"I said both Congress and the EPA did this."
Ok, fine. What blocks did the EPA and Congress put into place in the 1960s, which would have had to have been the case if we hit peak oil in 1971?
"This only says that supplies were reduced, it says nothing about peak oil."
Say what? We hit peak oil in 1971, although it took a little while to recognize that. That means, despite drilling more, we couldn't replace the fields we were depleting.
That is a pretty strong statement about supply in this country.
"I was only maintaining that drilling would have kept supplies sufficient to keep prices down."
Now, see, this is another place where you depart from reality. The oil market is a global one. You are only going to move the global price if you can significantly affect the global supply. Which is why the DOE estimates that if we were able to tap all of the reserves we think are out there, which is more than proven reserves which is more than can actually be recovered, we might knock a whole quarter off the price per barrel. The global market is very hard to move with the reserves we have now. Proven or otherwise.
"You are simply trying to read between the lines to find any fault with it you can."
Waving your hands again. I took exactly what you said. Now you are claiming you meant something different. I can't read minds, and I have no intention of trying to plumb your so-called mind.
"Also I believe most of the blocking was in the 80's and 90's when we had a glut of oil."
Except for Santa Barbara, almost all of it. Including Florida which you claimed was in the late 1960s, early 1970s. Especially for offshore.
Which means your statement was, if not stupid, then a lie.
Which was it? |
