by Tyler_JC » Tue 11 Mar 2008, 12:51:59
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')harles Bensinger, co-founder of Renewable Energy Partners of New Mexico, describes Kunstler's views as "fashionably fear-mongering" and uninformed regarding the potential of renewable energy, biofuels, energy efficiency and smart-growth policies to eliminate the need for fossil fuels. Contrarily, Paul Salopek of The Chicago Tribune finds that, "Kunstler has plotted energy starvation to its logical extremes" and points to the US Department of Energy Hirsch report as drawing similar conclusions while David Ehrenfeld writing for American Scientist sees Kunstler delivering a "powerful integration of science, technology, economics, finance, international politics and social change" with a "lengthy discussion of the alternatives to cheap oil."
Kunstler, who majored in Theater at college and has no formal training in the fields in which he prognosticates, made similar predictions for Y2K as he makes for peak oil. Kunstler responds to this criticism by saying that a Y2K catastrophe was averted by the hundreds of billions of dollars that were spent fixing the problem, a lot of it in secret, he claims.
In June 2005 and again in early 2006, Kunstler predicted that the Dow would crash to 4,000 by the end of the year. The Dow in fact reached a new peak by 2007. In his predictions for 2007, however, Kunstler admitted his mistake stating "Let's get this out of the way up front: the worst call I made last year was for the Dow to crumble down to 4000 when, in fact, it melted up to a new all-time record high of about 12,500. The reason we saw this, in my opinion, was that inertia combined with sheer luck to keep the finance sector decoupled from reality…". He also predicted, however, that in 2006 the United States housing bubble would start to deflate, which appears to be borne out by latest data. However, unlike Kunstler's Dow predictions, which were uniquely his, the bursting of the United States housing bubble was widely forecast before Kunstler began discussing it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Howard_Kunstler
Someone please explain to me why Mr. Kunstler is qualified to talk about
anything with a level of conviction resembling certainty?
He's an author and a social critic. This means that he can write an entertaining story, lampooning some element of society. He should stick to fiction. Actually, everything he writes
is fiction so I guess he's doing what he does best. When society doesn't collapse into cannibalism in the next five years, he can move on to another topic and sell another couple thousand books. And God bless'em, he can write a great story. I enjoy reading his humor column (err, blog).
But let's be honest with ourselves about Mr. Kunstler. He's not a geologist, an economist, a physicist, a psychologist, an urban planner, an engineer, or a computer scientist.
And yet he pretends to have the same level of knowledge as someone involved in all of those professions.
He is no more credible than Alex Jones, Richard Heinberg, or Michael Ruppert when it comes to discussing issues related to Peak Oil. All of those people, I should add, have no formal training in anything even remotely related to petroleum engineering, economics, electric engineering, etc.
There are credible Peak Oil theorists. Matthew Simmons, T Boone Pickens, Colin Campbell, Kenneth Deffeyes, and others can make a credible claim that they know what they're talking about.
Kunstler, on the other hand, knows about as much about Peak Oil (and its related consequences) as anyone on this forum. That's not to say we're clueless but compared to someone who actually works in the oil fields or in the trading pits at NYMEX, we're just making wild ass guesses.