Sunday, September 25, 2011

Oil, liberty and so much more.

Peak Oil Scam is Based Upon Ideological, Fact-Blind Liberalism

While it cannot come as a surprise after so many liberal hoaxes, it’s still shocking to find we’ve been duped again—this time by the “Peak Oil” myth. Peak Oil is the theory the world is on the verge of a catastrophic decline in global petroleum reserves that will result in major energy crises causing chaos across the world. This notion has now been proved demonstrably false—yet, how was it accepted in the first place?

It was the result of the hypothesizing of noted geologist Marion King Hubbert who claimed as a simple fact that oil production would reach a peak and then decline by 1970. But instead of being based upon provable data, this idea was the result of Hubbert’s extreme leftist beliefs called “Technocracy,” which for short a time swept the world, capturing millions of cult-like followers. This is similar to the millions who pathetically cling to the Global Warming myth despite repeated examples of falsified proofs surfacing weekly.

Peak Oil theory has radically affected generations of leaders, public policy makers and the general populace. In doing so it has robbed countless persons of cheaper energy and their countries of smarter energy policies. Further, Peak Oil has been taken by the environmental cabal as another proof that mankind is badly out of touch with the earth. But all recent data shows the globe is not running out of oil, but to the contrary we now have more discovered oil than ever before. And as technologyimproves, the number gets even higher. So how did Hubbert get it so badly wrong? This essay tells the story of Hubbert’s massive mistake which still gravely deforms global energy policy to this day.

I. Peak Oil—An Alarming Theory

A. Hubbert’s Peak Oil Theory

Peak Oil is a scientific theory predicting collapse of global oil production by geologist M King Hubbert. It is claimed the earth is running out of petroleum, sooner rather than later. This notion is prized by environmentalists who therefore demand cuts in oil consumption, more “green” energy, and other measures against “Man-made Global Warming.” One site describes this:

Peak oil is the point in time when the maximum rate of global petroleum extraction is reached. Afterward, production enters terminal decline. The aggregate production rate from an oil field over time usually grows exponentially until the rate peaks and then declines—sometimes rapidly—until the field is depleted.

B. Energy Apocalypse

Various doomsday scenarios have been suggested as a result of reaching Peak Oil, as described in Kunstler’s The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of Oil, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century. A video series created by The Nation magazine, titled “Peak Oil and a Changing Climate,” is described here:

Scientists, researchers and writers interviewed throughout “Peak Oil and a Changing Climate” describe the diminishing returns our world can expect as it deals with the consequences of peak oil even as it continues to pretend it doesn’t exist. These experts predict substantially increased transportation costs, decreased industrial production, unemployment, hunger & social chaos as supplies of fuel dwindle & eventually disappear.

What many leftist writers suggest is a coming apocalyptic scenario where stronger and wealthier nations battle against the poorer ones for ever-dwindling resources, creating Peak Oil Wars while production and farming ebb, as mass starvation and transportation collapses play out in the background. But is this what the near future holds for earth?

II. Marion King Hubbert—Mr. Peak Oil

A. Advent of a King

So who was Marion King Hubbert, Mr Peak Oil? One writer describes him:

Marion King Hubbert was one of the most eminent—and controversial—earth scientists of his time. Born on a ranch in San Saba, Texas in 1903, he did his university education, including his Ph.D., at the University of Chicago. One of his fundamental objectives was to move geology from what he called its “natural history phase” into its “physical science phase,” firmly based in physics, chemistry and, in particular, rigorous mathematics.

Hubbert had a powerful mind, taking three different degrees as an undergraduate. But he also had, as is true of many intellectuals, a bent towards demanding leadership of the elites over the uneducated. This is the model used by all socialists, Marxists, and other progressives, first adumbrated by Joachim of Flora in the 12th century (see: Obama, the Duke of Babylon & the Christian Origins of Marxism). In Hubbert’s case, his ideas took root in a leftist movement called “Technocracy,” quite reminiscent of August Comte’s plan to have all of society run by an autocracy of “scientists” (see: Sources of Madness—The Insane Thinkers of the Modern Age)

B. Scientific Prophet of Doom

Hubbert gave interesting quotes revealing how ideologically leftist he was in his beliefs, being anti-growth and socialist-minded. Further, it is fascinating how he deluded himself into thinking his own area of expertise—geology—was the study of studies for mankind as a whole. But, as the saying goes—to the carpenter, all the world looks like a nail. He writes:

The knowledge essential to competent intellectual leadership in this situation is preeminently geological - a knowledge of the earth’s mineral and energy resources. The importance of any science, socially, is its effect on what people think and what they do. It is time earth scientists again become a major force in how people think rather than how they live.

He also doomsayed the coming chaos after Peak Oil:

The steep ride up the and down the energy curve is the most abnormal thing that has ever happened in human history. Most of human history is a no-growth situation. Our culture is built on growth and that phase of human history is almost over and we are not prepared for it. Our biggest problem is not the end of our resources. That will be gradual. Our biggest problem is a cultural problem. We don’t know how to cope with it.

III. The “Technocracy” Movement: Socialist Scientific Tyranny

A. Technocracy

M. King Hubbert’s answer to the problems of society was a movement called “Technocracy”—but what did Technocrats believe? In short, they claimed all politicians were incompetent in our age of technology. Therefore, they needed to step aside to allow the “experts”—scientists, but especially engineers—to lead mankind into the future. This is exactly what the deranged Comte’ taught, as well.

B. Anti-Capitalism

More darkly, yet befitting Marxist dogma, Technocrats believed anti-capitalist theory... “The Technocracy movement aims to establish a zero growth socio-economic system.” They rejected all economic systems, even Soviet, claiming a higher level of socialist purity of a non-economic system.

One author describes their bizarre ideas:

Technocracy claimed politics & economic arrangements based on the “Price System” (i.e., traditional economics) were antiquated. The only hope of building a successful modern world was to let engineers & other technology experts run the country on engineering principles. Rejecting all traditional political science, Technocrats refused to even use standard geographical maps as their boundaries were political, so only referred to states by geographical coordinates.

C. Energy as Money

But the movement was really focused upon turning money currency into “energy units” while making scientists in various disciplines the default leaders of society. This is almost an exact replica of madman August Comte’s Positivist society, which had absolutely no human rights or laws for private property. According to another writer:

Technocracy was a weird movement flourishing briefly during the Great Depression, advocating the merger of all of North and Central America into one nation, ruled by scientists & engineers replacing politicians. The dollar was to be replaced by the erg, the centimeter-gram-second (CGS) unit of energy. The movement’s fondness for matching red and grey uniforms & militaristic fleets of grey vehicles brought it under great suspicion given the state of Europe, and interest in the movement soon collapsed.

IV. Meaning of “Technocracy”—or Why “Science” Trumps Democracy

A. Scientific Heaven Earth

Technocracy represented a summary of the classic progressive dream of using people to build paradise on earth via scientific humanism while an elite herd the dumb masses towards enlightenment. This audacious idea was first outlined in Joachim of Flora‘s 13th century writings, and has been the model in every leftist scheme since. As one writer describes the movement:

Technocracy was a utopian dream, a cult-like movement, and a concept that captured the public’s attention. The fingerprints of Technocracy are deeply impressed upon today’s political, economic, military, social and spiritual landscape. There isn’t anything Technocracy hasn’t touched, chiefly because as a type of meta-philosophy, it rests on the most basic principle of human rebellion: By pursuing god-like illumination, Man can become as God. Man, not God, is the ultimate engineer of human destiny—therefore, Man is God. Technocracy represents the pinnacle of Man’s quest for self-deification: The perfectibility of Man through the thoughts of his mind and the subsequent works of his hands. It’s the cosmic taunt, stemming from the most ancient of days. What God can do, Man can do. The Garden of Eden will be remade.

B. Scientism

The cult of science, or Scientism, and the desire to see society run with exactitude by “experts” predates August Comte, going back to the ancient Gnostics, according to Eric Voegelin in New Science of Politics. Voegelin’s theory was the logic of ancient Gnosticism reasserted itself in socialism’s infatuation with a society run by elites who directed the ignorant. Gnostics taught salvation came by way of education, as opposed to the work of God. Notes one author:

Technocracy in the modern sense is an idea that came to prominence during the early decades of the 20th century. Auguste Comte (1798-1857) offered mankind a “Religion of Humanity.” Understood through the laws of science, Humanity was the “only true Great Being,” and thus Humanity should “direct every aspect of our life, individual or collective.” Comte called this Positivism, and viewed it as the pinnacle stage of human development; scientific laws determine truth, therefore only a scientifically enlightened elite should guide humanity. Positivism was a “regenerating doctrine,” an “all-embracing creed” that would lead the world out of ignorance, corruption, and anarchy through a positive, scientific worldview.

C. Engineers Are Gods

It turns out Hubbert was merely a conceited worshiper of his own expertise, seeing in it an opportunity for godlike guidance and salvation of the ignorant masses, being a celebrant of the religion of humanism. In this sense, he like many other members of the cult of Scientism developed an unhealthy, and even malignantly narcissistic insanity. For no one in their right-mind would believe science is a fit replacement for religion. Highly self-regarding writer Thorstein Veblen and his Darwinist interpretation of society were of special preeminence to Technocrats.

States another author:

At its core Technocracy seeks the “engineered society”—not through conventionally understood ideologies such as capitalism or socialism, but through a scientific/engineering mindset. In this sense technology plays a defining role in society, and “social engineers” wield the technical means to transform a population. From economics and industry to population size and general education, the desire of Technocracy was to remake the world in a way that exemplified “efficiency” and guaranteed social harmony.

V. Death of Peak Oil: Why The Theory is Wrong

A. The Misinformed King

Hubbert was wrong for a host of reasons, but specifically because he neither understood how newer technology affects the oil industry, nor how economics works in general. Daniel Yergin writes,

“Hubbert was imaginative and innovative,” recalled Peter Rose, who was Hubbert’s boss at the U.S. Geological Survey. But he had “no concept of technological change, economics or how new resource plays evolve. It was a very static view of the world.” Hubbert also assumed that there could be an accurate estimate of ultimately recoverable resources, when in fact it is a constantly moving target.


Hubbert, as another worshiper of the science of humanism, greatly overestimated the ability of “experts” to understand the world and control it. Worse, his egotism informed him humanity could not survive without such insane conceit. Adds Yergin:

Overall U.S. oil production has increased more than 10% since 2008. Net oil imports reached a high point of 60% in 2005, but today, thanks to increased production and greater energy efficiency (plus the use of ethanol), imports are down to 47%.

B. American Oil

In other words, America has yet to “peak” in oil production, but will continue to raise its output for the foreseeable future due to changing economics and technology. Further, we could produce even more oil if the politicians would step aside from renewed exploration. For example, consider that Montana and Dokata’s Bakken formationcontains over 500 billion barrells of petroleum, or consider what is held in the Colorado Rockies alone:

Studies over the years by industry and government alike estimate that there may be between 800 billion and more than one trillion barrels of oil locked up in the Colorado rocks—nearly 3 times known reserves in Saudi Arabia.

Meanwhile, Exxon in the US Gulf just discovered three majors finds directly after the end of the Obama moratorium. In fact, according to the Saudi Gazette, America will become the NUMBER ONE oil producer by year 2017! And much of America is unexplored for oil formations with modern technology because of regressive and illogical bans of drilling.So who knows how much more petroleum lies below our land and beyond our shores.

The fact is that all “known recoverable” petroleum reserves are constantly in flux because of continually improved extraction technology and newly discovered pools. But such facts, and inconvenient details are quickly swept under the carpet like so much embarrassing detritus by environmentalists.

C. American Gas

But these oil facts do not even address massive natural gas reserves discovered in the Marcellus Shale, which holds 84 trillion cubic feet, nor America’s newest petroleum and natuiral gas bonanza—Eagle Ford in Texas. America currently has over 100 years of natural gas.

Yet, Global Warming activists desperately fight against “fracking” use despite no major problems associated with the technology. It seems these modern Luddites cannot abide the idea of economic growth, much like M King Hubbert, despite their underlying beliefs continually being disproved.

VI. Conclusion

In summary, God help us from humanists similar to “Peak Oil King” Hubbert who will not rest until all of humanity lies in chains under command of megalomaniac busybodies intent on “saving” humanity by way of tyrannical, bureaucratic slavery—designed to cancel our God-given liberties.

1 comment:

  1. Once you are informed that you own Barnett Shale Mineral Rights, you should do extensive research about the topic if you have no idea what this might be.

    ReplyDelete