Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Discussions related to the physiological and psychological effects of peak oil on our members and future generations.

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby RedStateGreen » Wed 24 Dec 2008, 23:44:00

Read this article before you talk with them, at least.

Does anyone know the kid in the article? Was he on PO.com? That is truly tragic.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('efarmer', '&')quot;Taste the sizzling fury of fajita skillet death you marauding zombie goon!"

First thing to ask: Cui bono?
User avatar
RedStateGreen
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1859
Joined: Sun 16 Sep 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Oklahoma, USA

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby uNkNowN ElEmEnt » Thu 25 Dec 2008, 00:02:25

Hey guys, (Stormbringers teens that is) ever seen lord of the rings? We got a whole challenge ahead of us and at the end we hope we will live as good as hobbits. Lots to learn and try, lots to explore and do. Have courage and stick together. Good luck!
User avatar
uNkNowN ElEmEnt
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Sat 04 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: perpetual state of exhaustion

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby Aaron » Thu 25 Dec 2008, 12:50:15

The most compelling peak oil argument I have encountered.

Image

Once you understand what this graph means, the rest flows naturally.

To avoid a "peak" in oil production the world must defy over 40 years of discovery trending downward.

Let's have a show of hands for everyone who thinks oil discovery will suddenly reverse it's massive declines, and soar ever higher.

\Your dog wants abiotic oil
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby shortonsense » Thu 25 Dec 2008, 13:57:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'T')he most compelling peak oil argument I have encountered.

Image

Once you understand what this graph means, the rest flows naturally.



The USGS never provided the information necessary to make that graph. While disinformation from ASPO is hardly a surprise, it strikes me as disingenuous to assign the USGS name to something which they neither created, nor provided, in any such form.

Read it for yourself.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-060/ESpt2.html

The relevant phrase being:

"The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) World Petroleum Assessment 2000 provides estimates of the quantities of conventional oil, gas, and natural gas liquids outside the United States that have the potential to be added to reserves in the next 30 years (1995 to 2025)."

I highlighted the part which ASPO either ignored, or didn't read, in the creation of that phony graph.

Perhaps I should google up the definition of "potential" and write a letter to ASPO pointing out their obvious error of converting a "potential estimate" into an "actual volume"? Also, the USGS estimated undiscovered RESOURCES....the ASPO compares those to actual VOLUMES in that graph...which, call me crazy, but I'm betting are already in the "reserves" category....

The EIA did some sort of similar nonsense in its 2037 peak estimate which the Hirsch report in its Appendix appropriately dealt with the attribution of, but the ASPO can't be counted on to be so honest as Dr. Hirsch.

The good news being, obviously, that if industry isn't converting it from "potential" to "actual" at a rate which makes ASPO happy, it certainly isn't GOING anywhere, and will be there in the future when industry decides its profitable to convert it off in the future. Save it for our kids I always say.
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby shortonsense » Thu 25 Dec 2008, 14:00:07

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')
Let's have a show of hands for everyone who thinks oil discovery will suddenly reverse it's massive declines, and soar ever higher.



[smilie=eusa_naughty.gif]

How about a show of hands for those who want honest information from ASPO?
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby Sixstrings » Fri 26 Dec 2008, 03:23:26

I don't have any kids, but I have plenty of opinions, so here's my advice.

Firstly, I don't think 12 and under should be bothered with these big issues. So here would be my advice for teenagers:

1. Forget your social life, school is more important than you can imagine. If you screw up high school and college, you really could make the rest of your life suck very bad. This is no joke.

2. If you do screw up, you've set yourself back but it's not the end of the world. You can always start over, it just gets harder and more depressing the older you get.

3. Watch your credit like a hawk. Don't fall into the trap of overspending. Money is power in this world, and that's why good credit (and education for that matter) are so important.

4. Understand that we may have a monetary system collapse / Depression unfolding. If not now, this is very well inevitable within your lifetime. Social Security may not be there for you in your older years -- that seems a very distant time for you, I know, but trust me what you do now affects how happy or miserable you'll be in those golden years.

Also, peak oil is going to force you to live a different kind of life than what you do now. There are also mutating viruses out there, and a lot of your favorite foods are probably very bad for you to eat. And then there's climate change.

The point is, a lot of bad stuff is going to go down in your lifetime. Deal with it. This is your cross to bare. Your challenge is to find happiness, stability, and success in spite of what life will throw at you.

5. Don't let this Doom stuff scare you, or depress you. This is really too deep for a teenager to dwell on too much. The main thing to remember is to use this knowledge to put your life into perspective. It's OK to enjoy cool gadgets, clothes, whatnot.. just never allow your self esteem to get wrapped up in these material things. You want to be strong enough to survive and prosper if and when you lose all those things.

5. Be careful with your future romantic relationships. Nothing has the power to screw your life up more than the wrong kind of partner. Peak Oil hath no fury like a woman scorned, so they say.

6. Don't do recreational drugs. It's OK to never even try them, trust me you're not missing *anything*. Also be very wary of pharmaceutical drugs -- do the research, know the risks of any pill you take. You may think drugs are cool now, but if you fry your brain you'll be anything but cool.

7. Don't smoke cigarettes. Once you're hooked, it is incredibly dificult to stop. And even when you stop, you'll miss it the rest of your life, so don't even start.

8. You don't think it is, but driving a car is statistically one of the most dangerous activities you will do as an adult. That's why it's important to be a cautious driver. That's why it is critical to not drink alcohol and drive. Car wrecks are very scary, and no fun at all. So drive carefully.

Oh, and Merry Christmas. :)
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby Aaron » Fri 26 Dec 2008, 09:31:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')erhaps I should google up the definition of "potential" and write a letter to ASPO pointing out their obvious error of converting a "potential estimate" into an "actual volume"? Also, the USGS estimated undiscovered RESOURCES....the ASPO compares those to actual VOLUMES in that graph...which, call me crazy, but I'm betting are already in the "reserves" category....


Ahhh... your name makes sense suddenly.

Perhaps you should Google "potential".

Also Google "probability"

P5 = 5% probability of discovering that much new oil.

P95 = 95% probability

P50 = 50% (mean)

The USGS does indeed publish these numbers and has done so for decades. It's worth noting that if you examine the historic oil discovery data, this "averaging" formula accurately reflects actual discovery trends in gross numbers.

Unfortunately, part of the P5 estimate assumes economic viability of the considered probable resources. In other words, companies with sufficient economic incentive can always "look a little harder", and find more oil.

Which is the main point of disagreement of course.

Peak Oil contends that new discoveries will be constrained to physical limits because of depletion, regardless of economic incentive.

In any event, the graph above accurately reflects the USGS published numbers regarding probable reserves coming online in the near future.

None of that is necessary to understand the basic message however, despite attempts to obscure it.

Oil discoveries have been falling for decades regardless of new discovery technology or price incentives.

Why?

Simple... Depletion.
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 26 Dec 2008, 12:54:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')erhaps I should google up the definition of "potential" and write a letter to ASPO pointing out their obvious error of converting a "potential estimate" into an "actual volume"? Also, the USGS estimated undiscovered RESOURCES....the ASPO compares those to actual VOLUMES in that graph...which, call me crazy, but I'm betting are already in the "reserves" category....


Ahhh... your name makes sense suddenly.


Well, that would depend on whether or not I pointed out correctly how silly that ASPO propaganda graph is. :-D

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')P5 = 5% probability of discovering that much new oil.
P95 = 95% probability
P50 = 50% (mean)


Oh Aaron, lets have some fun!!

For starters, your simplistic statement is incorrect if you are referring to the study in question.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')P5= 5% potential probability of discovering that much new oil
p95= 95% potential probability
P50=50% potential probability ( P50 is NOT the mean Aaron unless you assume some sort of uniform symetrical distribution...naughty naughty...because the USGS specifically DOES NOT assume such a thing )


Come on Aaron, lets keep things accurate here....we don't want the children to see sloppiness in your expressions of probability here.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')The USGS does indeed publish these numbers and has done so for decades. It's worth noting that if you examine the historic oil discovery data, this "averaging" formula accurately reflects actual discovery trends in gross numbers.


Its worth noting that the USGS doesn't do any sort of AVERAGING formula at all and that they certainly don't EVER do an overall discovery trend presented with their own resource numbers. It requires some lunkhead like ASPO to mangle their answers in much the same way you are now trending towards.

Come on Aaron, have you actually READ the study?

http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-060/

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')
Unfortunately, part of the P5 estimate assumes economic viability of the considered probable resources. In other words, companies with sufficient economic incentive can always "look a little harder", and find more oil.


The study quoted DOES NOT ASSUME ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF ANY CONSIDERED RESOURCES WHATSOEVER. Come on Aaron, it sounds like you are now making stuff up. I think there are some old economics related papers for some of the older stuff, but not this baby.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')Which is the main point of disagreement of course.


Of course nothing. The Assessment in question is neither economic, nor does it run around averaging things into the sort of distribution you appear to want to jam it into, and it certainly NEVER includes a future looking discovery trend WHICH IS WHAT ASPO MANUFACTURES AND THEN PRETENDS BELONGS TO THE USGS.

Which IS the point....because it means, much like your phantom P50=Mean, that they didn't understand what was done either, or they misrepresented it on purpose.

Did you confuse P50 with mean because you aren't familiar with basic probability theory, or because you chose to misrepresent it?It might seem like a unfair question...but you just did EXACTLY the same thing they did.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')
Peak Oil contends that new discoveries will be constrained to physical limits because of depletion, regardless of economic incentive.


Peak oil contends that global oil production will one day reach a maximum and never again be able to attain that maximum.

Hubbert is 1956 certainly never talked about economic intervention in his theory, he invented that later when it became obvious that the economic component contained implicitly within his bell shaped curve was capable of completely overwhelming any claimed geologic "imprint" that may, or may not, have been contained within it.

In summary, his bell shaped curve was not geologic, it was dictated by human behavior.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')In any event, the graph above accurately reflects the USGS published numbers regarding probable reserves coming online in the near future.


Thats what Aaron says, the USGS said no such thing. They didn't assess reserves, they didn't publish or assume a discovery trend, they simply said, and I quote while paraphrasing, "potential to be added to existing reserves in a 30 year time frame"

"Potential" being the key word of course. Potentially, NONE of those resources may become reserves. Potentially, ALL of those resources may become reserves. The probability spread which is NOT P50=Mean determines the range of uncertainty in those RESOURCE estimates.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')
Oil discoveries have been falling for decades regardless of new discovery technology or price incentives.

Why?

Simple... Depletion.

Wrong. Depletion has nothing to do with discovery rates. Based on the level of misunderstanding in just this simple thread, I think we need to spend more time talking about oil stuff rather than carrying capacity and some of the other silliness which appears to be swamping the basics.

Here...this is a good place to start if you really want to understand why your concept of averaging is pretty meaningless in an answer, the distribution of which has NOTHING to do with P50=Mean

http://www.springerlink.com/content/f61 ... lltext.pdf
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby StormBringer » Fri 26 Dec 2008, 16:29:48

Hey guys this was to be for my kids...NOT A PISSING CONTEST.
"All you need for happiness is a good gun, a good horse, and a good wife." Daniel Boone
____________________________________
It is not that which we endeavor to build, but that which we destroy to do so, will be the downfall of mankind.
User avatar
StormBringer
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 922
Joined: Sat 06 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: BFE Mo.

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby Ludi » Fri 26 Dec 2008, 16:31:44

PISSING CONTEST = po.com


:razz:
Ludi
 

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 26 Dec 2008, 17:38:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('StormBringer', 'H')ey guys this was to be for my kids...NOT A PISSING CONTEST.

Your kids are old enough to understand propaganda....but will they recognize it when its presented as "factual" in nature? It obviously is slick enough propaganda to rope in Aaron, who I assume is otherwise a competently functioning adult. Doesn't know much about probability perhaps, but thats not uncommon in todays world.

ASPO did something either because they didn't understand what was published, or because they chose NOT to understand.
So...were they incompetent, or did they lie?

They needed to discredit something they have neither the time, money, scientific expertise nor credibility to refute.

Whats the best way to do that? Confusion or propaganda.

Let the kids decide for themselves. I included links to the study in question, Aaron provided the ASPO graph, have the kids see if THEY can find any economic component to the study which Aaron claims is included. See if the kids can understand the difference between "resource potential" and "actual discovered and produced volumes". Have the kids see if they can figure out how easy it is to understand that the USGS probabilistic answer is neither symmetric nor some sort of grand "averaging" scheme. See if the kids can distinguish between how discoveries work versus depletion rates after all the discoveries have been made.

I'm actually surprised this hasn't all been noticed and settled before, but when I searched for it all I found was that ASPO graph used somewhere else and no one pointing out how wrong it was then.
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby mgibbons19 » Fri 26 Dec 2008, 17:52:52

It would seem to me that the best thing the kids could see is that there are a variety of different viewpoints here (and everywhere actually). Take whatever side you choose and do your best to tear it down.

Peakers here believe they have found the truth. It's pretty arrogant actually. At the same time, being aware of the problem and its potential implications is simply smart no matter what they're looking into.

Don't let them wallow in self-obsessed doom either. That's neither useful nor truly honest - the future's not written yet.
mgibbons19
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1105
Joined: Fri 20 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby StormBringer » Fri 26 Dec 2008, 18:50:20

Difference of opinion is cool I just didn't want it to degrade further.
"All you need for happiness is a good gun, a good horse, and a good wife." Daniel Boone
____________________________________
It is not that which we endeavor to build, but that which we destroy to do so, will be the downfall of mankind.
User avatar
StormBringer
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 922
Joined: Sat 06 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: BFE Mo.

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby Aaron » Sun 28 Dec 2008, 20:05:38

From the link you provided:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')95 represents a 95 percent chance of at least the amount tabulated. Other fractiles are defined similarly.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'U')ndiscovered conventional
F95 F50 F5 Mean
334 607 1,107 649

So do we think there is another 650 billion undiscovered plus another 600 billion in reserves growth? Because that's the USGS prediction... the source numbers of the chart.

And yes the P50 estimate isn't technically an average... but it's pretty close.

Basically it's a question of if you believe the 2.6 trillion URR.

Which seems unlikely, and makes your protests quite lame.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-060/ESpt4.html#TOP
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston
Top

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby shortonsense » Sun 28 Dec 2008, 23:07:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'F')rom the link you provided:$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'U')ndiscovered conventional
F95 F50 F5 Mean
334 607 1,107 649

So do we think there is another 650 billion undiscovered plus another 600 billion in reserves growth? Because that's the USGS prediction... the source numbers of the chart.

650 billion undiscovered conventional RESOURCES? Sure. And 600 billion in reserves growth? Sure. With a planet to play with, I'm betting their evaluation is light, but thats just me guessing.
There is quite a bit more of course, but that particular study didn't evaluate the unconventionals.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'A')nd yes the P50 estimate isn't technically an average... but it's pretty close.

Nothing technical about it, it just isn't. And yes the F50 is fairly close, but because they don't specify the distribution or standard deviation that I could find, its hard to even know what "pretty close" means.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'B')asically it's a question of if you believe the 2.6 trillion URR. Which seems unlikely, and makes your protests quite lame.

I'm not protesting anything except the propaganda/ignorance displayed by ASPO in the graph in question.

And I think that URR is quite a bit more than 2.6 trillion URR, the study was way too restricted to consider everything, it stuck to a small and easy to define corner of the resource pyramid.
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby gnm » Mon 29 Dec 2008, 00:12:45

My moneys on Aaron... :-D


-G
gnm
 

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby shortonsense » Mon 29 Dec 2008, 00:26:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gnm', 'M')y moneys on Aaron... :-D -G

To do what? Differentiate between real information and ASPO propaganda from here on out? I would certainly hope so....
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby Aaron » Mon 29 Dec 2008, 10:02:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')he study was way too restricted to consider everything, it stuck to a small and easy to define corner of the resource pyramid.

They look at conventional only because more exotic sources are not really comparable to conventional... apples & oranges.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'i')ts hard to even know what "pretty close" means.

It means it's not that different.

They use weighting factors in addition to the "averaged" high/low case.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')'m not protesting anything except the propaganda/ignorance displayed by ASPO in the graph in question.

I already explained the rating system... the math is pretty clear. The USGS predicts a divergence from historic discovery trends.
What?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') think that URR is quite a bit more than 2.6 trillion URR

I hope you're right... I really do.

I just doubt it.

What we are really arguing about is OPEC's "paper barrels".

If they actually do exist, I concede the argument and agree with the USGS estimate around 3 trillion URR.

Absent these paper barrels however I just don't see the numbers adding up.

Your critique of ASPO's analysis just does not prove anything except your own lack of understanding of the data you are seeing.

The chart correctly points out the divergence of the USGS prediction for oil discovery going forward, with past trends.

I'd be more impressed with an argument about how reserve growth will be affected by emerging technologies like oil digesting bacteria injection for example.

Everybody predicts a peak in conventional oil... even the USGS & CERA. We argue about the timing...

If we can't agree that the USGS predictions represent a change in new discoveries, I don't think we can move forward with this conversation.

Not meaning to derail your thread...

\Your dog wants simplified complexity.

:)
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston
Top

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby shortonsense » Mon 29 Dec 2008, 15:40:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'T')hey use weighting factors in addition to the "averaged" high/low case.

No. They don't. Go here. Read. http://energy.cr.usgs.gov/WEcont/chaps/MC.pdf

The statistical sampling method used isn't based on high/low cases. And a Monte Carlo system by DEFINITION doesn't just do some sort of averaging, in this case, its smashing together complete and different distributions in such a way as to generate a probabilistic answer.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')'m not protesting anything except the propaganda/ignorance displayed by ASPO in the graph in question.
I already explained the rating system... the math is pretty clear. The USGS predicts a divergence from historic discovery trends.
What?


Nope. Go here. Read more. Page 5.
http://energy.cr.usgs.gov/WEcont/chaps/AM.pdf
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('More from USGS report', '"')However, assessment results are controlled by geology-based input parameters supplied by assessment geologists who are regional experts, and not by computer-generated statistical projections of historical trends."

The USGS isn't using historical trends for anything, or making any predictions of future trends. They do resources with geological experts.

Still on Page 5.$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('More from USGS report', '"')Note that the geology-based Seventh Approximation does not attempt to predict volumes of conventional resources that will actually be discovered in a given assessment time frame."
So now we have the USGS specifically saying that the ASPO CAN'T do what they did. I ask my original question, did they not read the report to know this as a FACT, or did they choose to misrepresent it on purpose? In either case, according to the USGS report itself, they are WRONG.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'Y')our critique of ASPO's analysis just does not prove anything except your own lack of understanding of the data you are seeing.
Actually, I've just referred to the exact USGS language which says the ASPO graph is bogus. I misunderstood nothing. If you have a beef with the USGS resource numbers, cool. But that ASPO graph is garbage, and I've just pointed out why.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'T')he chart correctly points out the divergence of the USGS prediction for oil discovery going forward, with past trends.
The USGS didn't predict future discoveries, it predicted potential resource estimates. I supplied the quote. Why do you insist they said something which they didn't?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'E')verybody predicts a peak in conventional oil... even the USGS & CERA. We argue about the timing...
I don't recall ever seeing the USGS predicting peak oil, unless you are counting when Hubbert was working for them and did it? Reference please....based on your approach to ASPO propaganda, you can see where I might be a little suspicious about where you have been getting your information.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'I')f we can't agree that the USGS predictions represent a change in new discoveries, I don't think we can move forward with this conversation.
The USGS appear to know exactly what they assessed, its ASPO so far who appears to be screwing it up. Go read the Chapters I referenced, they are quite fascinating.

The only real solution to this is what specific language ASPO published with your their graph. Did they recognize they were doing something SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED by the USGS? Some set of rules to convert from the USGS assessment to their production and discovery line on that graph? Its possible of course, I seem to recall the EIA playing this game before, but I believe they explained their conversion from resource to production, your graph didn't come with any such language. You wouldn't happen to have some, would you? Showing that they had a method for their "analysis" other than just making something up because they didn't pay any attention to the actual USGS report, just grabbed the results and started making stuff up?
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: My Kids Want To hear it from you.

Unread postby Ferretlover » Mon 29 Dec 2008, 16:18:27

"Open the gates of hell!" ~Morgan Freeman's character in the movie, Olympus Has Fallen.
Ferretlover
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Wed 13 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Hundreds of miles further inland

PreviousNext

Return to Medical Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron