[JJ]

we're saved. Wish ya'll hadn't wasted so much of my time...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/opini ... .html?_r=1

[hillsidedigger]

No, it hasn't.

[JJ]

No, it hasn't.

that was meant to be sarcastic...should have said so...

[like_the_dinosaurs]

Funny read!

[eastbay]

A related argument — that the “easy oil” is gone and that extraction can only become more difficult and cost-ineffective — should be recognized as vague and irrelevant.

That was the funniest line.

If I hadn't heard of Yergin I would think this hilarious article was a spoof on the arguments of cornucopian peak oil disbelievers.

[Cloud9]

Now all we have to do is tell the President. No need for resource wars. We can pack up our troops and come home.

[crude_intentions]

the public is understandably alarmed.

Yeah sure whatever Mention peak oil to a 1000 people and you'll be lucky to find 2 who know or even care what it is.

[Plantagenet]

The New York Times is a liberal paper with a strong pro-democratic party tilt. Its not surprising they'd push this junk......these are the same folks who blamed high oil prices last year on evil speculators, not supply shortfalls.

[mcgowanjm]

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5521#more

Sam Foucher/Khebab

the consensus among geologists is that there are some 10 trillion barrels out there

Try to Google that number.

A century ago, only 10 percent of it was considered recoverable, but improvements in technology should allow us to recover some 35 percent — another 2.5 trillion barrels — in an economically viable way. And this doesn’t even include such potential sources as tar sands, which in time we may be able to efficiently tap.

Try to source any of the above.

Next intelligence failure
300 billion barrels OPEC oil missing

[eastbay]

The New York Times is a liberal paper with a strong pro-democratic party tilt. Its not surprising they'd push this junk... these are the same folks who blamed high oil prices last year on evil speculators, not supply shortfalls.

That's why they endorsed the idiotic oil wars. They couldn't be called 'liberal' if they did otherwise.

[Carlhole]

Welcome back to PeakOil.com, where it is FUN and educational to learn about and debate the energy issues facing the world.

[copious.abundance]

Come on people. It's easy to dump on typical cornucopian logic.

But how does this crap make it into a well-respected newspaper run by educated intelligent people? The editors write and edit complex sentences and paragraphs. Doesn't it mean anything that NYT staff can think, organize, edit, and perfect entire paragraphs? You would think this gives them a leg up in the brains department?

Why do they publish this crap?

ad hom deleted Just as a conservative Forbes magazine published a commentary which seemd to endose peak oil, a liberal newspaper like the NYT is now publishing a commentary which seems to debunk peak oil. This says nothing about the relative intelligence of the staff of either Forbes or the NYT, it simply means they're printing a variety of opinions, as they should. There is nothing "crappy" about publishing a variety of opinions.

[copious.abundance]

Deleted per COC 5.1 and 5.2.

[Carlhole]

Deleted per COC 5.1.

[Plantagenet]

Come on people. It's easy to dump on typical cornucopian logic.
But how does this crap make it into a well-respected newspaper run by educated intelligent people? The editors write and edit complex sentences and paragraphs. Doesn't it mean anything that NYT staff can think, organize, edit, and perfect entire paragraphs? You would think this gives them a leg up in the brains department? Why do they publish this crap?

ad hom deleted Just as a conservative Forbes magazine published a commentary which seemd to endose peak oil, a liberal newspaper like the NYT is now publishing a commentary which seems to debunk peak oil. This says nothing about the relative intelligence of the staff of either Forbes or the NYT, it simply means they're printing a variety of opinions, as they should. There is nothing "crappy" about publishing a variety of opinions.

Good point. And you are right that some of the MSM seem to get "Peak Oil" and what it means for our society.



When do you think we'll see a pro Peak Oil editorial from the NY Times to balance out this garbage they just published?

[Grautr]

Come on people. It's easy to dump on typical cornucopian logic.
But how does this crap make it into a well-respected newspaper run by educated intelligent people? The editors write and edit complex sentences and paragraphs. Doesn't it mean anything that NYT staff can think, organize, edit, and perfect entire paragraphs? You would think this gives them a leg up in the brains department? Why do they publish this crap?

Its the big push/surge by the media to convince the world an economic recovery is on the way by inspiring confidence in the masses to go on buying needless shit.

I'm off out to buy myself a mobile phone (so the boss can find me whenever he wants me) some designer clothing that feels uncomfortable but looks sharpe and a candle snuffer so I can look sofisticated at dinner parties.

[TheAntiDoomer]

Deleted per COC 5.1 and 5.2