OK, thanks Ron. Speaking strictly for myself, I don't think I can buy Rush Limbaugh's citation of some guy somewhere sometime as reason to disbelieve everything we know about petroleum geochemistry - but hey, that's just me. And yes, new fields are discovered from time to time, much as I occasionally discover loose change under my Lazy-Boy... but that doesn't mean its growing down there (dang!).
I do strongly agree with you, however, that our real focus needs to be on figgering out how to continue to power our civilization through these increasingly tough times and - even more importantly for me, because I'm a parent - the even tougher times to come. The reason I care how much crude is left is because the answer to the "how much is left?" question has an important influence on the answer to the larger question. If there are huge oceans of crude down there, far in excess of our needs, then the obvious solution is to drill more wells and build more refineries. If the opposite is true... if we're running out... then the "drill more, refine more" strategy is actually counterproductive, since then logic would dictate that we should be conserving remaining supplies to carry us over until new energy sources can be brought online. Think of it this way: when someone gets shut inside a refrigerator, with a limited supply of air, what he shouldn't do is scream and yell and thrash around, because he's just wasting what little air he has left; what he should do is flip open his penknife and commence to calmly beavering away at popping the lock. In contrast, if he's trapped in a cage... with unlimited air... then yelling and banging against the door makes perfect sense.
I also agree with you that achieving energy independence for the US is vitally important... I'm no happier than you are about the reliability of our foreign suppliers. And so once again, the question of "how much is down there?" is vitally important. If US reserves amount to only about a three-year supply, as all the research indicates, then its just not enough to pin our hopes on.
I'm old enough... and I suspect you are too... to remember the oil shocks of the 70's and 80's. It would have been nice if those had scared this country sober, and had stimulated an effective, sustained, crash program to develop alternative energy sources for the US... we wouldn't be having this debate today. So to, I'm afraid, two or three decades from now my son will look back on 2005 and say the same thing about us. In order to avoid that fate we need a clear, coolheaded view of where we're actually at, plus a LOT of citizen involvement to push us toward where we need to be. I'm guessing you and I are on diffeent ends of the political spectrum, but we have a couple of important thing in common: (1) a complete lack of faith in our politicians to solve the problem, and (2) a belief (or at least a hope) that where the people lead, the leaders will follow.
For much of the 20th Century, American agriculture fed the world. Today, that's no longer true, and increasingly unnecessary, as South America, Canada, Australia, China and India have so hugely ramped up their agricultural industries. So today we in the US have vastly more agricultural capacity than we actually need, and we try to prop up our farmers with subsidies at taxpayer expense. All that ag capacity that is no longer needed or wanted to feed the world is, in principle, available to grow biodiesel - tomorrow - to fuel America's trains, semis, tractors, cars, generating stations, and, yes, our beloved CTDs. We (here on TDR), as diesel consumers, are on the front line of recognizing both the problem and the solution, so let's help lead!
Attention: TDR Forum Junkies 
I would never say such a thing. I meant to say "fabulous" or "fantastic". I have been known to fat finger the keyboard at times.
