<Peak Oil - Whom to Believe? Part 1 - There's Plenty of Oil, CERAiouslyThe Oil DrumJamais Cascio: Finding a Little Comfort Fifteen Minutes into the Future>
<Solar Islands: A new concept for low-cost solar energy at very large scaleThe Oil Drum: EuropePortugal getting a hand on Venezuela's energy riches>

106 comments on Oilwatch Monthly - May 2008

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Asebius from Toronto on May 21, 2008 - 1:49pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I don't recall that, do you have a link?

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3835#comment-329504

Your reply had me laughing...

The goal of the "confidence interval" was to illustrate the large uncertainty existing among forecasts. I used only forecasts that are seeing a peak in the near future...

LOL!!!

Oh those lovely confidence intervals. Oh how they inspire confidence!!

Phd or not. I flatly do not believe that you have formal training in statistical methods.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
PeakOil Tarzan on May 21, 2008 - 1:54pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I predict you will soon have a new screen name.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Khebab on May 21, 2008 - 2:13pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Look, I've been on this website long enough to know that answering to this kind of negative comments is a complete waste of my time.

I stand by what I said and my confidence intervals do represent where 95% of listed peak oil forecasts are seeing future crude oil + NGL supply, nothing more.

I also strongly suggest that you open a blog yourself (it's free: http://www.blogger.com/) and share with us your vast knowledge of Statistics. You can already count me as a frequent commentator :).

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dragonfly41 on May 21, 2008 - 6:43pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Khebab...if this is Hothgar, I may have to pull out my lamprey graphic again.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jim burke on May 21, 2008 - 8:53pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

or present him with the "blowfly award" (only good for eating shit and bothering people ;-)

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Robert Marston on May 21, 2008 - 2:29pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Asebius? Nice moniker. Why don't we just shorten the phonetics a little and call a spade a spade or let an ass be an ass, as the case may be.

You provide zero objective information on your own while you flame professional contributors.

The task of timing the peak, exactly, may well be beyond anyone. If Deffreyes missed it by a few hundred thousand barrels per day, then he missed it. But it doesn't really change the fact that peak oil is still coming out in the wash and that Khebab, Deffreyes, and others, have been far more accurate in predicting world oil production than known energy optimists -- CERA et all.

The price of oil alone is an indicator how dear and scarce supplies have become -- even in an age of undulating plateau.

The problem, in general, is not enough people are aware of the kind of analysis going on here and far too many people are happy to gobble up the kind of obsfucation you blow out. But like any other cloud of smoke, it will all too soon dissipate.

The casualty, for your kind of disinformation, are those poor souls who were disoriented by it and failed to prepare or respond adequately.

Assbeass, like other worm-tongues before you, are henceforth banished...

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
WebHubbleTelescope on May 22, 2008 - 1:24am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Asebius,
I dispatched that particular commenter quite easily. He essentially didn't know what he was talking about. Khebab's model results are perfectly valid. A model itself is a best guess estimate, much different than purely statistics-driven bootstraps.

This is what I said at the time, and if you don't like it, try to argue it now, I noticed you did not back then:

The no-name Name does not understand that some sort of model underlies all of these curves. For the "election polling" analogy Name brings up, no human behavioral model exists and yes indeed the projections are bootstrapped from a smaller subset and one can only use pure statistics to project error margins.

I find confidence intervals like Khebab presented perfectly valid. The "truth" about a situation may indeed converge with more and more physical behavioral models applied from sources of various breadths of knowledge.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.