planet X has moved ahead of peak oil in the probability stakes and Peak oil stays just ahead of Y2K
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')immons, Heiberg and Kunstler and others now seem and sound like desperate men as they see future book sales waning.
Many wonder whether Simmons is a dupe for people like those on here who with his help have elevated prices to $60 plus with many, many thanks from the Oil industry who have been keeping billions of barrels under their stetsons.
I would hazard a guess that peak oil websites had been enjoying expotentially growing hits but I would assume that this to is waning now.
by MacG » Mon 31 Oct 2005, 16:20:03
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Leanan', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')I'm not into quantum chemistry enough to form my own opinion, but if they expose themselves in scientific forums, a bluff wont hold more than a year or two.
Yup. And the general consensus seems to be that it's quackery, or at least not what's claimed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrino_theorySounds to me like it's right up there with abiotic oil, or cold fusion. There may be something there, but it's not likely to be anything earth-shaking.
OK, thanks, agree. Open and shut case.
Came to think of it, since this is claimed to be a chemical reaction, bulk amounts of hydrogen are involved. What does the residue look like? This extremely low energy state of hydrogen that is? Can it get back to normal hydrogen trough some simple endothermal reaction or something?
Ah, nice try I must say anyhow!