[TheDude]

How is PO being treated in peer reviewed journals and the like? Broadly speaking, a percentage figure perhaps. I assume that it's considered a given universally. Climatologists could debate the issue of global warming but people in the oil industry know that this must happen. I assume. Unless they're into abiotic theories and such, but the mainstream opinion of theories like that files it under pseudoscience, right?

[MonteQuest]

It has gotten a fair amount of good press, meaning it hasn't been displayed as quack or cult-like, just that technology and investment will come to the rescue.

When the respectability goes down is from the rants we often see on here depicting Peakoilers as doomers, purveyors of a myth or a cult-like sect.

I find all of that to be child-like immature sandbox noise.

You can't get more unprofessional when discussing major issues like this than to resort to name-calling to try and win a debate.

Name-calling never has won anyone respect.

[Carlhole]

AAAHHHHHHHhhhhhh Shhaddap! Ya long-eared galoot!

[NEOPO]

Yole sammity!!!

PO is geology is a science is respected.

Observation becomes science once and only if you can get beyond the violent opposition part.

In the future we could have 1000's of new sciences, current sciences may morph and some may even cease to be studied.

I take offense to the title of this thread!!
M. King Hubbert

Pseudointellectuals might file PO under pseudoscience....... yeah
They would save the science file for real science like economics or business

dunt duh duh

[TheDude]

About the last thing I'm interested in is what goes on here!
Is it only in geology circles that PO is being discussed? Are economics or environmental people talking about it? What's the broad concensus on viability of alternative energy versus current demand? And so forth.

[NEOPO]

I walked up to a guy one day and asked him if he knew where blah blah was and he looked and me and said "yes, yes I do".

[rogerhb]

It's worth reading the original story of Cassandra.

[Gazzatrone]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gideon', 'A')nd that's when I start to contemplate moving to some very primative third world island nation so that I can live my life without being around the stupidest educated people in the world.

[TheDude]

Are you guys paid trolls or something? Traumatized by the doomerish posts here? Once again - I'm interested in what the scientific community thinks, not the man/woman in the street, who are busy rooting through garbage cans or talking on their cell phones.

[BrownDog]

If you want to know what the scientific community thinks, then you should probably ask him/her.

[Carlhole]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheDude', 'A')re you guys paid trolls or something? Traumatized by the doomerish posts here? Once again - I'm interested in what the scientific community thinks, not the man/woman in the street, who are busy rooting through garbage cans or talking on their cell phones.

[garyp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheDude', 'A')re you guys paid trolls or something? Traumatized by the doomerish posts here? Once again - I'm interested in what the scientific community thinks, not the man/woman in the street, who are busy rooting through garbage cans or talking on their cell phones.

[Doly]

Academics are known for being ivory tower types, that don't notice much about what's going on in the world at large until it hits them on the face. They concentrate on their speciality, otherwise.

Many geologists know about peak oil. When I first became aware of peak oil, I had a good look at the newsgroup alt.geo.petroleum (I'm not sure I got the name right, it was something like that). These people started discussing peak oil around 1999. Hubbert's peak was already well known to most of them.

Scientific American has been publishing more and more articles about energy issues, but they tend to concentrate on global warming, rather than peak oil. They do know about peak oil, of course (they published that famous article by Colin Campbell). I guess it doesn't seem as pressing, or as well-known, to them.

So my impression is that the scientific community that counts, that is, geologists, generally agree with the basic premise of peak oil, but the rest are generally unaware.

When it comes to consequences, such as economic consequences, there isn't really a "scientific community" that can talk with expertise about it. Unless you want to consider economists as scientists, which is a big leap of faith for me.

[NEOPO]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BrownDog', 'I')f you want to know what the scientific community thinks, then you should probably ask him/her.

[BrazilianPO]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheDude', 'A')re you guys paid trolls or something? Traumatized by the doomerish posts here? Once again - I'm interested in what the scientific community thinks, not the man/woman in the street, who are busy rooting through garbage cans or talking on their cell phones.

[lorenzo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheDude', 'A')re you guys paid trolls or something? Traumatized by the doomerish posts here? Once again - I'm interested in what the scientific community thinks, not the man/woman in the street, who are busy rooting through garbage cans or talking on their cell phones.

[KhanCEO]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')I find all of that to be child-like immature sandbox noise.

You can't get more unprofessional when discussing major issues like this than to resort to name-calling to try and win a debate.

Name-calling never has won anyone respect.

[rwwff]

What is there to research from a scientific perspective on PO??

Predictive stuff about economy, politics, and population aren't going to merit anything greater that editorial status.

The only scientifically discussable part of the issue is whether there is a finite amount of oil in the ground. If one were to say, "abiotic" then you'd claim that the supply was not limited by current supplies; otherwise, you say, "biological", and that supply is limited to what is currently in the ground; thus there exists a point where some much lower amount of oil will be extracted each year.

But there is no way to prove that this will create war, or famine, or that the economy will crash as a result.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', 'B')ut there is no way to prove that this will create war, or famine, or that the economy will crash as a result.

[TheDude]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', 'T')here are standard measuring techniques to see what a topic means in the scientific community, and using these techniques, "Peak Oil" means nothing.