"Comrade Mark J was talking about something with a lot more depth than the price form. "
^^^^^ CB: Yes, I have been wanting to suggest this for a while in this debate. I don't quite see how that literally and rigorously the 2nd law of thermodynamics is expressed or causes a limit with respect to oil. But the key issue is not price fluctuation, but the catastrophic impact of loss of a basic means of production for this technological regime. by Waistline2 Comment Mark Jones thesis - in my opinion, had very little to do with price fluctuations and riveting his thesis to price fluctuations does not accurately explain his salient points. Comrade Jones put forward a proposition that humanity itself had reached or would shortly reach the "event horizon" or the nodal point or that point in the bell curve where the absolute decline fossil fuel and energy production runs into the thermodynamic barrier with all its social consequences. Comrade Jones also advanced the proposition that this thermodynamic principle was the underlying unseen "law" - impulse, that compelled industrial socialism in the Soviet Union to reach its historical limitation (and he throws in the issue of industrial structures for good measure) in 1945. It seems that trying to prove the operation of the law of thermodynamics on the basis of monthly price fluctuation is a losing cause. Fifty years is a very short time in human history - one way or another. Henry C. K. Liu did an excellent reprint of an article he wrote two years ago (the A List) on the price of oil predicting the $40.00 range and the mechanics that would lower the price . . . only for it to further rise. If Mark J. predicted the rise in the price of oil he was most certainly correct along with everyone else on earth. Comrade Mark J was talking about something with a lot more depth than the price form. Melvin P.
