The Etp Model Has Been Empirically Confirmed

Status
Not open for further replies.
Exactly. You are just like Beer w/Straw.
You mean, like most folks arguing against you here, we all seem to have bothered to attend class, do the work and pass the courses? Ok, I'll conceded that point.

Your mind is made up before you even start.
My mind is made up that your dumb cluck argument was over before I started to read it. I'm just the umpteenth person to tell you this.

That is what it means to be closed minded.
Yes I would say you demonstrate that quite well. "Deliberate ignorance" I think some posters said.

Yeah, that's real open minded of you. I am innocent until proven guilty, you jerk.
You proved yourself guilty of fraud in your OP. Whether you are the other poster known as "BW Hill" is practically moot at this point. However, your guilt follows you in this regard.

By your logic, everyone you accuse of being wellwisher, must be wellwisher, because denying it would prove it was true. This is like a witch trial!
No, everyone who posts trash like wellwisher runs the risk of being asked if he or she is wellwisher. And, unlike the persecution of women as witches, your offenses against the intelligence of average readers are drenched in the guilt of willful ignorance (or the pretense of that), condemning yourself of trolling. And while the question of dousing you hinges on who asks to have you banned, your readers are politely asking you to go jump in a lake.

And wellwisher is also BWHill is also Futilitist! Ha ha. You are some kind of nutty conspiracy theorist. :confused:
One scammer with multiple sock puppets does constitute a conspiracy. However you are welcome to discuss that among yourselves.

Yes there is. I have a copy of the report.
No, you have one item, with no traceable author, no endorsement by any credentialed expert, posted on the author's own web page, with nothing that comes close to qualifying this as a "copy of the report". "Report to who?" I asked and you still have not answered. Of course it's a fraud. It has an invented "report number" which is meaningless to anyone who accesses it. It's not good enough to be hoax, so we are left to refer to you as a scammer, a fraud, a troll. and (IMO) probably worse.

Here are some screen captures I just made especially for you:

Etp%20Aqueous%20proof%201_zpseg8q5z0d.jpg


Etp%20Aqueous%20proof%202_zps7oh1fmsa.jpg


Etp%20Aqueous%20proof%203_zpsywxntddo.jpg


Etp%20Aqueous%20proof%204_zpskc5pstdy.jpg


As you can clearly see, it is *WAY* over your head.
Quite the opposite. Technical presentation is way over your own head. Otherwise you wouldn't be posting it (if it isn't yours) or you wouldn't be making it up (if it is yours). In either case, you lose. And posting screen shots makes no difference. Except for the possibility that it increases your ability to insert malware somewhere. The only other thing you have done is to bury the inane logo and "report number" as you have evidently now scrubbed the site of its reference to BW Hill's purported degrees.

You are wrong.
All of the faults of the other readers here, taken in the cumulative, pale in comparison to the idiotic proposition and defenses you've gives. The sham pretense that you have posed a science question which can be intelligently treated in a reply, has not fooled the readers. At best you are a troll. But more likely, as the evidence seems to suggest, you are probably a scammer posing as a troll. A more guilty conscience than this is possible. You may be up to something worse. Why else continue to play this game?

How does it connect to me? I never claimed to have a Master's Degree in Mining & Manufacturing Engineering. Where the hell did you get that idea?
My bad. You actually said Yeah, I guess, other than running a mining and manufacturing engineering association with a staff of physicists and engineers, and having a Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering, and a Master of Science in Project Management. What are your qualifications?

Gee, by preponderance of the evidence you are indeed BW Hill.

You are trolling.
Contending with a troll is not trolling, but way to play the pathological game of blame-shifting.

I want my apology now.
Ok, I am sorry for accusing you of having a Master's in Mining in Manufacturing when in fact you admitted to running a mining and manufacturing engineering association.

The Hill's Group Mining and Manufacturing Engineering

The Hill's Group™ is an association of consulting engineers, and professional project managers.


Busted, dude.
 
I
Curious bewilderment is one reason.

I never knew much about the oil industry in the first place.


And it is good comedy like this:

Loved when the scientific literature was mentioned as reading material for the congressional bonehead society.
 
You mean, like most folks arguing against you here, we all seem to have bothered to attend class, do the work and pass the courses? Ok, I'll conceded that point.


My mind is made up that your dumb cluck argument was over before I started to read it. I'm just the umpteenth person to tell you this.


Yes I would say you demonstrate that quite well. "Deliberate ignorance" I think some posters said.


You proved yourself guilty of fraud in your OP. Whether you are the other poster known as "BW Hill" is practically moot at this point. However, your guilt follows you in this regard.


No, everyone who posts trash like wellwisher runs the risk of being asked if he or she is wellwisher. And, unlike the persecution of women as witches, your offenses against the intelligence of average readers are drenched in the guilt of willful ignorance (or the pretense of that), condemning yourself of trolling. And while the question of dousing you hinges on who asks to have you banned, your readers are politely asking you to go jump in a lake.


One scammer with multiple sock puppets does constitute a conspiracy. However you are welcome to discuss that among yourselves.


No, you have one item, with no traceable author, no endorsement by any credentialed expert, posted on the author's own web page, with nothing that comes close to qualifying this as a "copy of the report". "Report to who?" I asked and you still have not answered. Of course it's a fraud. It has an invented "report number" which is meaningless to anyone who accesses it. It's not good enough to be hoax, so we are left to refer to you as a scammer, a fraud, a troll. and (IMO) probably worse.


Quite the opposite. Technical presentation is way over your own head. Otherwise you wouldn't be posting it (if it isn't yours) or you wouldn't be making it up (if it is yours). In either case, you lose. And posting screen shots makes no difference. Except for the possibility that it increases your ability to insert malware somewhere. The only other thing you have done is to bury the inane logo and "report number" as you have evidently now scrubbed the site of its reference to BW Hill's purported degrees.


All of the faults of the other readers here, taken in the cumulative, pale in comparison to the idiotic proposition and defenses you've gives. The sham pretense that you have posed a science question which can be intelligently treated in a reply, has not fooled the readers. At best you are a troll. But more likely, as the evidence seems to suggest, you are probably a scammer posing as a troll. A more guilty conscience than this is possible. You may be up to something worse. Why else continue to play this game?


My bad. You actually said Yeah, I guess, other than running a mining and manufacturing engineering association with a staff of physicists and engineers, and having a Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering, and a Master of Science in Project Management. What are your qualifications?

Gee, by preponderance of the evidence you are indeed BW Hill.


Contending with a troll is not trolling, but way to play the pathological game of blame-shifting.


Ok, I am sorry for accusing you of having a Master's in Mining in Manufacturing when in fact you admitted to running a mining and manufacturing engineering association.

The Hill's Group Mining and Manufacturing Engineering

The Hill's Group™ is an association of consulting engineers, and professional project managers.


Busted, dude.
LOL.
 
Bullshit. I have repeatedly answered your demand as best I can. You are fully aware of that. Please stop asking for inputs as if I haven't already sufficiently addressed your demand. It is intentionally misleading and requires that I clear up your attempted deception for the readers sake on every single page. You are trolling. Please stop this.

Here is was my answer to you the last you brought this up (again):
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/th...rically-confirmed.152487/page-44#post-3330996

Evaluation of $$E_{TP}$$ from Equation# 7 requires the determination of three variables: mass of the crude ($$m_{c}$$) mass of the water ($$m_{w}$$), and the temperature of the reservoir ($$T_{R}$$). These must be determined at time (t).

1) The mass of crude at time (t) is derived from the cumulative production function,
2) the mass of water is derived from the average % surface water cut (fw) of the reservoir,
3) temperature of the reserve is derived from the well depth. This assumes an earth temperature gradient of 1°F increase per 70 feet of depth.

The determination of the three variables above are described in great detail in the Etp book. It is very technical and covers about 12 pages! It is beyond the scope of this thread to provide all of that here.

The program employed to calculate $$E_{TP}$$ (Equation #7) is the C++ program EtpX, which was developed in house by the Hill's Group.

Here is a post from peakoil.com from someone else who tried to run equation #7 . He had the Etp book and from that information he was able to approximate the three variables used in the equation:
what a ffucking joke you are. you think you are persuasive enough too fool new readers. it's massively obvious this is your pathetic game.
so again, where are 'these' inputs that were used, the values, the specific numbers. again, this was never in the vicinity of being answered.
stop the pathetic game.





The link I posted works just fine.
Here it is:
http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Cargo-Trends-Affirm-Falling-Oil-Production.html
Here is the link you posted:
http://oilprice.com/contributors/Nilofar-Saidi/news

That is clearly a different link. You embedded it under Nilofar Saidi and now you claim my link doesn't work. Why did you do this? The last time I put up the same link, you didn't have any problem linking to it. This is what you said then:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/th...rically-confirmed.152487/page-45#post-3331043

So you are now intentionally creating another stupid misunderstanding which I have to spend my time clearing up. Thanks troll.
excpet i NEVER POSTED a link. i just copied and pasted the authors name from that page.
:) shrugs. AGIAN, WHAT A FFUCKING JOKE YOU ARE. :)
i simply clicked on what you supplied and that article is what came up with that specific author.
ahian, :) what an obvious pathetic joke you are. i think you should be banned from this pathetic stunt.
~~~THE KRASH661:cool::cool::cool:^10

[edit]ahh i apologize, i did not know that ,that posted as a link.
 
Last edited:
Uh... It is not thermodynamics, but people trying a marketing strategy that is affecting the price of oil.
Uh...the marketing strategies are failing because thermodynamics must supersede marketing strategies. Hopeful articles that disregard the laws of physics are a dime a dozen.

I never knew much about the oil industry in the first place.
Then why should anyone listen to you?
----------

It's fascinating the amount of attention this guy gets. This is page 46 of this thread which should have been over after page 1 and 2. Since he's an intellectually dishonest doomsday troll the continued trolling has stretched it out to page 46 and most likely beyond. Ugh.
Ha ha. The thread is so long because I keep winning all the arguments and you guys keep pretending you are winning. I spend most of my time clearing up the repetitive deceptions. You guys are flooding the thread in an ongoing effort to make it basically unreadable. You think that is winning the debate. Pathetic.
-----------

In my view, the sole reason for this is that he has tried, absurdly, to co-opt a fundamental law of physics into supporting his ridiculous views. It is that which has got up the nose of the scientists reading this shite.
Which scientists reading this "shite" are you referring to? You? Russ_Watters? Beer w/Straw? krash661? Seriously, none of you are scientists. Give me a break.
--------------

What are we haggling about WHEN WE KNOW oil will no longer be available as a primary energy source in the near future? One fact remains INDISPUTABLE, we are running out of oil! Exactly how, why, or when is irrelevant! Pick your poison!
It is important to know the exact timing if we are to make good policy.

If you had a terminal condition, what good would it do you to have your doctor tell you that you are going to die eventually? That wouldn't tell you anything you didn't already know. And if the doctor knew how long you actually had to live, would you prefer that he lie to you?

1,786,761,764,936 Solar energy striking Earth today (MWh)
An inexhaustible supply of pure energy!
Too bad that "inexhaustible supply" is so diffuse that we can't use it very efficiently. Too bad the sun only shines during the day. Too bad that most people don't own electric cars. Too bad the electric grid is so decrepit. Too bad solar is such a small fraction of our energy today and we don't have time to ramp it up. Too bad that batteries are so expensive, inefficient, and toxic to be used as widely as would be necessary in your fantasy.

Can we not devise a "formula" (oh, and a chart) how and when to use this energy as our primary source of energy as it has always been?
Sure. But solar energy hasn't been our primary energy source for a long time. We could only support a small fraction of the 7.2 billion people alive today with solar as our primary energy source.

"Lord, what fools these mortals be!"
You don't give people enough credit. It is not our fault that we cannot defy the laws of physics.
------------

Fossil fuel is only a way of mining previous stores of solar energy. And we are getting better at intercepting the real thing, in real time, thank goodness.
How fast are we getting better compared to how fast we need to get better? That is the important question.
--------------

My mind is made up that your dumb cluck argument was over before I started to read it.
Yes, I know. And you are proud of this.

Yes I would say you demonstrate that quite well. "Deliberate ignorance" I think some posters said.
You just admitted your own deliberate ignorance when you said, "My mind is made up that your dumb cluck argument was over before I started to read it". I am open mindedly wasting my time reading your arguments so I can formulate real answers.

You proved yourself guilty of fraud in your OP. Whether you are the other poster known as "BW Hill" is practically moot at this point. However, your guilt follows you in this regard.
You are full of crap. You don't even say what the supposed fraud is. Grow up.

No, everyone who posts trash like wellwisher runs the risk of being asked if he or she is wellwisher. And, unlike the persecution of women as witches, your offenses against the intelligence of average readers are drenched in the guilt of willful ignorance (or the pretense of that), condemning yourself of trolling. And while the question of dousing you hinges on who asks to have you banned, your readers are politely asking you to go jump in a lake.
You are a troll, not a reader. You said so yourself when you said, "My mind is made up that your dumb cluck argument was over before I started to read it".

One scammer with multiple sock puppets does constitute a conspiracy. However you are welcome to discuss that among yourselves.
I am only Futilitist. You have no proof that I am anyone else. Please stop making false accusations. It is against the rules.

No, you have one item, with no traceable author, no endorsement by any credentialed expert, posted on the author's own web page, with nothing that comes close to qualifying this as a "copy of the report". "Report to who?" I asked and you still have not answered. Of course it's a fraud. It has an invented "report number" which is meaningless to anyone who accesses it. It's not good enough to be hoax, so we are left to refer to you as a scammer, a fraud, a troll. and (IMO) probably worse.
I have a copy of the Etp report. I posted screen shots to prove it.

Quite the opposite. Technical presentation is way over your own head. Otherwise you wouldn't be posting it (if it isn't yours) or you wouldn't be making it up (if it is yours). In either case, you lose. And posting screen shots makes no difference. Except for the possibility that it increases your ability to insert malware somewhere. The only other thing you have done is to bury the inane logo and "report number" as you have evidently now scrubbed the site of its reference to BW Hill's purported degrees.
You are insane. I quoted BWHill's degress from the Etp book, not the Hill's Group website. You are grasping at straws.

All of the faults of the other readers here, taken in the cumulative, pale in comparison to the idiotic proposition and defenses you've gives. The sham pretense that you have posed a science question which can be intelligently treated in a reply, has not fooled the readers. At best you are a troll. But more likely, as the evidence seems to suggest, you are probably a scammer posing as a troll. A more guilty conscience than this is possible. You may be up to something worse. Why else continue to play this game?
I am not playing any games. You are.

My bad. You actually said Yeah, I guess, other than running a mining and manufacturing engineering association with a staff of physicists and engineers, and having a Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering, and a Master of Science in Project Management. What are your qualifications?

Gee, by preponderance of the evidence you are indeed BW Hill.
Once again you are making another false accusation. It is against the rules of this site. I am formally asking you to cease and desist.

Contending with a troll is not trolling, but way to play the pathological game of blame-shifting.
I am going to report you and let the mods sort it out.

Ok, I am sorry for accusing you of having a Master's in Mining in Manufacturing when in fact you admitted to running a mining and manufacturing engineering association.

The Hill's Group Mining and Manufacturing Engineering

The Hill's Group™ is an association of consulting engineers, and professional project managers.
I am not BWHill. I am not a part of the Hill's Group in any way.

Get off my thread, troll.



---Futilitist:cool:
 
Last edited:
This thread is to seriously discuss the Etp model and it's implications.

Anything else is trolling.



---Futilitist:cool:
 
Uh...the marketing strategies are failing because thermodynamics must supersede marketing strategies. Hopeful articles that disregard the laws of physics are a dime a dozen.

...

Then why should anyone listen to you?

image.png


:(


funny+pictures+of+animals+with+captions+(19).jpg


As will everyone if you don't take your medication.
 
Hang on, why the technicolour and block capitals suddenly? You seem to have become like Fute (only kidding:biggrin:). Have you been at the drinks cabinet on a Saturday night by any chance?

Fossil fuel is only a way of mining previous stores of solar energy. And we are getting better at intercepting the real thing, in real time, thank goodness.

Until I see billions of dollars being spent on solar energy capture and distribution, instead on "cracking open the earth" or "sifting sand" for oil, I will continue to make my case BOLDLY.

I am glad to hear we are "getting better" at intercepting the real thing, but in who's "real time"?

Theoretical models of "end times of oil" are useless in preventing the "end time of oil".

Please, someone, give me a theoretical model of direct solar to energy conversion, just like all living things in the real world have done for billions of years.


Is that asking too much, or am I asking this too late?
 
.
Beer w/Straw said:
I think having an apocalypse would stroke his ego.
Just the idea of an apocalypse is causing you to have a stroke. :eek: :mad:

Write4U said:
Is that asking too much, or am I asking this too late?
Both, actually. :(



---Futilitist:cool:
 
What an odd thing to say. What have I said that would cause you to come to such a conclusion?


Um... Read his post when he quotes me on it. He wants me to have a stroke -be all in horror of the coming apocalypse. And he quotes you, implying that there is no stopping it.

The great prophet of doom. He wants to watch the world die just to say 'I told you so'.

Futilitist, were you homeschooled?
 
Last edited:
exchemist said:
Ha ha. Who are you?

Although you used to play a major role here, you haven't really been relevant to the conversation since you chose to run away from my serious questions to you. A while back, I would have used this opportunity to post those questions again for you here, but you are not really important enough to worry about.

Um... Read his post when he quotes me on it. He wants me to have a stroke -be all in horror of the coming apocalypse. And he quotes you, implying that there is no stopping it.

The great prophet of doom. He wants to watch the world die just to say 'I told you so'
Um...My statement was a humorous construction. A simple word game based on your statement. You are reading too much into it.
Beer w/Straw said:
I think having an apocalypse would stroke his ego.
Futilitist said:
Just the idea of an apocalypse is causing you to have a stroke.
Note the mirror symmetry and similar wording. My choice of the word "stroke" was simply predetermined by your use of the word "stroke". I don't want anybody to have a stroke. You are being way too literal. I did not express a wish that you be "all in horror" of the coming apocalypse. I was just saying that you seem to be afraid to have a serious discussion about the coming apocalypse.

My statement to Write4U is a separate statement answering Wright 4U's question. I was not "implying" that there is no stopping the coming apocalypse. I was stating my opinion, supported throughout the thread, that the coming apocalypse cannot be stopped.

I combined my post to two people into one single post for convenience and because the page looks better if I don't try to answer each post separately.

None of this supports drawing the conclusion you are trying to make with the rest of your statement.

The rest of what you are saying is just an extension your original statement to me. It could exist even if I had not poetically answered your first statement. You are expressing your belief that all of this is just an ego trip, and I somehow want the world to end so I can say I told you so. This is totally silly and untrue, but you are, of course, entitled to think whatever makes you feel most comfortable. The whole exchange says more about how you think than it does about how I think.
Beer w/Straw said:
Futilitist, were you homeschooled?
No.



--Futilitist:cool:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top