by rangerone314 » Thu 09 Apr 2009, 15:59:25
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'W')hat you seem to be saying seahorse2 is that demand is not elastic (and there will be no demand destruction). If anything the unemployed will have more reason to drive around and use up petroleum. Looking for jobs, "getting out of the house" etc.
Our country is dependent on oil in someways like a diabetic is dependent on insulin.
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right
Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take
You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown
Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
-
rangerone314
- Light Sweet Crude
-
- Posts: 4105
- Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
- Location: Maryland
-
by shortonsense » Thu 09 Apr 2009, 20:38:11
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheDude', 'I') agree with Roy that Matt should can it, as in his predicting imminent nationwide shortages post-Ike due to refinery outages
Did he actually
predict that? He usually talks about probabilities, given certain scenarios.
This must be the right Simmons.
When asked if there was a solution, Simmons is quoted as having said,
"I don't think there is one. The solution is to pray. Under the best of circumstances, if all prayers are answered there will be no crisis for maybe two years. After that its a certainty."
He was quoted saying this in August, 2003.
We are now almost 4 years past his CERTAINTY, peak oil has happened twice and the crisis consisted of the return to happy motoring.
Somehow, I don't think you can hide bad predictions behind "probability" when the quoted author happens to be CERTAIN. Something about those two not mixing well.....
by shortonsense » Fri 10 Apr 2009, 20:23:28
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'W')hen asked if there was a solution, Simmons is quoted as having said,
"I don't think there is one. The solution is to pray. Under the best of circumstances, if all prayers are answered there will be no crisis for maybe two years. After that its a certainty."
He was quoted saying this in August, 2003.
Fair enough, though it depends on what he meant by crisis.
Of course. Undoubtedly when he said crisis he meant "prices will crash and we'll have so much oil that billion dollar tankers will be randomly cruising around as portable storage waiting for prices to rise enough to make it worthwhile to dock and unload their cargo's...hopefully within a year or two."
Come on Tony, do you really believe when he used the word "crisis" he meant anything remotely resembling what has happened?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '
')
We started to see the beginning of the oil production plateau in 2005, with production barely moving since then. That could be seen as a crisis, though most people seemed to ignore it, except to increasingly call for more production from the Saudis and the opening up of areas previously off-limits.
So the crisis is lack of demand rather than lack of supply? That doesn't seem to be what peaking is all about, it strikes me that the very definition of peak
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil"Peak oil is the point in time when the maximum rate of global petroleum extraction is reached"....precludes some notion of what demand is ( I DEMAND A MILLION DOLLARS!! ).
And I'll bet that climate changers think lack of demand, OR supply, is quite an EXCELLENT thing, certainly not a crisis in their eyes, if they had a choice they would probably CHOOSE it for the rest of us.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '
')One incident, however, hardly blasts his credibility. If that were so, people like Dan Yergin would be unable to hold down a job and no economist would get invited on TV to explain the behaviour of the markets.
by Lolberg » Fri 10 Apr 2009, 21:44:31
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheDude', 'I') agree with Roy that Matt should can it, as in his predicting imminent nationwide shortages post-Ike due to refinery outages
Did he actually
predict that? He usually talks about probabilities, given certain scenarios. However, he did make a bet about oil prices a few years down the line but I can't think of a specific prediction he made for a time now passed.
1. The bet was for $5,000 with some journalist that oil would hit $200 before December 2012.
2. I in 2007 when the EIA would make predictions about future oil prices and they would get it wrong- consistently. They were ridiculed on this board for this and it was used to imply that they have no ability to forecast other things, like the timing of peak oil and potential future outputs. Well... now it seems that Simmons gets the price massively wrong. He didnt see $37 oil coming. Does this mean he is wrong about everything and should be ridiculed the way the EIA was? This is the thing I have noticed- people can be just as close minded as the people they criticize for being close minded!
by shortonsense » Sat 11 Apr 2009, 10:21:55
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')Call me crazy, but follow the money I always say.
"Simmons & Company is the only independent investment bank specializing in the entire spectrum of the energy industry."
There's your conflict of interest.
But of course. Thats just the obvious one, then we have the book sales, the ego feeding which must go on on the talking head circuit, the semi-righteous belief in a worthy cause, what it must feel like to think that you are the Pied Piper of your generation, doing good for all mankind, sounding the klaxon call to save the country/earth/solar system/universe.
How dare basic economic theory, the free market, Boone Pickens, or the changing behavior of Americans driving habits get in the way of ANY of those!
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')For that matter, Schiff has a conflict of interest, as he plugs foreign investment, right?
I can't say the value of what any particular stock broker says is particularly relevant to much of anything. I would think that watching about 5 minutes of Cramers show would cure anyone of that assumption.
by shortonsense » Sat 11 Apr 2009, 17:32:29
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '
')
On the other hand people do care about his book because it is an impressive piece of scholarly scientific research.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Amazon', ' ')Parts 3 and 4 contain [b]analysis of Saudi Arabia's oil and gas industry based on the technical papers published by the Society of Petroleum Engineers.
You'll forgive the actual reservoir engineers for having been forced to debunk Mr Simmons scholarly accounting experience.
http://www.ceri.ca/Publications/documents/GoE_Oct05.pdfWhat was it that Mike Lynch said? If you want to know something about reservoir engineering, you don't ask an accountant? Seems like the "scholars" have already chipped in, but then, I don't confuse Amazons book review opinions with the actual professionals within a given field.
I don't suppose you can reference any engineering departments in the entire country which use Simmons work as scholarly reference in the classroom versus, say, the actual reservoir engineers who panned his book?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PStarr', '
')
Now I actually did read the book. Imagine that? I paid money, opened the pages, and sat back, read, considered, analyzed, questioned, and discussed the implications here and on other sites. Have You Shortonbrains, Mossie, or Lolberg?
So let me see if I understand this....now the validity of Simmons book is based on you having been lured into buying it, reading it, and deciding it was an accurate portrayal of scholarly work?
Versus the opinion of the actual experts in the particular field?
Call me crazy but I have to ask...do you have any particular credentials that allow you to make such a statement in dispute of recognized experts in the area?
You wouldn't happen to be a reservoir engineer, worked for a major oil company or consulting firm as one, taught it in a college or done anything else remotely similar within the industry which might give you a leg up on this actual engineer's opinion of Simmons work?
I have no objection to listening to all evidence on the topic, if you have more to add from your personal experience?
