5 ms·

Agreed, which is why we should all believe in God, since although the possibility that he exists is slim to none, the risk of him actually existing is quite gre

• dasil003 13y ago
  Of course that's a bad analogy because we can define God any way we want; we could easily define him to be angry at people who do believe. Whereas a fire escape or even peak oil is at least somewhat quantifiable risk.
  • fleitz 13y ago
    Which is why the problem is being solved by a mix of pricing and development of alternatives by the free market. The problem is some people don't think what the market is doing is enough and demand intervention from government based on a line of reasoning similar to Pascal's Wager. Apparently, oil companies developing resources, and Tesla and others developing alternatives is 'doing nothing'.
    • rybosome 13y ago
      You are correct that some private firms are beginning to hedge their bets (or in Tesla's case, directly offer a competing product), but I was referring to government...as you guessed. We've seen numerous examples of abuse of the free market - I don't think that a few companies pushing us past the point of comfort with respect to oil production is a far-fetched scenario. Personally speaking, I would like some level of government intervention. The identification of my argument as being analogous to Pascal's Wager is interesting (that was a great read, thank you for linking), but is not compelling enough to dissuade me. If I'm reading the tone of your posts correctly, you do not agree that peak oil is something to be concerned about; what is your counter-argument?
• continuations 13y ago
  But which god though? Pick the wrong one and you're still classified as a non-believer.