Talk:Hubbert curve

message: Discussion that might be relevant to this article is going on at Talk:Hubbert peak theory.
22:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Hubbert peak theory]] 

message: Most of the content here is based on the alternative method Hubbert presented in the '86 paper.  Where are the original formulas based on differential calculations that the '56 paper discussed?  That is the true Hubbert curve.
Carbonate 23:53, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The differential equations 

message: Propose that Hubbert math be merged into this article because "Hubbert math is a wp:neologism,, and so not appropriate for an article title.  The information from 'math' fits in naturally and compliments Hubbert curve, and what doesn't go there could fit in Hubbert peak theory.  NJGW (talk) 03:50, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hubbert math is redirected here per wp:NEO.  The history is preserved so that any information which seems important may be placed in this article.  NJGW (talk) 23:22, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal from Hubbert math 

message: The actual shape of the Hubbert curve, as proposed in his famous 1956 paper (and in numerous other occasions) is not a logistic curve ; it is not even symmetrical.
The logistic curve, as an approximation of Hubbert's proposal, came much later.--Environnement2100 (talk) 01:14, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice find... figure 21.  Interesting caption though.  Doesn't seem to be the prototypical curve.  More like a model based on observations.  Hubbert liked to account for those.  Have a look at Figure 11 if you want to see the prototype.  71.125.71.215 (talk) 00:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As a consequence of the above, I recommend that the text be changed accordingly - typically the paragraph Shape. All account of logistic curve, which does not appear in M. Hubbert's work, may be moved to either Hubbert peak theory or Peak oil article. --Environnement2100 (talk) 02:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are you so set on getting rid of the word logistic?  Not only is it the most common version of the curve in current models, it is also considered by Mathematicians to be what Hubbert himself used 1956.  You're either in way over your head or being facetious.  71.125.71.215 (talk) 03:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  The 2006 study doesnt really test Hubbert and claims some points about Hubbert which are not to be found in the original study. First Huberts 1956 paper was already about global peak oil, gas and coal, the actual figures far from what happened. This is completely left out in the 2006 "testing paper". Hubbert used among other an asymmetric statistical model to predict global oil produccion after the peak. Neither a Bell curve nore a gaussian Model were used for this. Bakulan (talk) 21:39, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hubbert's curve shape 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hubbert curve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080527233843/http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/1956/1956.pdf to http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/1956/1956.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:57, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Article currently reads in just the third sentence It has gained a high degree of popularity in the scientific community for predicting the depletion of various natural resources. No source cited, and the language is weasely. In fact the theory is controversial at best. Andrewa (talk) 10:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious