For class I have to analyze if 5 different websites are trustworthy sources of information about Peak-Oil theory.
The first site was Counter Currents. Which was a page put together by activists. This group clearly has an alterer motive. Not that having an agenda always makes you untrustworthy, this group did seem to be untrustworthy. The article, although having a wealth of information, didn’t link or cite any of it. So we have no idea if what they say is true or not. The page also didn’t appear to be written for the web and seemed to read like a page from a book.
The Oil Drum was the next website on the list. The website appeared to be a place for discussion about oil to take place. The writers seemed to be from a diverse oil related background. People in the field, people who studied natural resources in school, etc. In short the debate is has a well rounded scope of participants. The website also linked all of its facts and charts to what appeared to be trustworthy sites. Government sites, research organizations, schools. This was the only website I thought fit all of the criteria for being a trusted source of information.
I didn’t find any reason to trust Don’t Tread On Me. Least important, it’s website was hard to read with the overwhelming amount of advertisements on it. More important, they have a very unclear agenda. I was unable to figure out who Don’t Tread On Me is. I can join their academy for free, or give them my money. I know they want revolution, but can’t figure out what kind or how they plan on going about starting one. I mostly find over used quotes and generic theory on the website, no clue as to what they actually want.
Lastly, some of Don’t Tread On Me’s sources are linked to government websites. This is usually good but the websites are so jumbled with jargon that I can’t understand them without a lot of extra time to do research. The other links, which lead to more easily understood websites, are blogs with no sources linked on them. So they link to sources that are incomprehensible to most people or are not trustworthy
Huffington Post, the fourth website was an article by Raymond J Learsy. This site seemed like it could be trusted at face value, but with some research I found it hard to trust. First it was under Political News but it seemed more like an ED/OP piece so I decided to learn more about the writer.
Learsy was in the oil market, and believes that the market is corrupt. The writer has made a portion of his living by trading raw materials, I was unable to ascertain which raw materials. He is also an investor, but I couldn’t figure out what he invests in. So the author may, or may not, have investments in, and made part of his wealth from, oil. If he has then he has a definite agenda when discussing Peak Oil. If he hasn’t then his discussion may not be biased with his personal investments. But, in the end I have no idea so I am unable to trust what he says.
The last website is the Information Clearing House. This site also proved to be untrustworthy. Mostly because the person who runs and writes the website, is just that, one person. This person states that they are only trying to disperse information, not tell the truth. The truth is ours to decide while learning the facts. This is an interesting idea. I like it. But it also doesn’t mean that I can trust a single person that I have no connection too to tell me the truth. Unlike on the Oil Drum site, which appears to only want to disperse information also, there is no one to keep this person in check. No one to tell this person that he is being unreasonable, or to argue if she has alternative facts. Although this website links it facts to other sites, it needs more minds behind the words if it can be trusted.