The Etp Model Has Been Empirically Confirmed

[Futilitist]

I expect this means that you will now run off to B W Hill to try to get an answer

I hadn't actually considered doing that.

Here is a good BWHill quote, though:

The Etp Model is predicting that the end of the oil age will come about as a result of the entropic decay of the world's petroleum production system. The advantage of the method, over other estimates of world reserves, is that results are calculated from the world's accumulated production data set. It is based on data for which we have reasonable knowledge, as opposed to projected conjecture, as to what might be existing reserves.

The Model is derived through the solution of the "Entropy rate balance equation for control volumes"; which is a very well known equation in thermodynamics. It is the only model known that can generate quantitative results from a proven thermodynamic law. Because the Model is a mathematical construct, its validity, or rejection can only be subject to an analysis of its construction. Even though the Model has been reviewed by thousands of qualified persons from around the world, a reasonable refutation has not yet come forward.

As the output of the model does not bode well for a long term continuation of the present industrialized system, it is to be expected that many opinions will run counter to its conclusions. Opinions are, however, highly influenced by emotional interpretations, and are subject to a bias that results from those emotions. Historically, decisions that have resulted from emotionally driven conclusions, have often ended very badly!
~BWHill



---Futilitist

 

[exchemist]

I hadn't actually considered doing that.

Here is a good BWHill quote, though:

The Etp Model is predicting that the end of the oil age will come about as a result of the entropic decay of the world's petroleum production system. The advantage of the method, over other estimates of world reserves, is that results are calculated from the world's accumulated production data set. It is based on data for which we have reasonable knowledge, as opposed to projected conjecture, as to what might be existing reserves.

The Model is derived through the solution of the "Entropy rate balance equation for control volumes"; which is a very well known equation in thermodynamics. It is the only model known that can generate quantitative results from a proven thermodynamic law. Because the Model is a mathematical construct, its validity, or rejection can only be subject to an analysis of its construction. Even though the Model has been reviewed by thousands of qualified persons from around the world, a reasonable refutation has not yet come forward.

As the output of the model does not bode well for a long term continuation of the present industrialized system, it is to be expected that many opinions will run counter to its conclusions. Opinions are, however, highly influenced by emotional interpretations, and are subject to a bias that results from those emotions. Historically, decisions that have resulted from emotionally driven conclusions, have often ended very badly!
~BWHill



---Futilitist

Look forward to you answering the question posed, Fute. As previously stated, what we are asking for is (a) the expression comparing the energy produced and the energy consumed in production, and (b) the values that model comes up with.

 

[Futilitist]

Look forward to you answering the question posed, Fute.

That is very forward looking of you, x.

As previously stated, what we are asking for is (a) the expression comparing the energy produced and the energy consumed in production, and (b) the values that model comes up with.

Thanks for making your questions so clear.

(a) I don't think such an explicit expression is a part of the model, but I'll check.

(b) I'll look them up in the Etp book just as soon as I get the chance.

Is your highly anticipated refutation of the Etp model going to be based on these numbers?



---Futilitist

 

[Russ_Watters]

Well, I am trying to give the most generous interpretation I can, seeing that we are under the eye of the moderator now. The days of "blowing off" are, I hope, over. Fute is on notice that he has to support his statements now, so let's see what he can come up with.

Your display of undue deference is as admirable as your lack of exasperation at Futie's [non]response.

I hadn't actually considered doing that.
[separate post]
That is very forward looking of you, x.
[back to the previous]
Here is a good [totally irrelevant] BWHill quote [too try to distract you from noticing I'm ignoring your questions], though:

I am exchemist's complete lack of surprise.

 

[Futilitist]

Your display of undue deference is as admirable as your lack of exasperation at Futie's [non]response.

You need to learn to relax a little, Russ. I said I would get to it.

I am exchemist's complete lack of surprise.

Like a multiple personality thing?



---Futilitist

 

[Russ_Watters]

Like a multiple personality thing?

Exactly, but because you said that, I can tell you don't know what it means.

 

[Futilitist]

Exactly, but because you said that, I can tell you don't know what it means.

What does it mean, Russ?



---Futilitist

 

[Russ_Watters]

What does it mean, Russ?

Google it.

 

[Futilitist]

Google it.

Are you refusing to answer?



---Futilitist

 

[exchemist]

That is very forward looking of you, x.


Thanks for making your questions so clear.

(a) I don't think such an explicit expression is a part of the model, but I'll check.

(b) I'll look them up in the Etp book just as soon as I get the chance.

Is your highly anticipated refutation of the Etp model going to be based on these numbers?



---Futilitist

Just get us the expression and the values it comes up with, so we can see how it arrives at the conclusion we disagree with.

 

[Ophiolite]

Are you refusing to answer?



---Futilitist

I think his answer is self evident.


To all participants in this thread. It seems apparent that Futilist will continue to avoid answering any of the very reasonable and pertinent questions he has been asked and will thereby willfully refuse to substantiate or, in any meaningful way, support his thesis. That being the case the thread runs the risk of descending into an exchange of increasingly bitter ad hominens.

Thus the argument of the OP has been refuted by default and the thread serves no further useful purpose, but rather offers the risk of descent into unseemly behaviour. Is it time to request the thread be locked? I so move.

Side Note: I see I have been consistently misspelling Futilitist's name. That has been accidental. In my defense at least one can find ophiolite in a good dictionary.

 

[exchemist]

I think his answer is self evident.


To all participants in this thread. It seems apparent that Futilist will continue to avoid answering any of the very reasonable and pertinent questions he has been asked and will thereby willfully refuse to substantiate or, in any meaningful way, support his thesis. That being the case the thread runs the risk of descending into an exchange of increasingly bitter ad hominens.

Thus the argument of the OP has been refuted by default and the thread serves no further useful purpose, but rather offers the risk of descent into unseemly behaviour. Is it time to request the thread be locked? I so move.

Side Note: I see I have been consistently misspelling Futilitist's name. That has been accidental. In my defense at least one can find ophiolite in a good dictionary.

I sort of agree, except that I think I would like to give Fute until the end of today EU time (i.e. 24hrs) to answer the outstanding question. If none is forthcoming, then we can all - I mean including forum moderation - publicly draw the conclusion that I'm sure you, I, Russ, Billy T and loads of others have already reached in private. And Fute will have no reason to belly-ache about it - though he may take the conspiracy theory tack, I suppose.

 

[Ophiolite]

Yes, I definitely agree he should be afforded adequate time to respond beyond the time he has already been allowed. However, like you I doubt he will choose, or be capable of so doing.

 

[Futilitist]

Oh my god, the clock is ticking! Whatever shall I do?

Such Drama!

Such bullshit.

Surprise! This is not a real science forum. It is a cheap charade! This so called forum is just a clumsy, right-wing, pro-business propaganda machine, doing basic astroturfing. It isn't even a real discussion forum at all. The "Valued Senior Members" are paid staff. The trolls all work for the house. Duh. I don't see how you guys think you are fooling anyone.

The game is rigged. There is obviously nothing I can do to stop the closure of my thread. At this final stage of The Experiment, I think it would be much more interesting if I don't answer your stupid question. Do whatever you were going to do anyway.

You may stop me, but you can't stop the apocalypse.


PS---The Dow just opened down about 192 points this morning and oil just dropped to 43.77 dollars a barrel.

Is the crash starting today?



---Futilitist

 

[exchemist]

Oh my god, the clock is ticking! Whatever shall I do?

Such Drama!

Such bullshit.

Surprise! This is not a real science forum. It is a cheap charade! This so called forum is just a clumsy, right-wing, pro-business propaganda machine, doing basic astroturfing. It isn't even a real discussion forum at all. The "Valued Senior Members" are paid staff. The trolls all work for the house. Duh. I don't see how you guys think you are fooling anyone.

The game is rigged. There is obviously nothing I can do to stop the closure of my thread. At this final stage of The Experiment, I think it would be much more interesting if I don't answer your stupid question. Do whatever you were going to do anyway.

You may stop me, but you can't stop the apocalypse.


PS---The Dow just opened down about 179 points this morning and oil just dropped to 43.93 dollars a barrel.

Is the crash starting today?



---Futilitist

Right, thanks Fute. So more attempted deflection to avoid admitting that you cannot answer the question. And we have exactly the conspiracy theory smoke from you that I predicted. How funny.

That settles it. The model is rubbish, as we have been saying from almost the start of this thread. It merely serves as a piece of pseudo-mathematical bullshit, to prop up your irrational beliefs. It is a fraud, that only someone gullible and incompetent at science and maths would fall for.

That you consider my question stupid can only be an indication either of deep stupidity on your part or an irrational devotion to the "predictions" of this bogus model. I really do not know which of the two it is.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm with Ophiolite (who like me has spent his career in the oil industry, if I'm not mistaken), and we can now close this ridiculous thread.

 

[exchemist]

Yes, I definitely agree he should be afforded adequate time to respond beyond the time he has already been allowed. However, like you I doubt he will choose, or be capable of so doing.

Plophetic words, Glasshopper! Do we request the mods to close it?

 

[Ophiolite]

Oh my god, the clock is ticking! Whatever shall I do?

Avoid reality seems to have worked for you in the past.

Such Drama!

Such bullshit.

Sadly this is an accurate description of those posts where you respond to criticisms, implicit or explicit, of your assertions.

Surprise! This is not a real science forum. It is a cheap charade!

Can you remind me of which science forums have not yet ejected you or simply allowed you to languish in ridicule? Or, to put it another way: would you name one "real science forum"?

This so called forum is just a clumsy, right-wing, pro-business propaganda machine, doing basic astroturfing. It isn't even a real discussion forum at all. The "Valued Senior Members" are paid staff. The trolls all work for the house. Duh. I don't see how you guys think you are fooling anyone.

As a left wing, tree-hugging, biodegradable liberal I find that amusing. As a Valued Senior Member I demand my back salary.

The game is rigged. There is obviously nothing I can do to stop the closure of my thread. At this final stage of The Experiment, I think it would be much more interesting if I don't answer your stupid question. Do whatever you were going to do anyway.

There are four very definite things you can do, any of which would justify keeping the thread open.
1. Provide evidence to support your assertion that any part of the economy is starved of energy.
2. Concede that your choice of phrase "starved of energy" was a poor one and explain clearly and concisely what you actually meant.
3. Demonstrate in some way that you actually understand the model you are promoting. (It has become increasingly apparent that you don't.)
4. Answer exchemist's questions: (provide (a) the expression comparing the energy produced and the energy consumed in production, and (b) the values that model comes up with.)

PS---The Dow just opened down about 179 points this morning and oil just dropped to 43.93 dollars a barrel.Is the crash starting today?

No. (West Texas Intermediate is at 44.04, Brent Crude is at 45.28. My maths is on a par with my physics, which you are fond of reminding me is deficient, but I think both those numbers are larger than 43.93.)

 

[Futilitist]

we can now close this ridiculous thread.

Spoken like a true staff member.

Do we request the mods to close it?

Good catch.

No. (West Texas Intermediate is at 44.04, Brent Crude is at 45.28. My maths is on a par with my physics, which you are fond of reminding me is deficient, but I think both those numbers are larger than 43.93.)

WTIC spot price is 43.81 right now.

---EDIT---

WTIC spot price just dropped to 43.54


---Futilitist

 

[Ophiolite]

Plophetic words, Glasshopper! Do we request the mods to close it?

Since Bells is keeping a close eye on the thread I would leave it up to her as to when the axe falls. And Futilitist can always avoid this by enacting any one of the four points I suggested.

You see Futilitist, you may play the part of the victim, but there are four plausible sound actions you can take that will keep the thread open. Refuse to carry out any of them and it creates the impression you are bereft of arguments to support your flawed thesis.

It is your choice. I know which way you will jump. Why not have the satisfaction of proving me wrong by actually implementing one of those actions?

 

[exchemist]

Since Bells is keeping a close eye on the thread I would leave it up to her as to when the axe falls. And Futilitist can always avoid this by enacting any one of the four points I suggested.

Right-ho.

Time for a nice cup of tea.........