Quote from: RESo, since you are the one who knows where to find information like per capita energy use for different places and demographic subsets, I set you the task of finding out the relevant information, andthen I'll be happy to give you an educated guess.  Without such information it's just a WAG.

We are discussing doomer scenarios....WAGs are all there is. Peak oilers have proven it with oil for a century. Duncan has already demonstrated net energy per capita at the global level doesn't work, and did it in the last century. Supposing that the idea has validity is itself the fault, not a better calculation from a less experienced and less educated amateur than the PhD scientist who originated it.

Might the idea be involved in doomer hopes and dreams? Sure. Just as peak oil might. Or wars, pandemics, rogue states with nukes, according to the old Diner PlanetX and Yellowstone going BOOM were quite interesting as well.

WAGs are part and parcel of the doomosphere and your entire doomer career...why are you objecting to it this late in the game?

Quote from: REWithout good data, I can't make an educated guess.

Of course without good data you, and I, and everyone else, can make an educated guess. The guesses are simply better informed with first good data, and then more data and then more good data. It is why they are called "guesses".

Some knew that peak oil was a crock from the same data that the suckers who fell for it used. Was it because they had any better data? Or were better educated in the use of the same data?

So no, I don't automatically buy the "better data" angle, if only because with the same data some people have what it takes to generate the right answer, and some don't.

Quote from: REI play blackjack, and I count.  I win more than I lose.  Or I did back in my college days anyhow.
RE

Card counting operates in a system with quite limited outcomes. Interesting that you presume you card counting changes an already discredited idea into a better one if you just had more or better data.