Am I the only one that thinks that this constant smearing of anti-economist nonsense on this site is really too much? The way it seems at the moment a witch would have better chance in a Salem trial than an economist trying to post on this site..... As an economist myself, it's really quite insulting that every time I read these boards I get words shoved in my mouth by people who know nothing about economics.

Economics is one of the smallest and least understood sciences in the world. Like any science it actually has a range of opinions....some of which are "pro-peak oil" or "anti-peak oil", perhaps some of you should consider that.

Geologists: "A rock is a rock."
Strangely enough, the average geologist will know more than the average economist about rocks. However, suddenly geologists think they know all about the market and pricing mechanisms due to what their rocks are telling them.
Economists: "It might be a rock now, but if given the right incentives, it could become oil. Just let the market work its magic through the alchemy of the invisible hand."
There is no such thing as magic. Please stop pretending economists are magicians.

The most amusing thing about this economists versus geologists debate is that most economists don't even know about the argument, and many would probably take the geologists' side. It seems to me the whole thing is simply a way for geologists to make their unimaginably uninteresting science heard on the world forum.

Most prominent sceptics of peak oil, or in general sceptics of the idea that natural resource constraints will be important to humanity's future, have been economists. Julian Simon, Michael Lynch, Morris Adelman... While the stereotype might be simplistic, there is something to it.