In general the difference between oil and food is that food (locally) depends on the weather and the weather changes on a year to year basis. The population is sometimes over the carrying capacity for that year, but most of the time is substantially over.
Famines kill poor older people and poor people's children mostly, because they are not powerfull enough to fight for food, or have savings enough to buy it, or economically usefull enough to borrow money and buy food.
What is happening in oil now is more like shifting ecotomes during climate change. The rain just stops falling as frequently and intensely as it used to.

Hmm

1.) Fighting for it ? Yep
2.) Only the strongest/wealthiest get it ? Yep
3.) Economically powerful enough to borrow to buy it ? Yep

Actually my point is in the real world everything your saying is not happening is happening.

Geologic depletion itself presents the problem as a slow steady decline in most models its not clear that they are correct.

But reality is a different picture. In a few years we will know the truth but the chances of you being correct in your description are slim just like I'm willing to bet 100 dollars that future production will be less then is predicted by the model used in this paper. Are you willing to take that bet ?

I'm glad you agree with me. What made you change your mind? (Just trolling! I'm joking, joking!)

:)

Actually its important the reason for the production curves for oil is because of above ground factors certainly the details of the reservoir effect its production profile but we could have produced our reserves for 1000 years if we chose to.
Or never for that matter.

Geologies input is given a certain extraction profile whats the final result.
Everything else from the extraction profile i.e who/what/when/where/why of oil extraction on up is above ground decisions.

This is important because real future oil production is at the moment on a month by month basis depending on geopolitical events and hurricanes in the gulf. And major disruption in oil supplies from now on out will probably lead to war that will further disrupt oil supplies. After the US elections tension may drop and we are back worried about geologic depletion but its going to keep flipping back and forth.

As we flip this coin so to speak the chances are incredibility high that above ground factors will result in lower oil production then we would see vs the baseline geologic depletion.

At the longest we are at best on a five year horizon within five years peak oil will have to be accepted within five years after that chances are society will be quite different from what it is today.

This is certain even from the geologic graph.

Some dodgy pseudopsychology in posts above:

It is my opinion this is linked to our domain specific neural wiring that focuses (as it historically always did) on the present.

the simple fact that we intrinsically desire to be misinformed. Its part of our neural makeup.

On the contrary, one of the most important facts of human psychology is great individual differences in many respects. For instance Mozart said he considered death would be his truest friend, and Schubert every night hoped he would not wake up the next morning. In a late decadent society such as here/now, there will be a preponderance of short-termism, wishfulthinking and pretentiousness, but still it is not universal. But some behaviours dominate a society. The wastefulness of high-livers tends to defeat the efforts of more prudent others. High spenders force up prices for everyone else. Peaceful people are dominated by warmongers. Etc.

few people understand the importance of true peer review. Despite the problems with peer review its the basic principle of science in my opinion.

No. Some more basic principles of science are basing one's conclusions on demonstrable evidence and reasoning. And getting beyond mere "authority" assertions by providing justification of one's assertions by presenting one's data and reasoning. This means that everyone can judge the scientific case for themself (in principle) rather than having to rely on some contest of either status or numbers or a mix thereof. I didn't take the view that AnthroGlobalWarming is happening until I saw the case behind the (near)consensus. The (near)consensus (of intellectual prostitutes) is certainly utterly wrong on other matters such as the hiv-aids hoax.