Aren't hydraulics that are pressurised with gas actually pneumatics?

And this is a statement born out of ignorance of what peak oil actually is. It is maximal sustainable production.
Tar sands won't ever get you over a peak because the oil from tar sands is difficult to extract, so it won't be possible to extract as much oil from tar sands, as there was extracted from easy to claim oil wells at their peak. You won't be possibly able to extract as much oil from the difficult sources as you had extracted it from the easy ones.
Even if you get your oil off world, you certainly won't be able to get 80 millions of barrels a day from space. Even if one very distant day in the future the transport capacity would enable humankind this feat, the humankind would not need oil by then anymore.

Supply and demand function is not magical, as you imply. Sometimes there is just no more supply, no matter how high the demand is. And sometimes the supply costs have risen so high that it would be way cheaper to find an alternative solution. Thus in any of these cases oil production would not ever reach the erstwhile peak.

USA hit their peak oil in the 1970ies in fact. Russia reached peak oil about a year ago. When the ISIS situation is over, then the cheap oil from Iraq will also be gone. Oil price will go up long term, even when they are political driven fluctuations right now.

you don't need a driving license for a horse.

you mean the crusades against the very much christian russians and czech? and since when were livonian peasants conquerors who's land had to be retaken?

3. Soviet communism is what trainwrecked most of eastern europe and several asian countries whose preexisting regimes favored heavy handed states anyway. Then there's the self-loathing cultures it created in places like sweden. I hardly call any of this a success.

Along with pushing literacy from 24% to 99.8%, sending a man into space, advancing the technology level from being more than 50 years behind the rest of the developed world to being maybe 10 years behind and doubling the life expectancy. No sir, totally not a success.

You forgot Poland *scnr*

Eh, not quite. The world revolution rhetoric died with Lenin and was definitely buried with Stalin for good.

Well duh. But naked force has started more conflicts than any other course in history. All of them, in fact.
There are many reasons why I don't like Heinlein's works, and his condescending jingoism is one of them. The sad thing about it is that the only reason for his attitude was that he was scared shitless of Russians.

Really? Wake me up when they stop watering their lawns and start wearing stillsuits.

Actually, English is one of the more difficult languages to read because of all the irregularities. Even French is easier.

Estonian is, by the way, one of the easiest languages to read. No diacritic salad like in Czech, or letter clusters for a single phoneme like in Polish, French and German, no irregularities, long vocals are marked as a double vocals, which makes the most sense, double consonants are exactly that. Everything is written as you would say it. And in contrast to Finnish or German the words are usually much shorter.
Everything else in Estonian is, unfortunately, absolutely hostile to would-be learners.

This is nothing special and works with many languages. I have heard this kind of conversations in German and in Russian as well. As long as both parties speak a common language, even if it is broken, they can get their message across as long as they don't try to use idioms. These almost never work the same way, if at all.

The difference is that there are many more ships than aircraft. Also more difficult to enforce because the majority of ships are registered in Liberia. The fact that ships are built in much smaller series so there are many more different ships than different airplanes doesn't help it either.

if you are genuinely curious, try this book for starters. It is a bit superficial, but to understand how christianity was born you have to understand the then common sects of judaism and the political realities.

Or this one for a much more in-depth research on pharisees.

That is the thing of it, the description of pharisees in the bible is contrary to all the historical evidence. In judaism, pharisees had the most progressive and honest school of thought and ultimately were responsible for survival of judaism after the Romans threw the Jews out of Israel. For early christianity, judaism was a competitor so of course the description of the last surviving kind of judaism in the bible is slanderous. In reality, the behaviour of Jesus, as described in the bible, would be not that much different from the contemporary pharisees. Like I already said, then-pharisees are now-rabbis.