Reply #19: Dude, You and I are not disagreeing.

[24HRrnr]

The post I have been beating my head against is from galileoreloaded who catagorically stated that

"Most scientific evidence supports that with out cheap, easy to get oil (EIEROI of 1 to 20 or more) and cheap fertilizers (byproduct of refining and nat. gas production) that have greatly boosted production farming, that the planet can only effectively support about 500 Million people."

I have said consistently that I think his number is bogus.

We have large supplies of oil available in various forms. We have newer technologies that are coming on line in the next 10 years - I would watch what happens in the biotech field - there are very exciting advances taking place that will be interesting as they develop. And the biotech is for energy production, not for food production. I think that the numbers would be much higher tahn 500 million without any dietary changes. Please note the I "think" - that is my opinion unsupported by fact. I try very hard to be honest in my statements.

In response to my posts to him (and to another twit), I have received propoganda and the comment that my views were "scientifically unsound". Great.

Peak population is coming (and may arrive before true peak oil - if we account for all oil sources rather than the most easily extracted) and the Malthusian pressures will begin to recede. new technologies will continue to emerge and will assist the effort.

If I'm sounding frustrated, it's because I really hate bad science and galileoreloaded and AdHocSolver are purverors of the worst sort. Which is why they won't reply.

I don't want to argue with you. I think you're right.

Capiche?