From the May 2007 and May 1857 issue of Scientific American:

We believe that no particular use is made of the fluid petroleum, from the ‘tar springs’ of California, except as a lotion for bruises and rheumatic affections. It has a pungent odor, and although it can be made to burn with a pretty good light, its smell is offensive. This, perhaps, may be obviated by distilling it with some acid; we believe that this is not impossible in this age of advanced chemistry. If the offensive odor could be removed, a valuable and profitable business might be carried on in manufacturing burning fluid from it.

I find the hubris that we can predict we know what energy we will be using for lighting in 150 years astonishing. But whatever it is, if we project economically viable reserves vs. current usage, we can project we will run out of it. It’s a good thing we found a replacement for whale oil and tallow in time.

I think scientists and journalists misunderstand what ‘finite’ means when it comes to resources. Even a compact finite sphere can seem infinite if as you approach the edge, you slow down, the sphere grows, or your direction changes. When resources get scarce, price rises slows down usage, viable reserves grow, substitutes change usage patterns and magically–as if stayed by an invisible hand–we never run out of anything.

For thousands of years the only thing consistently getting more expensive is the value of human attention (Simon).

[Update from Rand, Saturday afternoon]

Per a comment:

Now, I consider myself a moderate libertarian and thus strongly disagree with them on this but while I am a strong believer in innovation and technological progress, the argument about finite resources does give me pause at times. What about industrial metal ores etc…?

Could we not at some point simply run out of materials to use?

I would point out that there’s no such thing as a non-renewable resource. Except, of course, time, and (ultimately) energy. It will be a very long time, though, before we run out of either, at least as a species.

By the way, Sam. What’s with all the marathon posting? Did you just lose your job? Not that I don’t appreciate it. Just sayin’…

And the left continues to attempt to rewrite the history of the Six-Day War. I remember the war, and some of the jokes about it afterward (it was so short because the Israelis were renting their tanks from Hertz), though it was no laughing matter at the time–I had many Jewish schoolmates. And in a sense, of course, the war goes on, because Israel’s enemies refuse to abandon their goal of destruction of the Jewish state.

[Update in the late afternoon]

And predictably, the Arabs blame all their problems on their failed attempt to destroy Israel four decades ago.

When a leader has been responsible for a military disaster in a misbegotten war, it’s time for him to resign.

Most familiar with the history of the second world war are aware of the failed attempt to assassinate Hitler in 1944. But this is the first time I heard of one a year earlier. If the story is true, it’s ironic that the Fuehrer was saved by a British bombing raid.

…by the Marines happened 231 years ago, in the Bahamas. Before they were the US Marines.

Cecil Adams apparently never heard of the Wilkes Exploration Expedition, in which he suppressed a (probably justifiable) mutiny. Unless the question is about successful mutinies, but it doesn’t seem like he uses that restriction in his own examples. And of course, it’s also unsurprising that he’s unaware of it–it’s a little-known part of American history, at least until this book came out.

In Jamestown.

I had never realized that the anniversary of the founding of the Marines was the day before Armistice Day. It’s been two hundred thirty one years. They’re older than the nation itself–there’s never been a US of A without them.

Such may indeed be the state of our edumacational system. Early to bed, early to rise, makes one have no fear except fear itself.

[Sunday morning update]

Alan K. Henderson has some more misnamed action figures.

Two thirds of a century later, many historians are saying that the RAF didn’t win the Battle of Britain.