Some of the people who are obsessed by peak oil definitely go overboard; they have this idea that at some point society will go absolutely crazy, and everyone will forget everything they know about agriculture and technology. That's nonsense. But peak oil is a fact of life. Unless you're asserting that an infinte amount of vegetable and animal matter was compressed and trapped within the earth's crust, you can't avoid the conclusion that, at some point, we will run out. Of course, we wont run out all at once, all of a sudden, so there will be a time where the rate at which we extract oil decreases. This will happen; it's just a question of when, and what effect it will have on society and the economy.

When you consider that there are other tangible benefits to reducing the consumption of oil and improving the efficency of renewable energy technology (such as reducing smog, lower energy costs, resistance to the effects of political turmoil in oil producing areas, and the reduction of greenhouse gases), I don't see why people get so hot about the idea that we should switch from oil to something else becase oil will, eventually, run out.

The oil crash is pernicious baloney. Not because we’re never going to run out of oil; at some point we are, and it will probably be tough going for a while. The oil crash, as presented here, wraps an apocalyptic philosophy around a kernel of truth. Johnson’s old man says the oil crash will be worse than bird flu and not “…simple, like nuclear war…” (!) From what I’ve read, the whole concept of the oil crash seems to turn on the idea that nothing can replace oil, and conservation of oil will only postpone the inevitable. At this point, you may be wondering what the point of raising awareness of the impending crash is if there is nothing that anyone can reasonably do to prevent it, because I know I am. Of course, we can try to emulate the old man. We can learn how to farm, to distill liquor, and stock up on guns and duct tape. This is what many of the advocates of the oil crash advise, and it is where we discover the raison d’etre for the idea of the oil crash (at least for lay practitioners); sticking it to the people who enjoy Caribbean cruises and “flying off to Paris for shopping” by preparing for the “dark age” now, and making sure you have the “last laugh”. As the old man says, he’ll be ready. He studied farming! And he has land and a stockpile of weapons. Boy, will we be sorry! While we’re burning down our houses and drinking our own urine, he’ll continue his post-industrial, individualistic existence in relative comfort. The oil crash almost becomes a supernatural entity, something that can’t be stopped, and will punish the unbelievers and reward the faithful. Of course, if it does happen the way the old man says, he going to be in big trouble. It won’t be long before a gang of armed people comes along, kills him, and takes all of his stuff. If the armed gang is smart, it will force the old man to farm his land so they can feed more workers and fighters, thus becoming a more effective armed gang. The old man says life after the oil crash will be like it was 200 years ago. He’s a little off the mark; it will probably be more like Medieval Europe with rifles. A feudal society will not tolerate people like the old man, unless they have the military muscle to defend themselves. The people who know how to fight in gangs will have the last laugh.

The biggest problem with this movie is that while the movie is running, this is what I’m thinking about. The 3-D component really has a four years ago feel to it, and the montage in the background has a ten years ago feel to it. The old man is creepy, yes, but mostly because he’s poorly rendered. It's only 3 minutes long; there's no excuse for it to look like this. Why was this a 3D computer video, anyway? So we could switch between all of two locations? Because Mr. Johnson couldn’t find a real old man? With a subject like the end of the civilized world to work with and the unlimited potential of 3D computer animation, you'd think we could get something more interesting to look at than an old coot on a excercycle. With lackluster visuals, the movie leans on the dialogue, which is really not…good. “Stick of dynamite stuck up the timeline of man”? I don’t even know what that means, but it sounds unsavory. Or "if you think that's a bunch of baloney, you just haven't heard the facts" a couple of beats after we're told "it's just a plain and simple fact". If someone is going to keep telling me that I don't have any facts, I would like to hear some.

As the saying goes, "If you want to send a message, call Western Union." I don't know what a post-oil-crash telegram office will look like, but I can guess what the message will look like: "We'll be running out of oil soon, and nothing anyone can do will stop civilization as we know it from ending completely. Get some duct tape.”

...and as soon as I learned about the "rythym method", I was confused. Condoms, diaphragms, and IUDs are wrong, but the rythym method is OK. My question has always been "Why?" It's just another strategy to keep the egg away from the sperm. If you're using it, you are even more aware that you are having sex only for pleasure, because your intent is too avoid conception. I mean, what's the point? Tricking God with a technicality? I've just never understood why it makes such a difference to these people.