• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Why would anyone want gold standard?


bio is something else I believe, this is just fine filtered.

rapeseed oil is the smoothest, but pretty much anything seems to work, its often difficult to know what it started life as, with bits of chips floating around in the muck.

its not a very nice job dealing with it, but its definitely viable.

makes the car smell like a chip shop too, which is fine if you're not hungry :)
 
granted you can at least burn paper for warmth. but I bet I could swap gold for way more paper to burn.


Because no one else would want that paper to burn, right? Even in a post-economic collapse paper money is more valuable than gold.
 
Because no one else would want that paper to burn, right? Even in a post-economic collapse paper money is more valuable than gold.

well you can rest easy as it looks like I wont have to kill you for your gold then, I can just swap it with you for all my useless paper ;)

and anyway you are wrong

http://www.prudentinvestor.com/2011/11/true-intrinsic-value-of-euro-money.html

Ever wondered about the true intrinsic value of Euro banknotes?

Prudent Investor blog reader Kurt Lindlgruber from Austria sent me this pragmatic approach, pulling up the calorific value of such notes once they have lost their purchasing power as did all fiat currencies in history.
Lindlgruber's calculations contradict French philosopher Voltaire's famous quote that
'Paper money will always return to its intrinsic value. Nothing.'

It is not all that bad. Your soon-to-be worthless Euros will at least keep you warm for a few minutes.
Here is his calculation:

The minimum value of paper money after the Euro crash corresponds with its calorific value.

A €5 banknote weighs 0.6 grams. The calorific value of one kilogram European fiat money (= 1,667 €5 notes) is 5 kilowatt hours (kWh).

You can fare much better with gold:

Based on Monday's Euro gold price of €1,260/oz one ounce will buy you 21 metric tons of wastepaper (current price €60/ton) which has a calorific value of 105,000 kilowatt hours.

The average heat energy consumption of a single family detached house is around 5 kWh. So 21 tons will heat a house for 21,000 hours or 2.4 years.

If you hold on to your Euros instead of gold, 252 €5 notes (=€1,260), they will deliver a calorific value of 0.76 kWh (252 x 0.6 x 5 / 1000 = 0.76 kWh) will keep you warm for a mere 9 minutes instead of 2.4 years.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, I missed this post, which deserves a response just so everybody can see precisely who knows what they are talking about in this thread, and who is talking out of their backside.

I tend to take the analysis of someone who is actually working in the oil business over someone who lives in his parents basement and spends hundreds of hours "researching" this very important issue (not referring to you).

Then who is it supposed to be refering to? Your characterisation of a typical "peak oil tard", presumably. In other words you are simply slurring all people who believe in peak oil as being "someone who lives in his parents [sic] basement."

But since you asked, my analysis:

Physical peak oil, which I have no reason to accept as a valid statement either on theoretical, scientific or ideological grounds, would be insensitive to prices. In fact the whole hypothesis of peak oil – which is that there is a certain amount of oil in the ground, consumed at a certain rate, and then it's finished – does not react to anything.

And so you demonstrate, as predicted, that you actually know about as much about peak oil as the average creationist knows about evolution. You do not even know what the hypothesis in question actually is, yet you are arrogantly dismissing everybody who believes it as an idiot. Peak oil is most certainly not the hypothesis that "there is a certain amount of oil in the ground which is consumed at a certain rate and then it is finished." It is the hypothesis that oil production from a given geographical area (in this case the whole planet) follows a bell-curve, which has a peak. As for "does not react to anything"...that isn't part of peak oil theory either. It is just some cr*p you made up and decided scrawl on this thread in your toddler-like fashion.

Whereas we believe that whatever can be turned into oil strongly depends on technology and technology depends on prices as well.

Ah yes! Technology will save us!!! The technology you speak of doesn't actually exist but it will save us!!!

Ah yes! High prices will save us!!! The price of oil will go to £200 a barrel and then it will be economically viable to pump oil from deep under the Earth! Erm, actually, no it won't. The first problem with that theory is that the real limitation is EROEI, not cost in money. I presume you don't know what EROEI stands for. Try looking it up. You might actually learn something, although I suspect you will find it rather difficult, given your status wrt learning difficulties.

Oh yes...then there's the additional slight problemette of high oil prices wrecking the rest of the economy.

Therefore there will never be a moment when the world runs out of oil because there will always be a price at which the last drop of oil can clear the market.

And this is on the same level as "Evolution can't be true because there's hundreds of gaps in the fossil record and every new species creates more gaps!" You aren't talking about peak oil at all, but some other theory about "oil running out" that nobody actually believes in.

And you can turn anything into oil into if you are willing to pay the financial and environmental price.

Of course! You can turn rocks into oil! You can turn sand into oil! You can turn house mite turd into oil! You can even turn carbon dioxide into oil!!!!!!!!!


Do you think that posting a picture of a dog laughing is going to fool anyone into believing you have anything to say that is actually worth listening to?

You are currently exhibiting a rather toxic mixture of arrogance and ignorance. You have a major attitude problem, and an absurdly high opinion of yourself compared to your actual level of knowledge and IQ. Your username says it all. You clearly fancy yourself as a deep thinker who knows quite a bit about quite a lot of stuff. The only problem is when it comes to delivering the goods.

Oh...and before you go whining to the moderators about the content of this post, I'd like to recomend anybody reading this post to go back and have a look at your contributions to the whole thread, starting with post number 2 on page 1. It set the tone for everything that followed.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, I missed this post, which deserves a response just so everybody can see precisely who knows what they are talking about in this thread, and who is talking out of their backside.



Then who is it supposed to be refering to? Your characterisation of a typical "peak oil tard", presumably. In other words you are simply slurring all people who believe in peak oil as being "someone who lives in his parents [sic] basement."



And so you demonstrate, as predicted, that you actually know about as much about peak oil as the average creationist knows about evolution. You do not even know what the hypothesis in question actually is, yet you are arrogantly dismissing everybody who believes it as an idiot. Peak oil is most certainly not the hypothesis that "there is a certain amount of oil in the ground which is consumed at a certain rate and then it is finished." It is the hypothesis that oil production from a given geographical area (in this case the whole planet) follows a bell-curve, which has a peak. As for "does not react to anything"...that isn't part of peak oil theory either. It is just some cr*p you made up and decided scrawl on this thread in your toddler-like fashion.



Ah yes! Technology will save us!!! The technology you speak of doesn't actually exist but it will save us!!!

Ah yes! High prices will save us!!! The price of oil will go to £200 a barrel and then it will be economically viable to pump oil from deep under the Earth! Erm, actually, no it won't. The first problem with that theory is that the real limitation is EROEI, not cost in money. I presume you don't know what EROEI stands for. Try looking it up. You might actually learn something, although I suspect you will find it rather difficult, given your status wrt learning difficulties.

Oh yes...then there's the additional slight problemette of high oil prices wrecking the rest of the economy.



And this is on the same level as "Evolution can't be true because there's hundreds of gaps in the fossil record and every new species creates more gaps!" You aren't talking about peak oil at all, but some other theory about "oil running out" that nobody actually believes in.



Of course! You can turn rocks into oil! You can turn sand into oil! You can turn house mite turd into oil! You can even turn carbon dioxide into oil!!!!!!!!!



Do you think that posting a picture of a dog laughing is going to fool anyone into believing you have anything to say that is actually worth listening to?

You are currently exhibiting a rather toxic mixture of arrogance and ignorance. You have a major attitude problem, and an absurdly high opinion of yourself compared to your actual level of knowledge and IQ. Your username says it all. You clearly fancy yourself as a deep thinker who knows quite a bit about quite a lot of stuff. The only problem is when it comes to delivering the goods.

Oh...and before you go whining to the moderators about the content of this post, I'd like to recomend anybody reading this post to go back and have a look at your contributions to the whole thread, starting with post number 2 on page 1. It set the tone for everything that followed.

tl;dr

I often wonder why, if "Peak Oil" is such a problem, it's not on the front page of the WSJ and NY Times on a daily basis. After all, the survival of our entire civilization depends on us solving this. The only time I ever see anything about it is on the Internet, on various conspiracy and gold bug forums. To a skeptic, like me, that speaks volumes.
 
the hotels currently have to pay to have the 50 litre tins removed and disposed of, we're actually looking into setting up a collection and recycling business.
That's unusual. Here the waste oil is sold.
 
tl;dr

I often wonder why, if "Peak Oil" is such a problem, it's not on the front page of the WSJ and NY Times on a daily basis.

Then you think about it quite a lot without ever figuring out the answer (which is rather obvious.) There's actually several reasons why it's not all over the mainstream media, including the financial press. The first is that quite a lot of those people have vested interests in not recognising the reality of peak oil, for one reason or another. The second is that quite a lot of people don't actually realise what is going on yet, because they are all waiting for somebody else to tell them instead of figuring out for themselves. The third reason is that nobody wants to scare people, because fear itself just makes the existing economic problems worse.

You keep refering to other people as the source of your opinions. You have told me that you'd rather trust somebody working for BP than me (instead of working it out for yourself) and now you are telling me that you are waiting for it to be all over the mainstream media before you'll believe it (instead of working it out for yourself.)

After all, the survival of our entire civilization depends on us solving this. The only time I ever see anything about it is on the Internet, on various conspiracy and gold bug forums. To a skeptic, like me, that speaks volumes.

That is an insult to genuine "skeptics." Try thinking for yourself. :(

Let's play a little game. I'd like you to summarise, in one paragraph, what peak oil theory is about and why you don't believe it. Because I reckon you can't do that without exposing yourself as totally ignorant on the subject.
 
Last edited:
I can't be bothered to go through adding [citation needed] to everything you've posted, so could you provide some proof for everything in post #169, UndercoverElephant?
 
That's unusual. Here the waste oil is sold.

I am sure we will get to that, currently they are happy for us to take it away.

Spain is way behind the UK on everything really, and being on a remote island we're behind Spain. there was also talk of a biofuel plant starting here as well, but that was 2 years ago and nothing since.
 
Then you think about it quite a lot without ever figuring out the answer (which is rather obvious.) There's actually several reasons why it's not all over the mainstream media, including the financial press. The first is that quite a lot of those people have vested interests in not recognising the reality of peak oil, for one reason or another. The second is that quite a lot of people don't actually realise what is going on yet, because they are all waiting for somebody else to tell them instead of figuring out for themselves. The third reason is that nobody wants to scare people, because fear itself just makes the existing economic problems worse.

Wow, sort of sounds like a....ummmm....what's that word I'm looking for? Oh, I know! Conspiracy!! That's it. Makes sense, as I think Jews own the NY Times.

Let's play a little game.

I love games!!! :)

I'd like you to summarise, in one paragraph, what peak oil theory is about and why you don't believe it.

How about one sentence?

Peak Oil is nonsense.

That's also why I don't believe it.
 
Last edited:
Wow, sort of sounds like a....ummmm....what's that word I'm looking for? Oh, I know! Conspiracy!! That's it. Makes sense, as I think Jews own the NY Times.

I love games!!! :)

How about one sentence?

Peak Oil is nonsense.

That's also why I don't believe it.

I likened you to a creationist. You clearly don't get the resemblance, so maybe I can help you see it. Imagine the following exchange.

opening post: "Why would anyone believe in Evolution?"

creationist tw*t: "Because science is just like religion - it's just a belief."

other posters: "Well, actually there are some good reasons why people believe in evolution."

creationist tw*t: [regurgitates a load of old chestnuts attempting to refute evolution]

biologist: "Ok let's play a little game. Why don't you tell us, in one short paragraph, what the theory of evolution actually states, because I don't think you understand it..."

creationist tw*t: "I love games!!! :) How about one sentence? Evolution is nonsense. That's also why I don't believe it."

The creationist tw*t then goes away smugly thinking he's won the argument and made the opposition look foolish. Everybody else just thinks he's a particularly arrogant creationist tw*t who actually takes pride in the level of his own ignorance.
 
Last edited:
I can't be bothered to go through adding [citation needed] to everything you've posted, so could you provide some proof for everything in post #169, UndercoverElephant?

That's a lot to provide proof of, and much of it can't be proven anyway. It is more a case of taking all of the available evidence into account and coming to a conclusion about what is most likely to be actually going on.

Where do you want me to start? Perhaps we need a new thread on peak oil. I'm more than happy to talk to people about what I believe on that subject, and why, but it is a big topic. The basics of peak oil theory are simple enough, but understanding the implications requires a much broader discussion of things like physics, politics, economics and human psychology.
 
Some of the things you need to know about peak oil:

(1) Why crude oil is so important to modern, industrialised civilisation. The physical reasons why it cannot just be replaced by something else.

(2) Why oil production from a given geographical area follows a specific sort of pattern.

(3) Where we are right now in that pattern regarding the geographical area of the entire planet.

(4) Why the initial responses given to peak oil theory don't actually work (e.g. why technology can't save us.)

(5) Why the mainstream media and politicians have been so slow to start openly discussing it.

(6) What peak oil has to do with the monetary/debt/banking crisis.

(7) What is likely to happen as supplies of crude oil decline globally, especially the Export Land Model, which was little more than a theory until about three years ago but which is now being proven correct. Put briefly this means that the amount of oil available on the open market declines much more drastically than other models predict because of the increases in domestic consumption in oil exporting nations as they hit their own peaks. It means that the population of places like Saudi Arabia will go on enjoying cheap oil whilst all the oil-importing nations compete for a rapidly dwindling share of what places like Saudi Arabia can still export without inflicing price rises or supply shortages on their own people. Eventually this will lead to total disaster for the oil exporters, but human nature being what it is...

All of these questions have answers. None of them are short.
 
Last edited:
I likened you to a creationist. You clearly don't get the resemblance, so maybe I can help you see it. Imagine the following exchange.

opening post: "Why would anyone believe in Evolution?"

creationist tw*t: "Because science is just like religion - it's just a belief."

other posters: "Well, actually there are some good reasons why people believe in evolution."

creationist tw*t: [regurgitates a load of old chestnuts attempting to refute evolution]

biologist: "Ok let's play a little game. Why don't you tell us, in one short paragraph, what the theory of evolution actually states, because I don't think you understand it..."

creationist tw*t: "I love games!!! :) How about one sentence? Evolution is nonsense. That's also why I don't believe it."

The creationist tw*t then goes away smugly thinking he's won the argument and made the opposition look foolish. Everybody else just thinks he's a particularly arrogant creationist tw*t who actually takes pride in the level of his own ignorance.

Religion thread is thataway =================>
 
Some of the things you need to know about peak oil:
<snip>
All of these questions have answers. None of them are short.

And none of them are answered by TCS's rather weird quote, which seemed only to indicate that every last dribble of oil has a value. Obviously true, but nothing to do with the "peak oil" debate at all.

Do vested interests lie to protect their position, knowing full well that they'll be long out of the loop before the facts become clear? Surely not!
 
That's a lot to provide proof of, and much of it can't be proven anyway. It is more a case of taking all of the available evidence into account and coming to a conclusion about what is most likely to be actually going on.

Do you want to try again, this time without contradicting yourself in your first paragraph?
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom