Important Peak Oil story in Environment/Energy/Science forum.

[JohnyCanuck]

I just posted a new thread in EES re. a debate challenge by Mike Ruppert to a Peak Oil skeptic, Dave McGowan of http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/index.htm#news

McGowan recently sent out an email newsletter which basically contained a rebuttal by Dave McGowan of Ruppert's position and the standard Peak Oil theories. I just posted the complete email newsletter (permission was granted by the author to reproduce) in the EES forum if you are interested in this topic and would like to follow up,here is the link to the thread in EES:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x5970

The newsletter can also be reviewed on the web at: http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr52.html

[kalian]

1. Well....

I don't particularly subscribe to Mike Ruppert's version of
peak oil even though he does cite most of the information available.
I believe that Ruppert is taking an issue and twisting it to his own
favor and vision.

As for this guys open letter...once again we're seeing how people are
MISINTERPRETING what peak oil really is: its the end of CHEAP OIL
and not the end of oil in of itself.

This gentleman continues on with the hypothesis that oil is
regenerating itself underground. That's bullshit. It has not been
proven and actually, its one of the known tactics used by oil
companies to dispell the "myth" about peak oil. You couple this with
the "new technologies" that permit oil to be extracted from
previously inaccessible regions...

Unfortunately, while everybody debates, oil continues to be consumed
at an outrageous pace... Instead on concentrating on alternatives,
we're trying to squeeze out the last drop of cheap oil from the
ground...even if that means invading countries and killing innocent
people.

What's wrong with the picture...?

[ThomWV]

2. Does Anyone Else Get Tired Of This "Peak Oil" Crap?

Every single day, Peak Oil. The same old peak oil crap that folks have been spouting since at least the early 60's. Move on, there are a lot more subjects out there.

[terisel]

3. Yes it is pure propaganda-proof sucker born every minute n/t

[RainDog]

4. You are joking, right?

I cannot assume that you are honestly saying that discussion of how to fuel the world in the near future is just another subject, especially considering the junta who took power in 2000 just so happens to be an oil consortium.

I have two kids, and believe me, people cannot talk about this enough, because we need to find viable ways to make the future work for our children and grandchildren.

It is astonishing to me that Americans and their politicians choose to maintain blissful ignorance whenever they don't want to face a difficult issue.

[Old and In the Way]

5. It's "Morning in America", right?

Just what Reagan/Bush1 promised.

Oh, that War in Iraq was about WMD, not about securing the 2nd largest know oil reserve. No, this is not "Evening in America" happening today.

Republican National Security = Energy Policy = War = Eventually, "light's out".

Democrats should promote an alternative future that bases our national security on alternative/renewable energy that produces jobs here.

But that won't happen until the Republican Oil Party is shown the door in our national government.

[burythehatchet]

6. Yes ThomWV, there are plenty of people tired of this Peak Oil crap

As with any issue like peak oil, people will generally fall on one of two sides. Some people will research, read, analyze, and use the existing data to formulate a reasoned opinion. These same people will also be on the lookout for more information. They won't calcify their data set. They will seek to modify their understanding based on new information. Then they will make small decisions in their lives that are in response to their belief.

The other side doesn't really like new information. Nor do they like their map of reality challenged. They are sick of the peak oil crap.