tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post1146768235488823658..comments2024-03-24T11:01:27.668-04:00Comments on Resource Insights: Peak oil conspiraciesKurt Cobbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-45798095118640572582007-09-30T03:36:00.000-04:002007-09-30T03:36:00.000-04:00You state that these paranoids feel excluded from ...You state that these paranoids feel excluded from the political process, but to some extent they are, witness the last election, and it is clear that Bush stole it, and what does the media do? They remain silent. Why? People feel excluded because they are lied too, the major media outlets can focus on what they want too, and too often they are afraid to bite the hand that feeds them, not paranoid, just simple economics without a conscience. History is full of examples, and those in power usually manage to retain that power through deception, manipulation, and murder. Too many act like psychotics...truly.<BR/>As for the statement that there is no viable plan put forward by these "deviants", many, many want alternate energy to take a great role in providing power. If you look at the subsidies given to oil, and put some of that into alternate energy, it could be a great start.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-34228079095569082102007-09-26T11:39:00.000-04:002007-09-26T11:39:00.000-04:00FWIW, I made an old post on Bacevich’s The New Ame...FWIW, I made <A HREF="http://odograph.com/?p=159" REL="nofollow">an old post on Bacevich’s The New American Militarism</A>, and its chapter, 'blood for oil.'<BR/><BR/>On the rest ... identifying paranoid conspiracies on the 'no peak' side doesn't disprove them on the 'peak soon' side.<BR/><BR/>I mean, to really tackle to what extent the 'peak oil movement' falls to conspiracy, we'd have to look at their accepted truths (like "they're lying") and see to what degree they are supported by actual data.<BR/><BR/>... and not an assumption based on missing data.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-59019581327442634912007-09-26T11:28:00.000-04:002007-09-26T11:28:00.000-04:00odograph,I would say it is not a particularly para...odograph,<BR/><BR/>I would say it is not a particularly paranoid inference to say that Bush Administration officials are aware of peak oil (though we have no public statements explicitly on this point) and that this <I>may</I> have been a consideration in their decision to go to war with Iraq. We cannot know this for sure so we must label it as an inference.<BR/><BR/>I do think that the paranoid style is in evidence in those who say that peak oil is a false theory (and as a theory it is indeed subject to falsification) but then go on to say that this false theory is being used by a tiny unidentified cabal as an excuse to starve billions in an attempt to control population.<BR/><BR/>As regards the Carter Doctrine, I never said that the doctrine justified the war. I only said it is the explicit policy of the United States and that the Bush Administration didn't really need to restate it. I must say it puzzles me that they deny the war has anything to do with oil. It is the policy of the United States to intervene militarily in the Middle East when it believes oil supplies are threatened. One could certainly argue that oil supplies were not being threatened, and I would agree with you. However, I have no doubt that someone could mount an argument that the U. S. needed to be pre-emptive about that threat before it materialized. I don't agree with that argument, but surely that must have been part of the thinking of this administration.Kurt Cobbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-66149663241316405942007-09-26T10:38:00.000-04:002007-09-26T10:38:00.000-04:00I feel like I should add a summary. Sorry if my c...I feel like I should add a summary. Sorry if my comments go on and on.<BR/><BR/>We could roughly divide people into those who believe peak oil is soon, and those who think it is later. Amongst those people, on both sides, one can find threads of irrational and paranoid thought.<BR/><BR/>Your (Kurt) original essay did a good job of identifying irrational/paranoid threads that exist in the "peak later" side. You certainly did not imply that all of the "peak later" folks were buying into conspiracies.<BR/><BR/>If my first two comments I just threw out some threads of conspiracy that I had seen in the "peak soon" side. This certainly is not to say that all "peak soon" folks are into irrational conspiracies either.<BR/><BR/>These conspiracies exist on both sides, and cloud the view for everyone.<BR/><BR/>The thing that holds my interest, I think, is the way the uncertainty holds people's attention, and the (sometimes strange) ways they seek to resolve it.<BR/><BR/>(case in point, the war might be in some degree about "oil" but it is highly uncertain how much it was about "peak oil.")Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-59725736699305654612007-09-26T09:52:00.000-04:002007-09-26T09:52:00.000-04:00BTW, as a subtext are you saying that peak oil as ...BTW, as a subtext are you saying that peak oil as a driver of the war is not in the 'paranoid style?'<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.oilempire.us/" REL="nofollow">check this out</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-47424876616645992362007-09-26T09:49:00.000-04:002007-09-26T09:49:00.000-04:00Actually the Carter Doctrine struck an interesting...Actually the Carter Doctrine struck an interesting balance. It told others (in those days the Soviets) that we would fight for that region. At the same time it told the nations in that region that we were respecting their sovereignty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-9842195985707515662007-09-26T09:44:00.000-04:002007-09-26T09:44:00.000-04:00Kurt, I agree with a lot of this last comment, but...Kurt, I agree with a lot of this last comment, but I think too many people give the Bush administration a "Carter Doctrine" pass on the Iraq invasion.<BR/><BR/>It's important to remember exactly what that Doctrine was:<BR/><BR/><I>"Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force."</I><BR/><BR/>The key words for me are "any outside force." Bush (or the old Neocon group) went way beyond that. In fact it threw out those constraints. The invasion was not in response to any outside force.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-6615593975972786962007-09-26T08:38:00.000-04:002007-09-26T08:38:00.000-04:00guitarbuddy,I am by no means asking people to acce...guitarbuddy,<BR/><BR/>I am by no means asking people to accept what the Bush Administration or any administration says on its face. Being skeptical of the paranoid style is not the same as being gullible. The Bush ties, junior and senior, to the oil industry and the military and intelligence communities are well-documented. No one needs to make up any facts there. One is certainly allowed to draw inferences, and as you will read above in my previous comment, there is every reason to believe that the Iraq war is in part about oil, especially if we consider the Carter Doctrine that the free flow of Middle East oil is a vital national interest of the United States and that it will respond with all means necessary to defend that flow. One does not need to engage in the paranoid style to arrive at such a conclusion.<BR/><BR/>What really does fit the paranoid style are claims that an unnamed elite are busy implementing plans for the mass starvation of the human race. People may be starving due to incompetence, drought, bad agricultural trade policy, plant disease and war (where one of the tactics can be to starve your enemy), but there is no evidence that a small group of unspecified people are using the peak oil issue to guide such a policy worldwide, that they could if they wanted to, or that they would if they could.Kurt Cobbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-34228062364209566862007-09-26T07:29:00.000-04:002007-09-26T07:29:00.000-04:00Oh, so we're now supposed to believe that this cur...Oh, so we're now supposed to believe that this current Bush administration, with it's long family ties to oil, intelligence, and the military-industrial complex really invaded Iraq just because they wanted to bring democracy to an oppressed country? Please. I'll keep some of my paranoid conspiracies, thank you very much.guitarbuddyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13855006470811668680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-77805923943504079232007-09-25T21:50:00.000-04:002007-09-25T21:50:00.000-04:00Now, on the other hand Kurt, if you want to talk a...Now, on the other hand Kurt, if you want to talk about relocation, I may have some deffident ideas about this......Kalmazzo, no, Concord, yes!yooperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11297259993402713368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-14434347204811695012007-09-25T21:35:00.000-04:002007-09-25T21:35:00.000-04:00"Peak oil conspiracies"? Many, many years ago, my ..."Peak oil conspiracies"? Many, many years ago, my instructors hammered again, again and yet again, "What difference does it make "how" it happened? It happened, that is that. How could "conspiracies" play in the matter at hand, in the long run? In other words, so what?<BR/><BR/>On one hand, if you're trying to convience people, of resource depletion is real, ok, Kurt, I see your agruement. Perhaps, this is not the site for me, I'm way beyond this...<BR/><BR/>Thanks, yooper.yooperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11297259993402713368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-5938891671903189772007-09-25T18:38:00.000-04:002007-09-25T18:38:00.000-04:00I don't think that either Kurt or I put our faith ...I don't think that either Kurt or I put our faith in miracles.<BR/><BR/>The question is really whether you can let uncertainty stand, as uncertainty ... without lashing out, for instance, in irrational anger.<BR/><BR/>(uncertainty favors neither the optimist nor the pessimist. it says they <B>both</B> should limit the certainty of their remarks.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-76839767715410202172007-09-25T16:04:00.000-04:002007-09-25T16:04:00.000-04:00Peak oil has many faces.Mexico a country depended ...Peak oil has many faces.<BR/>Mexico a country depended on oil, and not just for the energy, but for its money (40% goes to run the goverment) is facing a decline on its production and that is not a conspiracy is a reality. The outcome of this energy decline will hit soo hard Mexico, that this country will be the mirrow for the rest of the world, especialy third world countries.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-62236086822783740502007-09-25T16:00:00.000-04:002007-09-25T16:00:00.000-04:00I think Taleb would have us leave the uncertainty ...<I/>I think Taleb would have us leave the uncertainty as an uncertainty.</I><BR/><BR/>Oh! Yeah! I see that the little bastard <B>odograph</B> is still at work trying to confuse the issue.<BR/>Especially with his favorite bogus "counterintrepretation" of Nicholas Taleb's Black Swan : a black swan is <B>actually</B> a very improbable event that you cannot rely on and is most often highly detrimental, it is NOT a reason to put one's hope in miracles.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-35494383023597126392007-09-25T15:57:00.000-04:002007-09-25T15:57:00.000-04:00Oh no, watch out. Someone called Kurt an idiot! I ...Oh no, watch out. Someone called Kurt an idiot! I imagine it must be one of those conspricy theorists who can't stand painful doses of reality and doesn't have the vocabulary to explain the frustration at being so eliquently called 'an idiot'. <BR/><BR/>Disagree with him, maybe... Call him an idiot? Obviously he isn't one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-77248824116050861802007-09-25T14:12:00.000-04:002007-09-25T14:12:00.000-04:00Kurt Cobb, you're an idiot.Kurt Cobb, you're an idiot.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-91967052943480538512007-09-24T18:01:00.000-04:002007-09-24T18:01:00.000-04:00BTW, to be clear I'm repeating claims of "they're ...BTW, to be clear I'm repeating claims of "they're lying" that I've heard repeated at the Peak Oil sites, in their various comment sections.<BR/><BR/>It's true, as you say, that people have raised some real questions of uncertainty.<BR/><BR/>But the thing to watch for is the <I>assumption</I> that uncertainty equals low reserves (or "they're lying").<BR/><BR/>I think Taleb would have us leave the uncertainty as an uncertainty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-55631316504957617422007-09-24T17:43:00.000-04:002007-09-24T17:43:00.000-04:00I think it is a clash of cultures, and the "accept...I think it is a clash of cultures, and the "accepted truths" in each.<BR/><BR/>Peak oilers <I>know</I> the oil companies (and the Saudis) are lying, because that is the only explanation that dovetails with their world-view.<BR/><BR/>Certainly an average Joe, one less wedded to a philosophy might be suspicious of all "interested parties" and vested interests.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-87144640397156607452007-09-24T17:31:00.000-04:002007-09-24T17:31:00.000-04:00odograph,I think you are confusing systemic incent...odograph,<BR/><BR/>I think you are confusing systemic incentives with accusations of conspiracy. Oil companies have systemic incentives to exaggerate their reserves because it boosts the stock price and therefore option compensation for executives. But publicly traded ones rarely do this because the fallout can be so severe when they are found out. Witness Shell. When it comes to the national oil companies, we know from the historical record that production quotas for OPEC were being linked to the size of reserves in member countries. This is yet another systemic incentive. There is no need for any secret conspiracy here, only action based on self-interest, something one can ascertain from publicly available information. So, I would say that what you describe doesn't really fit into Hofstadter's paranoid style. People who've looked at the reserve claims of OPEC members question those claims and point out that there is no independent verification of such claims. This just seems like good detective work to me. It does not amount to a claim that they are lying.<BR/><BR/>Matt Simmons has even suggested a way the question can be cleared up. Simply allow independent auditors access to Saudi and other OPEC fields. This is unlike the paranoid who almost never can tell you how to resolve the situation.<BR/><BR/>As regards Iraq, it seems strange that you should say that the government doesn't want to admit that there will be a peak in world oil production since the EIA has published scenarios for the peak which are available on the web. And the DOE published the Hirsch report which, of course, is a discussion of mitigation strategies for peak. Of course, the EIA does not predict a nearby peak, but certainly the concept of peak oil is well-known among government policymakers and it not being kept from the public. (The public may be disinterested or incredulous, but that is a separate issue.)<BR/><BR/>Whether this administration invaded Iraq <I>because</I> of peak oil is probably not knowable. One would have to be able to read minds. We do, however, have the stated motives for the invasion: weapons of mass destruction, evil dictator, etc. But we also have the Carter Doctrine which this administration has not repudiated. I think it is a reasonable inference that oil had a major influence on the decision to go to war with Iraq though, of course, we would have to be mind readers to be absolutely sure.Kurt Cobbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-52872403395541677552007-09-24T12:42:00.000-04:002007-09-24T12:42:00.000-04:00Mr Kurt - you should read Edward Tapamor at Resour...Mr Kurt - you should read Edward Tapamor at Resource Investor.com he says many of the same items as your good self. Yes to peak oil, no to conspiracy ideas.<BR/><BR/>Yours<BR/>TCR<BR/><BR/>Lagos, Nigeria.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-78550562737231584342007-09-24T11:18:00.000-04:002007-09-24T11:18:00.000-04:00Oh, I forgot another one: "we invaded Iraq because...Oh, I forgot another one: "we invaded Iraq because the government knows about Peak Oil, but they aren't ready to admit it."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-11408793814125536922007-09-24T11:13:00.000-04:002007-09-24T11:13:00.000-04:00Ah, but to what extent does the refrain "oil compa...Ah, but to what extent does the refrain "oil companies (and oil exporting countries) are all lying (about true reserves)" itself resemble a conspiracy theory?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-23167415684294105662007-09-24T09:35:00.000-04:002007-09-24T09:35:00.000-04:00Nice post Kurt - its good to see someone with a me...Nice post Kurt - its good to see someone with a measured take on this subject.Big Gavhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00682404837426502876noreply@blogger.com