Martenson interview

Nationalists don’t want to do their homework and research peak oil objectively, for example, how Chris Martenson answers to the abiotic theories of oil:

Instead of debating here on WDH, nationalists are beginning to discuss the subject of my previous posts at Occidental Dissent, where Sebastian Ronin is dismissed by one of them as “a deracinated conspiracy doomer” and others are posting comments like: “I am increasingly skeptical in light of rising oil production due to fracking,” and also “I told you so. Technology. Never leave it out of your equations on predicting the future. There will be no ‘energy devolution.’”

There will be no energy devolution—a flat statement that ignores that mere tech cannot create energy out of thin air!

There’s nothing to do with those who don’t want to do their homework. It reminds me somewhat my experience with the counter-jihad gentiles that didn’t want to read literature on the Jewish problem, not even literature written by well-respected academic Jews!

I am afraid that those who, like Ronin and I, want to show the pro-white movement that energy devolution will tremendously impact racial politics, will be talking to a different audience.

13 Replies on “Martenson interview

  1. But objectively, Chechar, how do we know who to listen to involving economic or natural resource data? There isn’t one set of data and there isn’t one possible interpretation and one possible outcome.

    1) Is it possible Peak Oil is something oil companies want us to believe in?

    2) Are governments and oil companies doing something to consolidate their resources? If Peak Oil is reality why isn’t oil through the rough in terms of price? What is the motivation for keeping oil prices so low when scarcity awareness make it more expensive?

    3) Looking at your predictions, for example, let’s say the U.S. collapses and so does W. Europe, Peak Oil might be delayed by an entire century due to a 75% reduction is usage (I’m just guessing, but if its as bad as you say that would be close to accurate I imagine).

    so will peak oil still matter?

    1. If it wasn’t clear above, I meant to say that what if the U.S. economy collapses, not due to Peak Oil, but due to inflation. If Peak Oil is still decades away, would not a collapse of civilization partially cancel this problem?

    2. For your questions I see that you have not looked seriously at the subject—yet.

      With or without currency crash, peak oil doomers predict that billions will die: no energy to produce food or the transportation of it in quantities we are familiar with.

      Martenson is not a doomer apparently, but did you even listen to the above audio? I mean: you don’t seem to grasp the basics of what this guy said, for example that in the last 22 years the world has consumed about half (!) of the oil extracted throughout all history. You and Matt seem to be thinking linearly instead of exponentially. Cf. the very first minutes of Martenson’s course and the graphs he shows: sharp curves, not linear decline. And let’s take into account the energy needs of the entire world, and the fact that 95% of the current energy is extracted from liquid fossil fuels.

      I stick to my point above: skeptics have not done their homework.

      By the way, these are some of the friendly discussions with Martenson I mentioned to Parrott in the other thread; that I was convinced precisely because some of them are kind of peak oil skeptics, and I still thought that Martenson was right:

      http://www.peakprosperity.com/featuredvoices

      But you first have to take his course to understand the issues.

      1. No, my question is perfectly consistent; if there is a total system collapse due to currency inflation and monetizing debt, the sort of cataclysm you suggest would destroy most of the demand currently placed on the extraction of oil.

        That’s logical to assume that currency collapse, according to you understanding of how bad it might be, will kill most of us first.

        Secondly, I stated before that I read the entire book Ruppert wrote on this subject, granted it diverged into other subjects … but it was one hell of a weighty book.

        So I know the data Peak Oil proponents believe in, I’m just asking if that data can be looked at differently … I have seen no one properly answer the question of why if oil comapnies know that Peak Oil is a reality, why the price doesn’t go through the ruff.

        The explanation Peak Oilers give is that the oil company and gov’t are colluding so that people won’t panic; a massive conspiracy (which I’m more willing to believe than you, but still don’t buy).

      2. Mr D:

        If you bring conspiracy theories to the discussion, the discussion is over: because it’s a paranoid world where quite a few WNsts live in. No 9/11, JFK, UFO Roswell incident covered up by the government, peak oil or Satanic Ritual Abuse conspiracies actually exist.

        And had you understood well this peak oil thesis you wouldn’t have asked that question because if there’s no energy to carry food, etc, a currency crash would only accelerate the killing, not postpone it.

  2. I already dismissed the abiotic hypothesis as both unlikely, and as unlikely to matter. Whether it comes from below at a fixed rate or from above at a fixed rate, that fixed rate is surely much slower than we’re consuming it.

    I have been researching peak oil in the meantime, as promised. I don’t want to see you taken in by this crank. I’m not the one here turning an academic disagreement about the importance and availability of fossil fuels into an “us and them” fight between comrades. Seb’s the one who did that. That’s his entire shtick.

    With time, you’ll realize that.

  3. The “cuckolding” of Murkan White Nationalism continues on schedule. We, i.e. the RPN, prefer to call the process/raid National Synergy. (I get such a kick out Murkan WNs referring to themselves as “Folk” and speaking in terms of “our people.”)

    1. I hate the term ‘our people’ too … I said on Alt Right today that these are NOT ‘our people’ … meaning the white middle class; they are traitors who have thrown in with the Jews for material affluence or the dream of it; the modern ‘folk’ would feed us WNs to the alligators if they had the chance.

      In contrast, the Wehrmacht was truly fighting for the folk and ‘our people’ … because our people were making sacrifices back then for the good of the Reich.

      But today the term ‘our people’ doesn’t apply to most whites; they hate Wns.

      1. Herr Deutsch, the Wehrmacht was fighting for Germany and Germans, not for “Whites.” Murkan “White Nationalism” is a lie, a false premise. At its ontological core it is as culturally imperialist as is a McDonalds Arch.

  4. Chechar, just as a side note, because I see you have posted nothing about the recent Supreme Court decision, Greg Johnson posted a rather disgusting article on gay marriage.

    I’ve lost respect for him; he cannot just come out and say he supports it .. because he will lose customers … no he wrote an entire article side-stepping the issue which cleverly insinuated that gay marriage is good for whites. Seriously?

    I’m not a family values person, but I recognize that homo marriage will create more broken homes, more atomizing whites, more psychologically screwed up children, more feminized young men … this all equals more miscegenation in the end if you think about it.

    What a narcissist Greg and that other Queer O’meara are! I see what you are saying more and more now.