[trh44]

Your statements are just completely misguided. We're finding more and more sources of energy everyday. Our sources for energy isn't decreasing; it's increasing because techology allows us to extract more oil, more natural gas, more coal, and more uranium, as well as discovering newer and more efficient means to extract energy. We're also innovating on renewables; we're rapidly finding newer methods to get more energy out of wind and sun for example. Remember, we hadn't exploited natural gas for energy use until recently; technological innovations are helping us continually extract more and more energy out of that resource.

Before finding any uses for fossil fuels, we survived off of hydropower, an inifinite supply of energy. Predicting a doom and gloom because we'll run out of fossil fuels makes you forget that humans have survived for thousands and thousands of centuries without fossil fuels.

Further, stating that we'll run out of resources ignores the laws of supply and demand: if resources start to dry up, prices will increase, prompting people to find alternative sources for energy. Guess where the next growth industry will be, and where people will spend their money.

With economic growth, comes new and better ways of extracting energy (see natural gas and nuclear power, recent phenomenons). Humans are innovative, and we'll find even newer sources of energy in the future like we have been doing since the dawn of time.

[wazoox]

> We're finding more and more sources of energy everyday.

Excuse me, this flies in the face of everything I know of. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. No source of energy even remotely comparable to fossil fuels in power density and convenience is in sight. Unless you discovered a way to build a fusion reactor?

> Predicting a doom and gloom because we'll run out of fossil fuels makes you forget that humans have survived for thousands and thousands of centuries without fossil fuels.

Logical fallacy. Human beings will still exist in the future. What's in question is advanced civilisation. Read about how Rome looked like when Carolus Magnus came there, 350 years after its fall.

> Further, stating that we'll run out of resources ignores the laws of supply and demand: if resources start to dry up, prices will increase, prompting people to find alternative sources for energy.

Typical armchair economist bullshit; this really makes me angry nowadays. People will find alternative resources given that some exist.

> With economic growth, comes new and better ways of extracting energy ...

Hello, second law of thermodynamics calling. Exponential continuous growth is impossible. You know, like "it will cease someday or another, whether you like it or not".

This recent post on the oil drum is a pretty good digest: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7924

[lupatus]

I see your claim of peak oil and raise you one statue of David. Human creativity is one counter to the second law of thermodynamics.

Peak oil/resource depletion feels very much like global warming to me in that the main advocates of it make the data fit their theories instead of vice-versa. For example, back in '04, it was seriously argued that the peak oil crisis would cause me to now be living in a tipi in the post-oil dystopia. Instead, my living standard has only increased since '04.

Now, Ugo is arguing that even if we continue to acquire new sources of natural resources[1], that the resulting pollution will destroy civilization. Bollocks I say! Furthermore, I question why he and his ilk are so invested in the collapse of Western civilization.

[1] http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Debunking-the-Myth-of-P...

[wazoox]

> Peak oil/resource depletion feels very much like global warming to me in that the main advocates of it make the data fit their theories instead of vice-versa.

OK, please show me the data contradicting peak oil (even the IEA recognizes it now), or climate change. And I'm the one that "wants to believe". Heck, you people drive me mad.