by MrBean » Wed 02 Jul 2008, 17:09:19
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snik', 'P')eak Oil is conjecture. We don't know if it's already happened, is happening now, is going to happen soon, or is going to happen on down the line. It's all guesswork until it happens, and it will probably take a few years to know for sure that it has happened when it does.
There is also what could be called moving beyond the reasonable doubt.
Russia peaking, land export model, SA either not being able to produce more or leaving some in the ground for future generations (one aspect of land export model) mean that the jury has a verdict: this is the peak actual production (or at least, peak net exports), regardless of any ideal and imaginary production capacity that is never going to materialize.
Jury having a verdict on overshoot of population (not overshoot of wasting resources, that is a different issue and jury has extremely clear verdict on that) is a different story, because jury in overshoot could prove being overshoot beyond reasonable doubt only by jury die-off. In other words, overshoot belongs in that special category of predictions that has the capacity of turning the proving the prediction wrong by becoming consciouss of the prediction and acting to prevent it taking place as predicted.
So in case of overshoot, by the nature of accusation, jury is out at least untill it's own die off. Doesn't mean that the role of Cassandra presenting the case for overshoot would be unimportant, no, it's crucial.