The Oil Drum | NYT says peak oil "almost certainly correct"

221 comments on NYT says peak oil "almost certainly correct"

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

Dave Cohen on March 1, 2006 - 4:35am

Ah, this would be a rant so look out....

<rant>
Re: "deserve all the acclaim they can get..."

Of course they do. Not the point. Matt Savinar has been outfront for a long time now. Defcon 1.

Maybe it's just ego, but when we do this stuff at TOD, I like to see it recognized for its quality in addition to what other good websites have provided in taking the lead in the past.... I know that TOD is relatively new in the world but still we've been around for a while now.

I think TOD offers up a valuable, honest and often technical kind of discussion that can not be found almost anywhere else on the web about peak oil. End of story. If some people (including the NY Times) can't figure that out, then they are just mediocre journalists. I believe--though I can't prove it--that our regular readers include Heinberg, Kunstler, Pickens, Raintree and many other "influential people" who lurk here but don't contribute. When I introduced myself to the local Boulder Relocalization Group, all I had to say was "Hi, I'm Dave from The Oil Drum". They knew who I was. They read (and still do) the website everyday. And many people who I met at ASPO-USA in Denver back in November read it too. Jesus, at this point Stuart is actually getting famous for the interesting, obscure but very illuminating posts he does. Hell, I even get the occasional e-mail.

Point is, I don't like it that TOD is neglected by some guy at the NY Times because he hasn't done his homework. Screw him.
</rant>

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

AlphaMaleProphetOfDoom on March 1, 2006 - 5:27am

Dave,

Relax. Whenever I go gasoline syphoning, I scrawl "The Oil Drum was here." onto the bumbers. So the time when the Times links to your site in a tiny sidebar will come sooner than later.

Thus far, my site has only gotten three visits from the Times link and two of those were from me testing the link.

Best,

Matt

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Glenn on March 1, 2006 - 6:15pm

LOL - That's hilarious!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Stuart Staniford on March 1, 2006 - 5:48am

Take it easy Dave - we're the new kid on the block.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Leanan on March 1, 2006 - 7:56am

Maybe they know their readership is not up to following the technical discussion on TOD.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

pstarr on March 1, 2006 - 1:47pm

The punditry-class (and that includes the armchair pundits among the readers) listen only to specialists. The NYT is a world of 'experts' with very particular degrees and opinions, each of whom can miss important details from the fringe of their field and other fields. Plus the editorial board have their advertisers to consider. Don't want to scare the consumers :)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

NC on March 1, 2006 - 10:33am

Dave,

No need to worry about TOD exposure. This site is so cross linked to the other sites that people will get here as a second or third link. The people that are inquisitive and scientific minded will stay and browse the details. The others will go back to the other sites for an easy summary of what they should do.

You can't force people to accept hard truths, only expose them to it.

You have done your part well. Give yourself a pat on the back and wait for the knowledge stored here to filter out.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Liz on March 2, 2006 - 2:27am

I was curious about the crosslinks so checked out the sites mentioned by the NYT. I was astounded to find out that peakoil.com does not have TOD on their list of peak oil sites. If anyone is tied in there, perhaps they could get that corrected.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Leanan on March 2, 2006 - 11:15am

Submit it. So far as I know, all the links at PeakOil.com were submitted by visitors. They are screened, but anything reasonably peak-oil related that is not outright spam is approved.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

TJ on March 1, 2006 - 1:59pm

If the public rated technical discussion highly then scientists and engineers would be wealthy, corporate executives would know more math than averages and ROI, and HO would rule the world. The Times is not after us, they are after influence peddlers. In the U.S. like it or not that currently means people who avoid technical stuff like the plague.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.