I'm not saying we should all agree, not at all... open debate and conjecture and argument is how truth is discovered. I just think, and I think RR would agree, that there isn't much discussion about what might cause oil production to *rise*. And how *we* as the unofficial "peakist community" would address that.

It would be valid to go through all the possibilities, and revisit them on a regular basis. And not simply as an exercise to discredit anything that might go against peak-oil-now.

Hey Chrisale,

Here is my letter to my congressman, which I will edit and send to my senators. Maybe if we want to do something we should try to force the Congress to ask one question of our friends the Saudis. It seems like any easy question from my point of view. Editorial comments accepted.

---------------------
Dear Mike,

I do not write too much, but I am worried about the state of the world and frankly my investments at home. I have thought about the reasons for my anxiety and I have come to the conclusion that you can help. The source of continued growth and expansion in the world economies is the effective use of energy. Energy allows countries to reduce human suffering and elevate freedom. With this thought in mind, we urge you to ask President Bush to implore his friend and ally Saudi Arabia to “open the books” on the oil reserves to outside scrutiny. The audit of energy resources will allow me and many others to plan for the future and allow me to get back to work to generate revenue for the Treasury.

If you would like my recommendations for the blue ribbon panel to conduct this review, please do not hesitate to call, or better yet speak to Roscoe Bartlett R-MD.

Your Constituent,

Greg Hunter
ghunter@mannus.com

Greg,

Two, maybe three questions:

1. Do you have a net worth more than $10 million?

2. How much money have you contributed to said politician?

3. If you haven't sent ALOT of money why are you bothering to write your Congressman?

If the answer to #3 is "I dispatched some hookers along with the note I sent . . ." then I understand you may not be able to disclose your lobbying strategy here on a public internet forum.

=)

Disagree. We will never have a united front until peak oil is years in the rear view mirror. By then, it may be too late to do anything about it.

I tend to agree with this. In a sense it is already too late, and the actual ‘peak’ may be in the past, not that that matters much.

The difficulty is that it is a systemic problem (compare with smoking, asbestos in buildings, frogs dying, forests being decimated, teen drugging, car accidents, etc. though all those are also embedded in particular landscapes, societies, etc.) and the change required is a type II change, that is a ‘revolution’, a change in basic principles, rather than ‘tweaking,' ‘fixing’, ‘adjusting’ and so on.

Peak oilers, eco-types, seers and savants, your modest vegetarian bicycle riders, up-to-scratch scientists, even your mad doomers, don’t have an agenda they can agree on, which is understandable as the problem is so overwhelming, bringing so many parameters and ‘habits’ on board.

Second, and more importantly, they have no (or little) political power, and face opposition, which is determined, not to ignore the problem (they know all about it) but to handle it in their own way. They don’t want any interference, and hold the upper hand. So the scene is not ‘in getting the news out’ or ‘making ppl aware’ (say, though that might be a first step of some kind) but in gaining power to force the adoption of one or the other ‘solutions’, more properly, reactions. And that is a tough call.

Reason, scientific fact, understanding, have all gone down the river long ago.

Argh the river dried up. I forgot!