What do you expect me to "rebut?" That oil is a limited resource? I have long said that oil is too valuable to be burning for transporation and heat.

I can throw RL's global warming argument back at you: It's not that the concept of "peak oil" in general is arguable, it's the details on things like the timeline of the peak and suggested methods of dealing with it.

Right now, the market is doing a pretty good job of reducing demand and encouraging new resource development (where governments actually allow this to happen). The auto industry has a turnaround time measured in years, but their change in course is obvious. Private investment in alternative energy has ballooned, and dozens of promising technologies are under development. I still expect a major tipping point in photovoltaics in the next few years, and I have high hopes for new hybrid and electric transportation.

I wish we were pushing nuclear harder, but I don't want "panic building" any more than I want to see any other "panic" approach to this issue.

Also, there are signs that major consumers like India, China, and Indonesia, out of sheer financial self-defense, are going to start eliminating or reducing their inane end-user subsidies. Wait and see what happens to the market and prices then (other than riots in those countries).

But most "peak oil" advocates aren't interested in these naturally-developing market processes. They want to grab control of the energy industry and force it into directions they believe are more valid, right or wrong.