[chrispi]

Has anyone read this issue? I always find Scientific American fascinating (it had a Peak Oil article in '98 ) and it always deals with issues calmly adn with great insight.

The energy article in this SA doesn't dispute PO, but it does say that we can obviate it almost solely by improving efficiency. What do you think?

Scientific American

[Berkeley]

I think SA is assuming that people are rational. But none of these problems would have occurred in the first place if that were true. Scientific American writing emerges from an Ivory Tower that has completely forgotten what real people are like.

[oli]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Berkeley', 'I') think SA is assuming that people are rational. But none of these problems would have occurred in the first place if that were true. Scientific American writing emerges from an Ivory Tower that has completely forgotten what real people are like.

[shakespear1]

I started to read SA since I was in 7-8 grade. Loved the diagrams, look back in history etc. But I am still amazed and will never stop being amazed at how much knowledge we collect that is critical to the Planets well being and .... AND NOTHING.

It seems that we do more studying than applying. I should rephrase that, study to apply if it makes money.

[bobcousins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Berkeley', 'I') think SA is assuming that people are rational. But none of these problems would have occurred in the first place if that were true. Scientific American writing emerges from an Ivory Tower that has completely forgotten what real people are like.

[FireJack]

The people who write these articles may not think that these actions will come to pass, but they have to write it as though there was hope that it will happen. I just don't see one of the articles ending with "not of this will probably happen because people are generally to fucked in the head so expect and orgy of violence and death in the near future."