I know. The media does this all the time. There is an implication that the truth lies somewhere inbetween. Ultimately though each person's argument must be subjected to scrutiny and evaluated on the merits (the kind of thing that happens here). But the media doesn't seem quite ready take those steps.

If you read the comments associated with the article, it is even more depressing. Lots of partisan bickering (I guess that is to be expected). And there are lots of people who read a bunch of garbage on the internet, and then consider themselves to be informed.

Agree and that is why I read blogs. Positions on both sides are put to the test and reasonable minds can decide for themselves who is making sense and who is just talking.

A quick reply to Saudi's position would be:

So a 1% improvement in recovery gives another year of oil.
Great.

Does it increase the amount of oil production? Does it say anything about what happens if we pull that extra year of oil quicker on the front end, what happens to the decline rate on the back end? High decline rates are not fun--talk to Mexico about that.