Reader Poll
Posted by Big Gav
I've had a reader comment asking for a stronger focus on science and the exiling of the tinfoil department to another blog. As I'm always interested in what people think about the content here I thought I'd open it up for some general discussion - if a strong majority wants tinfoil no more it will disappear (possibly to appear elsewhere, possibly not) - but that means I'll need a reasonable number of responses (don't cares are still useful feedback).
The original comment:
I've been a reader for quite some time, and found this blog to be very interesting. I'm grateful for your effort in gathering the links into a valuable digest.
However, there seems to be a growing tendency towards the 'nutbag' kind of linking. The Ratzinger/Kissinger posts for instance. Can't quite see how they directly relate to 'Peak Energy'. Reporting on rumour becomes something analogous to the media eating itself. Of interest to the individuals in the media, but...
Might I suggest a second blog for the tinfoil/nutbag sort of stuff, and keep this one for the high quality science and debate for which we visit?
My reply:
Michael - Thanks for the feedback - I'm always interested in what readers think.
I'm not sure that the tinfoil content has increased that much over time - there's always been some sort of conspiracy theory included for people to ponder. The number of items included for entertainment or simply to pique reader curiosity has certainly increased over time.
This is partly because I like to keep exposing myself (and long suffering readers) to new ideas, and partly because I try to resist succumbing to the groupthink syndrome that afflicts groups of people who all focus on the same topic by continually introducing tangentially related material. Check out these links for some of the theory underlying this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/15/AR2006101500913.html
http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2006/10/homophily_in_so.html
That said, I have occasionally considered moving the tinfoil stuff elsewhere, but there have been 3 stumbling blocks.
Firstly, I don't have any desire to become a dedicated conspiracy theorist. The tinfoil decorations that are included generally relate to energy and the environment in one way or another - and I like to consider all schools of thought, including the paranoid ones - there are a lot of insights to be gained by not sticking to a particular party line (or even the full range of mainstream information sources). Plus I find many of them entertaining - I've always had an interest in history and parahistory has the added advantage of being completely novel.
Secondly they highlight a point that is important to keep in mind with all of this stuff - data quality matters. The number one problem with peak oil analysis is that by and large the data quality sucks and its very difficult to get certainty about anything - total reserves, peak date, alternate sources of liquid fuels all seem impossible to be quantified in a way that everyone can agree on. This is also true (to a greater or lesser extent) with all the other limits to growth. When you read a lot of commentary on these issues the writers tend to push their own view pretty firmly and don't leave much room for uncertainty. Reading tinfoil teaches you to question everything - does the person know what they are talking about ? Are they spreading disinformation or propaganda deliberately ? Is there a political bias of some sort at work ? Are they just repeating something they heard somewhere else which has been through the 1000 chinese whispers process ? Or are they simply crazy ? All these are good to keep in mind when you read or watch any form of media - conspiracy theory just makes it obvious (well - I hope it does).
Lastly - how do you decide what is tinfoil and gets exiled elsewhere, versus what is "normal" and gets to stay here ?
The scope of this blog has expanded over time as it became clear that you can't study any one problem (or solution) in isolation - "everything is connected" to use the tag line from Syriana (and from the 4th middle eastern religion for that matter).
Lets consider the main topics that I tend to cover here:
1. Peak oil and other resource limits - plenty of people consider the whole field "tinfoil" to a greater or lesser extent - go and ask Rex Tillerson or John Browne for example.
2. Global warming - some US Senators and conservative politicians here consider global warming to be a conspiracy (as does the Wall Street Journal for that matter) and a hysterical panic about nothing
3. Iraq and other resource wars - most conservatives would consider the idea that Iraq is all (or least mostly) about oil an outrageous conspiracy theory - we're there to take away Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and create conditions conducive to freedom and democracy
4. Terrorism - the idea that islamic terrorism is a form of reaction to western interference (blowback) in the region over the past century or two would be regarded as tinfoil in some quarters
5. Propaganda / surveillence / reduction of civil liberties - the idea that these are all indirect consequences of our oil dependency and the actions we take to control the oil supplies and the blowback that results would be regarded as tinfoil in some quarters
6. Solutions (which includes all the energy technology and science stuff) - if you write off some or all of the first 5 as tinfoil, then why are we bothering talking about solutions - there isn't a problem....
So - I'm open to suggestions (and will do a post on this to see what everyone else thinks), but its harder than you think to define what is tinfoil and what isn't.
In the meatime I label the obvious conpiracy theory as tinfoil and leave it to the end of the post - so you can always stop reading once the warning signal goes up and not waste any time on it.
As for Kissinger and Ratzinger - I don't follow Ratzinger's activities and don't have any particular desire to demonise him (though I am dubious about his history). The references to Kissinger were included because I noticed them in my news feeds and my next post will touch on the vexed issue of depopulation and population control - a topic he seems to be closely identified with (and as that right to life site demonstrated, not just by the communists).
I will admit the Santorum reference was just gratuitous Exxon bashing - but they are part of the problem and need to be criticised until they change their ways.
Posts
