Quote from: RE on Jun 13, 2024, 05:49 PMYou are the one who always uses IEA data because their scientists are such recognized experts.

I've never used IEA data. Read their reports mostly,like everyone else. And their "scientists" that I've been in meetings with, discussed things with, were mostly on the working engineer side, as opposed to scientist types. No geologists that I recall when they came calling, about a decade or more ago now.

Occasional interaction with their economists, but not qualified to know if they were top notch professionals, recognized experts or something else. I presume Fatih is considered top notch, economics wise, which might explain why he led them to screw the pooch back in 2010 with their 2006 call. Some of their 2011 report (if memory serves) was quite voluminous and quite a bit of it was reasonable.

The USGS has the scientist types, dime a dozen. The Texas BEG is more a 50/50 split I'd say, scientist types and working professional types, post-grad students as well, those related to the TORA project anyway.

Any other groups I've worked with, had meetings with, have come and visited me you'd like an opinion on? Sloan foundation folks? EIA? State Surveys and geologists? Mike Hohn was a good one, Love of the PA Survey, Tinker of Texas? Australia CSIRO? Jordan? Iraq? The British Geologic Survey? Canadian Energy Board, or the AEB? 

Quote from: RENow you say they're idiots. You can't have it both ways chief.

I don't. And I didn't say they were idiots. I said their stuff was fascinating. Reading comprehension...you must be way out of practice dealing with story telling to addled geriatrics who don't have the ability to understand..you know...words and stuff. Bullshitting your way through conversations doesn't usually work with folks possessing functioning brain pans.   

Quote from: REYou have been outranked.
RE

You don't know who I am, and have no clue where I do, or do not rank.