The End.

For some reason I've not come across the Ehrlich equation before. Ignorant me! Thanks a lot for that. It manages to quantify the problem very nicely.
 
StrongTurd said:
For some reason I've not come across the Ehrlich equation before. Ignorant me! Thanks a lot for that. It manages to quantify the problem very nicely.
Click to expand...

No prob. Thanks for the original posts. I found the articles fascinating, if not more than a little mind-boggling.
 
StrongTurd said:
Um, we ARE discussing peak oil here...
Click to expand...

Oh I thought you had added 2 + 2 and gotten 5. Or more likely you already had the answer in mind and the actual question didn't matter.

But thanks for the article, it was an interesting read.
 
icyrus said:
Oh I thought you had added 2 + 2 and gotten 5. Or more likely you already had the answer in mind and the actual question didn't matter.

But thanks for the article, it was an interesting read.
Click to expand...

Sure, no problem.
 
The Ehrlich equation? Why, yes! The infamous Dr Paul Ehrlich, who panicked the world into believing in The Coming Ice Age and Permanent Famine in America in the 1970s. Remember his book The Population Bomb? It was all the rage in the late 60s and 70s. There's hardly a more discredited "scientist" than Dr Paul Ehrlich. And yet his political cronies and running-dogs still love to quote him, because he's a Progressive Socialist and therefore Acceptable to the Chattering Classes.

IN 1980 he famously had a wager with Julian Simon, regarding scarcity of resources the price of certain natural resources ten years hence (which Simon let Ehrlich choose).

He lost badly.

Ehrlich has been spectacularaly wrong on every preduction he has ever made made, no doubt with the aid of his (in)famous Equation. From a scientific viewpoint it has absolutely zero value. Politics, of course, is another matter entirely, especially with those who buy into his Chicken Little doomsday agenda.
 
Last edited:
Arthur said:
The Ehrlich equation? Why, yes! The infamous Dr Paul Ehrlich, who panicked the world into believing in The Coming Ice Age and Permanent Famine in America in the 1970s. Remember his book The Population Bomb? It was all the rage in the late 60s and 70s. There's hardly a more discredited scientists than Dr Paul Ehrlich. And yet his political cronies and running-dogs still love to quote him, because he's a Progressive Socialist and therefore Acceptable to the Chattering Classes.

IN 1980 he famously had a wager with Julian Simon, regarding scarcity of resources the price of certain natural resources ten years hence (which Simon let Ehrlich choose).

He lost badly.

Ehrlich has been spectacularaly wrong on every preduction he has ever made made, no doubt with the aid of his (in)famous Equation. From a scientific viewpoint it has absolutely zero value. Politics, of course, is another matter entirely, especially with those who buy into his Chicken Little doomsday agenda.
Click to expand...

Ah, isn't Google a wonderful thing? All of a sudden we've all become experts on everything under the sun! Well, I asked the mighty Mr. Google what he thinks of your post and he said to me that there are as many sites vindicating Mr. Ehrlich than there are those that debunk him. I'm going to refrain from posting links; Mr. Google is available 24/7.

Methinks that you can prove or disprove anything if you search around on Google. Ultimately, one has to trust one's own common sense. So unless you can explain to me how infinite growth can take place when you've got a finite resource base then I prefer to stay a Chicken Little doomer. I thought not. :D
 
StrongTurd said:
Ah, isn't Google a wonderful thing? ... Methinks that you can prove or disprove anything if you search around on Google.
Click to expand...
Indeed, this is true. You can find anyone saying anything at all. One of the chief benefits of an education is that it helps with crap-detection.

Many more sites vindicating Ehrlich? I think not - you can't possibly have reviewed even a dozen. But let's grant your point for a moment: truth is not decided by counting noses. Or websites.

The Ehrlich-Simon bet was world famous. It was open and public. And Ehrlich's spectacular loss was widely reported in both the academic and popular Press. Sure the losers have tried to wriggle out of it (don't they always?). But Simon let Ehrlich choose the commodities, he let Ehrlich choose the prices, and he gave Ehrlich the overwhelming odds. All he challenged was his basic premise. Even with that, Ehrlich lost. Case closed.

Oh and by the way, my knowledge comes not from the internet. I was heavily into this sort of thing before the internet was invented. I'd prefer not to quote Wikipedia (in fact I detest it), but for some subjects it's a handy source for some data, and it does at least provide a link that people can follow up for themselves, with pointers to related materials, keywords, and issues.
 
Last edited:
Arthur said:
Indeed, this is true. You can find anyone saying anything at all. One of the chief benefits of an education is that it helps with crap-detection.

Many more sites vindicating Ehrlich? I think not - you can't possibly have reviewed even a dozen. But let's grant your point for a moment: truth is not decided by counting noses. Or websites.

The Ehrlich-Simon bet was world famous. It was open and public. And Ehrlich's spectacular loss was widely reported in both the academic and popular Press. Sure the losers have tried to wriggle out of it (don't they always?). But Simon let Ehrlich choose the commodities, he let Ehrlich choose the prices, and he gave Ehrlich the overwhelming odds. All he challenged was his basic premise. Even with that, Ehrlich lost. Case closed.

Oh and by the way, my knowledge comes not from the internet. I was heavily into this sort of thing before the internet was invented. I'd prefer not to quote Wikipedia (in fact I detest it), but for some subjects it's a handy source for some data, and it does at least provide a link that people can follow up for themselves, with pointers to related materials, keywords, and issues.
Click to expand...

Arthur, you are making a classic mistake in debating here. Whether or not Ehrlich won or loss the bet is immaterial here. Debate the point, not the credibility of the man.

Start by looking at the equation. Ask the following question: Does it make sense to you? If yes, then accept it. If no, the go to Google and look up the Ehrlich equation, not the Ehrlich bet. The two concepts are different. Find a credible source, that means a recognised publication or respected journal (not a blog), read it critically, and then make a decision. You have done none of that.

Newscientist for example is a recognised publication.

Now really, I would expect to have to explain this to 14 year olds.
 
StrongTurd said:
Here's today's doomer porn from myBB's resident uber doomer. It is a full 9 pages in length but it is truly some of the best material that I've ever encountered during my 12 years on the Internet. I would really encourage you to read it as it explains exactly why you can kiss your pension and your life savings goodbye and why your very way of life is about to come to an end. Don't worry, it's not boring at all. It tells a compelling story and almost reads like a good novel. Enjoy.
Click to expand...

I don't know how you made the fantastic leap from an article about a bunch of major investment banks collapsing (which is a fact, by the way, though not one of the apocalyptic significance you imply, in fact it's comparatively mundane), to comments like "uber doomer" and "why your very way of life is about to come to an end". Maybe you don't actually understand the content of the article you linked to.
 
Turtle said:
I don't know how you made the fantastic leap from an article about a bunch of major investment banks collapsing (which is a fact, by the way, though not one of the apocalyptic significance you imply, in fact it's comparatively mundane), to comments like "uber doomer" and "why your very way of life is about to come to an end". Maybe you don't actually understand the content of the article you linked to.
Click to expand...

Granted, maybe I don't. However, you've got to ask yourself if someone that calls the current financial crisis and the fact that almost every major economy in the world is now in recession "mundane" knows any better.
 
Tassidar said:
Arthur, you are making a classic mistake in debating here. Whether or not Ehrlich won or loss the bet is immaterial here. Debate the point, not the credibility of the man.
Click to expand...
Good point. Though what you call a mistake is in fact quite intentional ... sometimes the credibility of the person proposing an idea is relevant, especially when it is one laden with a heavy political and social agenda, as Ehrlich's has been for four decades. He's an entymologist, for heaven's sake. And he also has a very long and consistent record of being 180 degrees wrong - and this is very relevant when it comes to discussing his current claims, especially when he flights a bogus 'equation'.

Very few are scientifically qualified to examine the 'Ehrlich Equation' on its own merits. There are so many huge and undemonstrated assumptions that it's very hard to know where to begin. For example, the relationship between development and carbon output is not a necessary one (will it still hold if 90% of our energy is say thermonuclear?). Financial indicators of development are important but not comprehensive - there are a whole host of other 'soft' factors that most people rate as equally important, such as 'contentment', 'security', 'happiness', to start off the list. Then there's the mysterious 'Technology Factor' - something not known to any recognisable science. The whole 'equation' proposes to measure 'impact on the planet' without any consideration of the current condition, total resource, or any of the huge and unknown variables such as solar radiation, mantle-sourced carbon-heavy gases, oceans, etc. A scientifically credible 'impact' equation must of necessity include a parameter for current state in order to assess the change in relation to a future state. Ehrlich's has none - his equation is as free-floating as his greenhouse gases. Besides, from a planetary science perspective, human beings are barely recognisable and almost totally insignificant. Ehrlch's is such a loony and far-fetched and utterly unscientific notion -- with just enough of a veneer of pseudo-scientific babble to fool the unschooled -- that it gets a good press in certain media. But one only has to see the use of other 'scientific' terms like 'capitalism' to quicky recognise the political agenda behind the bogus science.

Ehrlich is a charlatan, and that is utterly relevant to the argument.

Ever tried to prove to a skeptic that the moon's not made of green cheese? There's just so much you have to establish up front, it's not worth the effort. In the end the overall credibility of the protagonist is at issue. Ehrlich has none - except in certain Environmentalist circles, where the socialist agenda is more important than truth.

The record is clear to any impartial observer: Paul Ehrlich has been 100% wrong in every prediction he has ever made. Though the famous wager was very public (it arose because Ehrlich opposed Simon's data that Ehrlich was wrong), Ehrlich quietly mailed Simon a cheque for $567.07, though he never publicly admitted to any error even though he was totally wrong on every point. Simon keeps the cheque framed on his office wall, a small but highly symbolic warrant to the victory of true science over politics and the bogus science it peddles. The day will come, hopefully soon, when we'll see this nonsense for what it is -- bogus pseudo-science, like 'Nazi Science' or 'Islamic Science', or 'Christian Science' or 'Chinese Science' ... and the whole gamut of pathological and ultimately anti-human ideologies dressed up in (pseudo) scientific terms.
 
Last edited:
In the first year of the current bear market, the market has fallen more steeply than it did during the first years of the Great Depression's bear markets. After adjusting for inflation, stocks are more than 40 percent lower than they were at their 2007 high (and more than 50 percent lower than their 2000 high).
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/10/11/business/20081011_BEAR_MARKETS.html

Even though Wall Street crashed in '29, it wasn't until June '32 when it bottomed out. This time round we're crashing faster that during the GD.

I doubt that most of the eternal capitalists on this board will comprehend the full significance of this but don't say that you've not been informed.
 
No more prizes for guessing when TSHTF; it has already happened. The climate has now also tended its resignation but will work a short notice period until 2038 before finally retiring:

A new study published by The Open Atmospheric Science Journal says the concentration of CO2 in the planet’s atmosphere has reached the point at which irreversible changes to climate start. Even if the concentration of carbon dioxide is lowered from its current level in record time, the catastrophic effects will still occur. The scientists give us about 30 years till the end of the planet to which humans are adapted.
Click to expand...

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter if you are one of those types that believe that climate change is caused by natural causes (there's many of those around these parts). Whatever you choose to believe, it still is GAME OVER.
 
Wow! Look at this:

US seeks 300 billion dlrs from Gulf states: report

KUWAIT CITY (AFP) – The United States has asked four oil-rich Gulf states for close to 300 billion dollars to help it curb the global financial meltdown, Kuwait's daily Al-Seyassah reported Thursday.

Quoting "highly informed" sources, the daily said Washington has asked Saudi Arabia for 120 billion dollars, the United Arab Emirates for 70 billion dollars, Qatar for 60 billion dollars and was seeking 40 billion dollars from Kuwait.

Al-Seyassah said Washington sought the amount as "financial aid" to face the fallout of the financial crisis and help prevent its economy from sliding into a painful recession.

The daily said the United States plans to use the funds to help the ailing automobile industry , banks and other companies suffering from the global financial turmoil.

The four nations, all members of OPEC, produce together 14 million barrels of oil per day, around half of the cartel's production and about 17 percent of world supplies.

The four states are estimated to have amassed close to 1.5 trillion dollars in surplus in the past six years due to high oil prices that rocketed above 147 dollars in July before sliding to just above 50 dollars.

The daily also said that the United States has asked Kuwait to forgive its Iraqi debt estimated at around 16 billion dollars.
Click to expand...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081120/bs_afp/financeeconomyusgulf_081120072928

Oh how the mighty have fallen! Surely this is unprecedented in modern history?

One also has to wonder why they are asking for $300 billion, which is exactly the same of money that was used to bail out the banks. Hmmmm...

Suppose the US does default. Citigroup and Detroit go under. Then all the other banks. Then eastern Europe. Then that takes down western Europe where the banks are leveraged 60:1 with heavy exposure to investments and loans in eastern Europe. Then China and so on and so on. What are we talking about when we say "its over"? How bad do you think it could get?
 
Paralysis in Washington:

“Right now, it's almost too big for people to comprehend,” says Donald W. Riegle Jr., who chaired the Senate Banking Committee during the savings and loan crisis nearly 20 years ago. “You have divided government and a form of paralysis. And the main leadership force—the President—is sort of missing in action.”
Click to expand...

Even more surprising, Paulson made public comments twice this week that the government’s efforts had succeeded in stabilizing the financial system.

On Thursday, he made that point in a major speech at the very moment Congressional leaders were holding a news conference to say there was no compromise agreement to bail out the nation’s automakers.

“It’s not clear to me that we’ve stabilized the financial system—the markets don’t think that,” says Lawrence White, a former white house economist and regulator, now with NYU’s Stern School of Business. “I'm really surprised that Paulson has thrown in the towel.”
Click to expand...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27840804

The effects of all of this still has to filter through to main street.
 
StrongTurd said:
Wow! Look at this:



http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081120/bs_afp/financeeconomyusgulf_081120072928

Oh how the mighty have fallen! Surely this is unprecedented in modern history?

One also has to wonder why they are asking for $300 billion, which is exactly the same of money that was used to bail out the banks. Hmmmm...

Suppose the US does default. Citigroup and Detroit go under. Then all the other banks. Then eastern Europe. Then that takes down western Europe where the banks are leveraged 60:1 with heavy exposure to investments and loans in eastern Europe. Then China and so on and so on. What are we talking about when we say "its over"? How bad do you think it could get?
Click to expand...

Mighty have fallen? Kuwait, Emirates and Saudi Arabia have been benefiting from Petrodollars for a long time. The Chinese and before them the Koreans and Japanese have been exporting first and foremost to the US of A. The mighty haven't fallen, if push comes to shove, the US can raise the prices of it's F18s or Apaches they sell to these countries and demand more contributions in the form of protection money. The Saudis, Emirates and Kuwait will gladly pay it, because without US troops they'll be ruled by Teheran within a short while. Meanwhile China needs to maintain a 9% GDP growth, if it doesn't it risks serious instability. The Chinese would gladly give the US $. The Japanese who see the US as their main ally are happy to help the US out, even though their own economy is in a poor shape, they're entering their 9th recession and their economy has been in a state of deflation for a long time now. They're adamant that the USD will remain as reserve currency. The French and Germans would possibly like the Euro to assume that role but a strong Euro would spell disaster for their own exports. Anyway compared to Japan the French and Germans do not have a voice. Everyone of these countries needs a strong US consumer and a strong US military (bar China on the military bit). Europe on the other hand has made some serious mistakes of it's own, see my earlier post and is in a worse shape overall. The European economy like it's population is in recession or in stagnation - bar for some Central European states which are still managing a 1.5% growth (eg Poland). Overall things look bleak for everyone - not just the US of A. Teheran and Venezuela, chief anti-US regimes out there are running a massive public debt and the low oil price is causing serious issues for them. Europe is also standing up more to Moscow afraid of being at it's energy supply mercy and Moscow itself needed a lot of help from its oligarchs who had to pull $$$ out of Western Europe at Putin's orders and put them back in Russia. Since this is everyone's problem and many are in a worse shape than USA or have revolution or change of government to fear (China, Iran, Venezuela) everyone will have to sort this out and everyone will fall if there is anyone to fall, that is of course not mentioning that Pakistan, Hungary and Iceland have already fallen.
 
PeterCH said:
Mighty have fallen? Kuwait, Emirates and Saudi Arabia have been benefiting from Petrodollars for a long time. The Chinese and before them the Koreans and Japanese have been exporting first and foremost to the US of A. The mighty haven't fallen, if push comes to shove, the US can raise the prices of it's F18s or Apaches they sell to these countries and demand more contributions in the form of protection money. The Saudis, Emirates and Kuwait will gladly pay it, because without US troops they'll be ruled by Teheran within a short while. Meanwhile China needs to maintain a 9% GDP growth, if it doesn't it risks serious instability. The Chinese would gladly give the US $. The Japanese who see the US as their main ally are happy to help the US out, even though their own economy is in a poor shape, they're entering their 9th recession and their economy has been in a state of deflation for a long time now. They're adamant that the USD will remain as reserve currency. The French and Germans would possibly like the Euro to assume that role but a strong Euro would spell disaster for their own exports. Anyway compared to Japan the French and Germans do not have a voice. Everyone of these countries needs a strong US consumer and a strong US military (bar China on the military bit). Europe on the other hand has made some serious mistakes of it's own, see my earlier post and is in a worse shape overall. The European economy like it's population is in recession or in stagnation - bar for some Central European states which are still managing a 1.5% growth (eg Poland). Overall things look bleak for everyone - not just the US of A. Teheran and Venezuela, chief anti-US regimes out there are running a massive public debt and the low oil price is causing serious issues for them. Europe is also standing up more to Moscow afraid of being at it's energy supply mercy and Moscow itself needed a lot of help from its oligarchs who had to pull $$$ out of Western Europe at Putin's orders and put them back in Russia. Since this is everyone's problem and many are in a worse shape than USA or have revolution or change of government to fear (China, Iran, Venezuela) everyone will have to sort this out and everyone will fall if there is anyone to fall, that is of course not mentioning that Pakistan, Hungary and Iceland have already fallen.
Click to expand...

Regardless of which political twist you want to put onto this, the fact remains that the USA (and, by implication, everybody else) is experiencing the most dire financial crisis since at least the 1930s.

This morning's (22/11) New York Times reports that the Standard & Poor's index of 500 stocks dropped more that 6 percent on both August 19 and August 20, 2008. Not to worry, that has happened before. Most recently, it happened on July 20 and 21 of 1933. Try not to worry about it.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X