Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby Aimrehtopyh » Tue 14 Mar 2006, 00:38:52

Crank.net is a very good site, with the exception of this.

http://www.crank.net/apocalypse.html

I disagree with their decision to put Peak Oil theorists like outselves in the same category as the Time Cube guy or alien abductees. You must admit that the writing on the front page of oilcrash.com is far from perfect, but mediocre writing doesn't mean you're a crank.
User avatar
Aimrehtopyh
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 375
Joined: Sat 18 Feb 2006, 04:00:00
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby gego » Tue 14 Mar 2006, 01:05:52

Look at such condemnations as beneficial to your own survival.

Those who feel invunerable right up to the end will not have a chance, hence you have a better chance to be closer to the lifeboat.

Now, Mind of Mencia is on cable, so bye.
gego
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu 03 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby OilBurner » Tue 14 Mar 2006, 05:43:04

I believe they are making the distinction between Peal Oil "theorists" and Die Off adherents. There’s a big difference between the two, with many people falling into both camps. That doesn’t make it the same thing.

If they put ASPO up as cranks then we know they have their head stuck up their behinds, otherwise I think they may have a fair point as far as OilCrash.com goes...
Burning the midnight oil, whilst I still can.
User avatar
OilBurner
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Thu 03 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Location: UK

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby killJOY » Tue 14 Mar 2006, 08:02:38

By what rights to the authors of such sites proclaim things "cranky"?

They speak ex cathedra.

They're probably among the most dogmatic people on the planet.
Peak oil = comet Kohoutek.
User avatar
killJOY
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2220
Joined: Mon 21 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: ^NNE^

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby EnergySpin » Tue 14 Mar 2006, 12:52:22

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilBurner', 'I') believe they are making the distinction between Peal Oil "theorists" and Die Off adherents. There’s a big difference between the two, with many people falling into both camps. That doesn’t make it the same thing.

If they put ASPO up as cranks then we know they have their head stuck up their behinds, otherwise I think they may have a fair point as far as OilCrash.com goes...

I disagree about ASPO: they have repeatedly published rascist pieces in their newsletters AND did feature Stanton's crap last year.
If you look into CC's academic writings and the tone of the newsletter you will find plenty of evidence to take what he writes (and calculates) with a lot of salt.
"Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
User avatar
EnergySpin
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby seahorse2 » Tue 14 Mar 2006, 14:42:55

Energyspin,

If I have to salt something to make it palatable, I don't eat it.
User avatar
seahorse2
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2042
Joined: Mon 18 Oct 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby OilBurner » Wed 15 Mar 2006, 05:26:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', '
')I disagree about ASPO: they have repeatedly published rascist pieces in their newsletters


Surely a statement like that demands some kind of link from you? That's a pretty strong accusation to make.
Burning the midnight oil, whilst I still can.
User avatar
OilBurner
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Thu 03 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Location: UK

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby Battle_Scarred_Galactico » Wed 15 Mar 2006, 05:56:31

I've never seen anything even remotley racist from ASPO.

As usual with this sort of crap there's precisley ZERO credable rebuttals from this site. Fucking idiots.
---
Battle_Scarred_Galactico
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu 07 Apr 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby julianj » Wed 15 Mar 2006, 18:25:04

I was rather disappointed with Crank.net. Bit pedestrian.

Parts of this site way out-crank them. I should hope so too - with the concentrated left-fieldness we can muster :)

FYI - EnergySpin is referring to William Stanton - now there's a crank's crank - who has been published 3 times I think in the ASPO newsletter,out of 689 stories so far (Mar 06 No. 63). So I don't think ASPO is racist or kooky in general.

If you want to read all the Stanton debunked thread, use the search facility.

But as a service to our readers, in the manner of the Guardian, I will give you the ultra digested version of William Stanton's ideas:


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ecause of Peak Oil: the UK population must be reduced to four people, preferably using euthanasia for the eugenically challenged, and the death penalty for more or less everyone who parks on a double yellow line, and nuclear weapons on population centres - it sounds drastic, but its humane really. Then the UK population: me, my dog, and 3 nubile women, will live in a wood-powered utopia.
julianj
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 913
Joined: Thu 30 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: On one of the blades of the fan

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby eastbay » Wed 15 Mar 2006, 18:51:34

Oh c'mon now... heh... :)

A charge of 'racist' no longer has much meaning and is generally and widely ignored these days. Funny how words once holding such power become largely depleted of meaning over time from severe overuse. I remember in the 90's the word was used so often it seemed everyone (White) was a 'racist'... lol.

In fact, using such words immediately lowers the credibility of the writers argument because it's generally assumed that accusation has no validity.

I may have mentioned this once before, but when I hear it (read it) I always smile because I'm reminded of the scene from Invasion of the Body Snatchers when Donald Sutherlin points and starts that rediculous scream when he spots someone not-yet-snatched.
Got Dharma?

Everything is Impermanent. Shakyamuni Buddha
User avatar
eastbay
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7186
Joined: Sat 18 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: One Mile From the Columbia River

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby MyOtherID » Thu 16 Mar 2006, 01:13:42

Reading this site, I see that EnergySpin uses the pejorative "rascist"(sic) frequently. Nobody call him on that yet?
User avatar
MyOtherID
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu 02 Mar 2006, 04:00:00
Location: Vegas, America's cloaca

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby EnergySpin » Thu 16 Mar 2006, 02:58:41

Well, If you want to read racism then you'd better start with the Stanton piece last year published in the ASPO newsletter (I believe the link is the following: http://www.peakoil.ie/newsletters/588).
We had a big fuss about it at this forum, so newbies like MyOtherID should use the search button more often.
After you search this forum for my alias+Stanton, you may want other blogs as well:
http://peakoiloptimist.blogspot.com/200 ... cists.html
Since newbies were not here last May, when the British Nationalist Party tried to sell us our solution to Peak Oil, they could search this forum for my name and BNP OR "EnergySpin AND Nationalist", or read what BNP had to say about the matter:
http://www.bnp.org.uk/peakoil/index.htm
"Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
User avatar
EnergySpin
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby EnergySpin » Thu 16 Mar 2006, 03:28:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('julianj', '
')FYI - EnergySpin is referring to William Stanton - now there's a crank's crank - who has been published 3 times I think in the ASPO newsletter,out of 689 stories so far (Mar 06 No. 63). So I don't think ASPO is racist or kooky in general.


I was mainly referring to W Stanton, but also to CC himself, since he is the editor of the ASPO newsletter. A couple of years ago, he wrote an article for an academic journal (Ehrlich, Pimentels etc frequently publish in that journal) which gave you a pretty good insight about what his personal viewpoints. If you can get a hold of the paper read it: Colin Campbell, Petroleum and People, Population & Environment v. 24, n2, 2002
and I will be happy to debate the specifics with anyone.

Regarding the interpretation of the ASPO stats (3/689):
CC never said "I'm sorry, it slipped through" when confronted about the Stanton piece, which raises the big question: Why?

In any case, reflecting back to the whole PO/hydrocarbon depletion business, it is yet unclear to me why prominent features of the "movement" never mention technical solutions to specific problems concerning:
a) fertilizers/synthetic chemistry (the ammonia thread in this forum is a give away isn't it?)
b) liquid fuels (cellulosic ethanol/methanol are obvious examples)
c) wind and nuclear power generation technologies.
yet are keen to bring the population down to 1 billion or less, to keep some sort of party going with the remains of hydrocarbons (tar sands could keep the party going almost for ever @ 5-7 million barrels per day).

It is also unclear to me, why they are adopting a rather different viewpoint about the population issue, compared to (climate) scientists I know personally. From their perspective, fossil fuels have to be phased out ASAP i.e. petroleum/coal/NG usage has to go down at an obscene rate (>10%). But if one buys into a direct, determining connection between petroleum/people/agriculture then it does not matter why FF usage declines, right? Yet very few, if any,climate scientists resort to predictions such as the following from the 52th ASPO Newsletter:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')How India will fare during the Second Half of the Oil Age is hard to predict, but disintegration is a possible outcome, as people revert to their old communal and religious identities, a process which will probably be accompanied by much bloodshed and suffering. Clearly, the present population far exceeds the carrying capacity of the land, but the Indian is blessed by a smiling, benign spirituality that helps.

To paraphrase the paragraph with an emphasis on the sentence in bold: "The Indian savages will kill and eat its other, but it is ok because they will keep smiling while they are eatening/being eaten , killing /being killed to offset the Growing Gap"

Unless someone provides a satisfactory answer to the questions I raised, here is an appraisal of most peak oil figures: they are not (and never did) promoting awareness, but they do promote a particular message.
The rest of us are saying the following:
it really does not matter why and how the FFs usage will decline or whether the trendologists are right. For reasons that relate to climate change, national security and the health of the general population, FFs have to be phased out. Alternatives DO exist, in the form of nuclear power and (mainly) wind power generation (strike out coal,NG), and carbon neutral liquid fuel cycles based on cellulosic ethanol and methanol,biodiesel (strike out gasoline) which coupled with certain cultural changes can sustain a population double the current size for a few thousand millenia/million years. All the available numbers say that this is possible ... but all the numbers also say that we've got to bite the bullet and be the ones that go through a 10-20 year long difficult period before we see the light at the end of the tunnel.
"Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
User avatar
EnergySpin
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby Doly » Thu 16 Mar 2006, 09:42:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', 'A')lternatives DO exist, in the form of nuclear power and (mainly) wind power generation (strike out coal,NG), and carbon neutral liquid fuel cycles based on cellulosic ethanol and methanol,biodiesel (strike out gasoline) which coupled with certain cultural changes can sustain a population double the current size for a few thousand millenia/million years.


I think "double" is far too optimistic. I have been reading on the subject of carrying capacity, and the greatest experts agree that it's difficult, if not impossible, to estimate. However, looking at the available evidence, it seems likely that we are approaching that carrying capacity, which means that adding as many people as we have now is not a possibility, certainly not in sustainable terms. Perhaps as much as a 50% population increase is possible, but I wouldn't bet on anything more than that.
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby Leanan » Thu 16 Mar 2006, 10:02:57

I think we're in overshoot. This is simply not sustainable:

Image

And I don't think it's "racist" to say so.
User avatar
Leanan
News Editor
News Editor
 
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu 20 May 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby EnergySpin » Fri 17 Mar 2006, 03:14:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', '
')
I think "double" is far too optimistic. I have been reading on the subject of carrying capacity, and the greatest experts agree that it's difficult, if not impossible, to estimate. However, looking at the available evidence, it seems likely that we are approaching that carrying capacity, which means that adding as many people as we have now is not a possibility, certainly not in sustainable terms. Perhaps as much as a 50% population increase is possible, but I wouldn't bet on anything more than that.

Doly, the "double" was used as a descriptive, not a proscriptive term.
In any case, population will start declining by mid century. Given that the global wind potential is 80TW , and we are currently consuming 12, energy is not really that important of an element in the big picture. Other factors are ....
And let's not forget that most "modern" studies of carrying capacity seem to adopt the position that "CO2" is the major limiting factor.
One of the reasons that carrying capacity is difficult to estimate is actually due to mathematics: people use a phenomenological model (Verhulst/logistic) as a causal/predictive model. But just because a term with that name appears in an equation, that does not mean that the term is a universal constant similar to gravitational acceleration.
"Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
User avatar
EnergySpin
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby datapencil » Fri 17 Mar 2006, 05:08:21

Really all it takes to prove that oil will peak is to look around us. Every day I walk through my traffic congested neighbourhood and city. I imagine that just in my small little corner of the world I see literally thousands of vehicles a day. Then I imagine that on a world wide scale, all day. all night.

Cars a just part of it. Agriculture, electricity, plastics - Everything we do consumes oil.

The only crankpot idea is that we will never run out of oil. Unless there is a bunch of tiny little trolls underground reproducing the stuff by millions of barrels a day - then we are going to run out!
User avatar
datapencil
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon 06 Feb 2006, 04:00:00

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby Battle_Scarred_Galactico » Fri 17 Mar 2006, 05:26:29

Really all it takes to prove that oil will peak is to look around us

Thank God someone with a pair of eyes. Nice post.
---
Battle_Scarred_Galactico
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu 07 Apr 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby No-Oil » Fri 17 Mar 2006, 06:57:17

EnergySpin, Get a life. RACISM is a fact of life, everyone is RACIST whether they know it or not. Do you have a skin colour, must have as you post on here, do you have an accent ? Well when the "brown smelly stuff hits the rotary oscilator" your skin colour & accent will dictate how & or why you survive or not.

Does the world still have NATIONAL boundaries, funny in a RACIST free world don't you think. People being deliniated as German, American, Chinese etc is underlying RACISM. Are the Americans at war in Iraq or the desert ? Are they fighting Iraqi insurgents or just insurgents ?! Get the idea. The WW2 Holocaust has been the banner add for anti-rascism & governments worked out long ago that by supressing racism, they can get more productivity & hence more PROFIT. The fact that the Anti-Racists have become racists by attacking & destroying anyone that has a FREE choice right to disagree with the liberal political crap that you can't be racist because its not PC !

The world went PC crazy in the 90's & now as expected is rebelling against the stupid laws implemented during that mad time. In the UK for instance their is a non white population of 7%, but certain laws require companies to show evidence or employee counts of non whites (I use that term to encompass all others in one block) higher than the national 7% population density ! That is RACISM against white people, by white people, without them even realising it. There are numerous reports at the moment of Police forces turning away applicants because they were white & they are short on recruitment targets of the number of non-whites required by government regulations ! Even when the non-whites are not applying.

Work it out, when the fighting starts, people stick with there own. From my own experience, the non-whites are the most racist against other non-whites, far more so than they are against whites. That all stems from their past history with each other, long before the white man got involved & they are still having those wars when they get half a chance !

RACISM was one of the first & will be one of the last human traits before humans cease to exist. FACT not fiction, unlike the panacia of a "world at peace" that the liberal loonies think they can manufacture.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it needed to be said.

No-Oil.
The roller coaster is still climbing, but it's near the top now !
Where there's a WAR there's a WAY :(
User avatar
No-Oil
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Fri 31 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: UK

Re: Not Cool: oilcrash.com featured on crank.net

Unread postby SHiFTY » Fri 17 Mar 2006, 11:03:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('datapencil', 'R')eally all it takes to prove that oil will peak is to look around us. Every day I walk through my traffic congested neighbourhood and city. I imagine that just in my small little corner of the world I see literally thousands of vehicles a day. Then I imagine that on a world wide scale, all day. all night.


This is the worst kind of "Argument from Personal Incredulity", a logical fallacy. Just because you cant imagine it, does not mean it is wrong!

Peak could be 10-20 years off for all we know. The less principled prophets of the peak oil cult have made some pretty definitive statements that we have passed the peak in order to grab some headlines. If they are wrong, I imagine they will be like the cult leaders who predict the end of the world and get it wrong- they will move on to their next 'definite' prediction, with nary a murmur from their brainwashed congregation.

Crank.net is right to feature these apocalypticons on their site.

(Note: I agree with the premise of declining liquid fuels, but some of the outrageous claims about die-offs and so on are just doomer fantasyland.)
User avatar
SHiFTY
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon 27 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Next

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron