X-Message-Number: 21993
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 15:26:37 EDT
Subject: Re: CryoNet #21973 - #21982

In a message dated 6/15/03 2:00:56 AM,  writes:

<< Simon and Lomberg weren't trained in petroleum geology >>
Well now, Mark Plus, so is it that no one unless so trained can look at data 
and speak with any authority on such matters? What nonsense.  Does Deffeyes 
speak for everyone in petroleum geology? And, for that matter, is the 
"Association for the Study of Peak 
Oil" a disinterested party? Just from the name, I doubt it.  Even the oil 

companies have a vested interest in high oil prices and hyping future shortages

along with drilling everywhere for more.  The manifest fact is that the pre-tax
inflation-adjusted price of oil has been dropping steadily for nearly 80 
years as known reserves as well as production and consumption have been 

increasing.  Long predicted, no peak is even yet on the horizon unless you count

infinitely riggable "models." As for the supposed "fossil" origins of petroleum,
I am just a casual lay reader on the subject, but from what I have read, the 
hypothesis is far from proven, partly because there seems to be so much oil in 
so many places around the globe that it casts in doubt the notion that it 

could all be geologically trapped animal residue.  The case for coal as a resdue
of decayed plants is obvious, of course.  We can argue ourselves blue on the 
subject of oil and other so-called "non-renewable" resources, but it should be 
obvious to cryonicists that if the doomsdayers are right, we are out of luck, 
because in the future world of scarcity and enveloping oceans that they 

imagine, nobody will allow funds to go into the energy-wasteful topping off of 
nitrogen containers, let alone developing and sustaining an infrastructure to 
usher in the revival of anyone frozen now or in the future. 
 I respect the fact that many on this list, perhaps Mark Plus, included, are 
confirmed environmentalists.  Indeed, on many issues, I count myself in this 

number, but if you think our world is headed for disaster unless we drastically
limit consumption of practically every consumable item,  then your views are 
in direct contradiction of cryonics and you probably don't belong on this 

list.  I stand by my previous comments and strongly suggests those concerned 
these issues at least browse the contrarian references I cited.
Ron Havelock
President-elect, Washington Area Life Extension Society
CI Member

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=21993