Register for Free
Post comments, receive updates via email, gain access to exclusive content, and more.
Spam Safe!
Thoughts of an outsider
I just saw/heard the crash course and I must say it was an amazing eye-opener. However, it's clear that it is not a neutral presentation, and after reading this forum for a couple of hours i can't help but to get a certain feeling of déjà vu (Y2K anyone?). Whereas I don't think the data presented is false, it is likely to be chosen carefully and as such might not give a good representation of reality. What i would want is to hear the arguments of the opposite side (ones who believe some other energy source will take over, that this is all blown out of proportions etc). Only then could I make an informed decision. Could someone be kind enough to present these arguments and/or link me there?
I just saw/heard the crash course and I must say it was an amazing eye-opener. However, it's clear that it is not a neutral presentation, and after reading this forum for a couple of hours i can't help but to get a certain feeling of déjà vu (Y2K anyone?). Whereas I don't think the data presented is false, it is likely to be chosen carefully and as such might not give a good representation of reality. What i would want is to hear the arguments of the opposite side (ones who believe some other energy source will take over, that this is all blown out of proportions etc). Only then could I make an informed decision. Could someone be kind enough to present these arguments and/or link me there?
I myself think PO will get kicked down the road a bit given the high possibility that we will decrease from 86 million +/- barrels a day of global consumption if there is further demand destruction (read:economic hell).
I'm optimistic about projects like Simmons created. Now that he died I'm a little less optimistic.
I'd be a lot more optimistic if they had created a Manhattan Project for this. Right now I think our biggest threat is an economic Katrina. PO will follow. You might want to watch this.
Hi Spray!
Welcome to CM!
What i would want is to hear the arguments of the opposite side (ones who believe some other energy source will take over, that this is all blown out of proportions etc). Only then could I make an informed decision. Could someone be kind enough to present these arguments and/or link me there?
Thats what we are all about here. I think you'll find plenty of skepticism and questioning here. There are not very many lemmings on this site only people who want to know what is really going on.
"Even if we are occupied with important things and even if we attain honor or fall into misfortune, still let us remember how good it once was here, when we were all together, united by a good and kind feeling which made us perhaps better than we are." - Fyodor Dostovevsky
Tycer: I listened to the podcast, and while Chris seems like someone who takes the data very seriously and tries to keep his feelings out of his work, he also said that the point of the CC was to affect people (that is, not to present the truth), something that makes me suspect his data isn't representative.
If I understand the part about the scientists correctly both tried to show how he manipulated his data, but none of them could find any sort of manipulation in there. That would naturally decrease the probability of manipulated data a lot.
Davos: If I understand the video correctly all it says is that oil will get more expensive due to PO and increased demand, which seems quite rudimentary. Gasoline cost is already over 7 $ / gallon where I live and the price shows no sign of decreasing or even stopping.
Having said that I can't help but wondering how this will affect the rest of the world. The effect of PO will probably be higher prices across the globe, which could (among other things) create a more local work market, but what would happen if US economy collapses? Also, what about the difference between defaulting and hyperinflation?
Johnny: Thanks! There also seem to be a lot of people who have all sorts of questions about farm life, self defence and the best place to hide ones gold =).
Glad to have you here Spray.
"Even if we are occupied with important things and even if we attain honor or fall into misfortune, still let us remember how good it once was here, when we were all together, united by a good and kind feeling which made us perhaps better than we are." - Fyodor Dostovevsky
I just saw/heard the crash course and I must say it was an amazing eye-opener. However, it's clear that it is not a neutral presentation, and after reading this forum for a couple of hours i can't help but to get a certain feeling of déjà vu (Y2K anyone?). Whereas I don't think the data presented is false, it is likely to be chosen carefully and as such might not give a good representation of reality. What i would want is to hear the arguments of the opposite side (ones who believe some other energy source will take over, that this is all blown out of proportions etc). Only then could I make an informed decision. Could someone be kind enough to present these arguments and/or link me there?
Let's start out with the opposite assumption. Let's assume that everything Chris says is false. Would getting out of debt, scaling down one's lifestyle, being prepared for a disaster of any sort, building community relationships, becoming more independent in terms of various resources (water, food, energy, etc.), becoming more physically secure with regards to protecting yourself from potential criminal activity, etc. be to your benefit or your detriment?
The future is uncertain. Being prepared for uncertainty, to me, is prudent and wise.
Y2K had me minimally concerned except for computer precautions. The developing situation described by Chris has me much more concerned and so I've prepared accordingly. Look for the preponderance of evidence. What does it tell you? What it tells me is that he knows what he is talking about and I'd be wise to heed the advice that he has freely and generously offered here. I've looked for compelling evidence against his arguments. Other than the remote possibility of an incredible technological breakthrough in energy and transportation (which even then, will take years to implement), I've found no such evidence.
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, etc., chances are ... it's a duck.
Davos: If I understand the video correctly all it says is that oil will get more expensive due to PO and increased demand, which seems quite rudimentary. Gasoline cost is already over 7 $ / gallon where I live and the price shows no sign of decreasing or even stopping.
Having said that I can't help but wondering how this will affect the rest of the world. The effect of PO will probably be higher prices across the globe, which could (among other things) create a more local work market, but what would happen if US economy collapses? Also, what about the difference between defaulting and hyperinflation?
I expect a more local economy.
What if the US economy collapses? Same stuff we'd see just as if y2k happened or a hurricane hit and I expect even less oil demand.
Difference between default and hyperinflation? I don't see them defaulting. They could. I see either an outright re-denomination (I.E. Bring us 10,000 old dollars and here is a new dollar) OR they will continue to debase our dollar making the old debt easy to pay with lots more new dollars, they have only 5% more to go, they've done 95% in 84 years, took Rome 300 years to do that. There are some on this site that feel that deflation and or stagflation will happen, I'm certainly not in that camp but they have super points to read and listen to.
I've yet to catch CM with a bad fact or bad data. The site welcomes skeptics in the sense everyone I've met here is extremely skeptical about everything. Basically everyone I have met on the site is a self thinker not some "Boobeling" who let's Cramer and the rest of CNBS do their thinking. What I found is that CM has a lot of grey matter but he has common sense and can simplify and see what something really is. Good luck.
Spray.
Why don't you just do your own research? If you doubt any thing you see or read here find a contrarian point of view. I am quite sure the DOE could supply you with all the data you need. Or perhaps BP.
I would certainly suggest you read some of if not all of the books in the Essential Books and Articles sections of this site. You see though Chris has done a very good job of putting the information in one very nice neat package he is relatively late to the game. I first started reading about PO in the 60's. There are many people out in the world speaking to many of these issues and have been for quite sometime.
If you think there is a silver bullet out there that will take the place of fossil fuels go find it and bring it back here , we would all like to know about it. You obviously have access to the most powerful research tool ever devised-the internet- we would all like to see what you could find that would make growing a garden, buying guns, buying gold getting out of debt, etc., etc., etc. obsolete. It takes a lot of time, energy and money to prepare for what is in the opinions of many here a high probability scenario. I for one would certainly be relieved to return to the days of Leave it to Beaver.
V
PS It is fairly obvious you do not live in the US. i would also assume that life has not changed very much for you over the last few years. Perhaps you do not live in a country with a debt of $120 trillion. Perhaps you have socialized medicine. Perhaps you might share how you come to your beliefs and opinions with facts.
Hi Spray,
Davos was directing you to this film: -
A Crude Awakening
You might well gain great insight from this excellent lecture also : -
Arithmetic, Population and growth
For a definative book that I recommend, you can read this one online: -
The Party's Over ~ by Richard Heinberg
These should be of great help ...
~ VF ~
Helen Caldicott ~ If You Love This Planet ~ A must see lecture that is perfect for our time ... http://www.nfb.ca/film/if_you_love_this_... - Rise like Lions after slumber - In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew - Which in sleep had fallen on you - Ye are many - they are few - Shelley
Sorry for testing you. I mostly wanted to see what kind of reaction I would get if I questioned your behavior. Fortunately it was met with logic, facts and tips rather than the kind of answer I would get if I questioned a religion, or something else not based on facts. I'm very glad to see you are also sceptical to the facts given by CM (and presumably others). As my knowledge in the area is limited to say the least, I thought I'd rather ask you than spend the hundreds of hours needed to get even a faint idea of whether the things CM say could be true or not. Seeing that it seems very likely I will have to do some proper research, though.
ao: Yes, being mentally and to whatever extent one can be physically (it's hard to be self-sufficient in a city, for example) prepared is important, even if the risk is small (which doesn't seem the case here). You're talking to someone with a long history in scouting. As for the evidence: yes he presents a lot of it, but that doesn't mean there isn't even more evidence against him which he doesn't show. Again, that doesn't seem the case here.
V: Yes, I'll do my research now that I know it's worth the time! I don't really have any beliefs in this question, I just routinely question everything I hear. Yes, our medicine is socialized, among other important parts of society (here, noone is poor and noone is filthy rich). And no, we don't have that kind of debt.
Thanks, I'll look into the videos and links!


Chris describes his Q&A with Parliament on Two Beers With Steve Podcast. Some of your Questions might be answered there as Members of Parliament are not easy joiners to a different viewpoint.
http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/two-beers-with-steve/id315666764
Titled " A World Worth Inheriting" 3/23/10
FWIW, I have presented the CC to more than a dozen men and women who have strong backgrounds in Economics and Energy (both oil and gas) who took offense at Dr. Martinson's assertions. It was my desire to have them debunk the CC. Any part of it.
The most solid argument I got was that graphs of all kinds can be manipulated with the same data to represent whatever the presenter wants. Both of the scientists that presented that argument have tried to show how Dr. Martinson did just that. Neither could and one just joined me in a large, long-term storage buy of grain.
The rest could not present any argument better than " humanity has alway overcome" or "technology is there to fix this"
When asked about scaling up the technology in time to prevent disruptions, not believed it could be done in less than a decade.
Thanks from the Beautiful Blue Ridge Mountains, Tycer