Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Oil is from Asteroids, not Organics!

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Millions of Americans learned in grade school that oil deposits originated in the age of dinosaurs, when vegetation in lush forests was buried and subjected to high heat and pressure. Those extreme conditions supposedly transformed the hydrocarbons in vegetation into the hydrocarbons of petroleum.

"That's nonsense," snapped Thomas Gold, a scientist at Cornell University. "There's not a shred of evidence from chemistry, geology, or any other science to support it. It has no place in textbooks and school classrooms."



Oil is often called a 'fossil' fuel; the idea being that it comes from formerly living organisms. This may have been plausible back when oil wells were drilled into the fossil layers of the earth's crust; but today, great quantities of oil are found in deeper wells that are found below the level of any fossils. How could then oil have come from fossils, or decomposed former living matter, if it exists in rock formations far below layers of fossils the evidence of formerly living organisms? It must not come from living matter at all!

Tar-coated comets and oily asteroids

The idea that complex hydrocarbons (the main components of petroleum oil) are a natural part of the Earth's crust should come as no surprise to scientists who study comets and asteroids. Some of the meteorites that fall to Earth are rich in tar-like hydrocarbons. Comets such as Halley and Hale-Bopp are thought to have a skin of tar-like material covering a "dirty snowball" -- like an ice cream dipped in chocolate.



The early Earth was made of the same stuff as comets and asteroids, so the presence of hydrocarbons deep within the Earth is to be expected. It used to be thought that the fierce heat deep underground was sufficient to break up any hydrocarbon molecules. However, Russian scientists have demonstrated that the enormous pressures prevent this.

Even if the Earth did not manage to retain its original supply of hydrocarbons it is likely that the rain of comets, space dust and asteroids over billions of years would have kept the crust of the Earth topped off with the raw ingredients for oil.



Hydrocarbon sources can be found at great depths below the surface, not a few miles, but a few hundred miles. The deep-Earth sources of hydrocarbons are still wor-king to this day, pumping tons of petroleum and methane gas up through the deep Earth's cracks and pores to the shallow sedimentary levels. It is here that drilling rigs access the upwelling that has been vertically dammed into reservoirs. Hydrocarbons did not come from rotting prehistoric plants; they were here a few billion years before life occurred.

Professor Gold discusses the latest space research in-formation, much of which he discovered or pro-posed, which confirms that hydrocarbons are present on lifeless heavenly bodies such as moons, asteroids, comets, and, of course, the gas giants Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptu-ne. In fact, the blue coloration of planet Uranus is the result of methane, a so-called fossil fuel. As Gold comments,"I am sure there are no big stagnant swamps on Titan or Pluto."

To support the abiogenic theory, Gold notes several points:

1) The geographical patterns that emerge from the oil fields, whether in the Middle East or Indonesia, all exhibit a correspondence to deep-Earth geological structure. This is in stark contrast to the haphazard deposition we find with surface life, and its subsequent fossils, which have never exhibited such patterns.

2) Hydrocarbons from a particular oil field do not exhibit chemical changes as the depth of their extraction increases. But the fossils above them have constantly changing biologi-cal "signatures," which relate to their particular paleontological periods.

3) Hydrocarbons are found in geographic areas where the amount of prehistoric life known to be at that location could never have provided the quantities of hydrocarbons involved. Most surface life is comprised of 90 percent water and 10 percent organic compounds. So, even if that 10 percent that is organic compounds had been entirely converted to "fossil fuels," it would not come close to the mass of hydrocarbons already extracted during the last 130 years.

4) Because hydrocarbons are so consistent, the use of distinct trace metals can be used to identify their geographic: origin.

5) The existing petroleum reservoirs are refilling themselves - from the bottom! Gold ex-plains: "The phenomenon of petroleum reservoirs that seem to refill themselves is widely reported, notably in the Middle East and along the U.S. Gulf Coast. I regard these occurrences as strong evidence for the deep-Earth gas theory."

Resources:

www.aapg.org...
www.davidicke.net...
mitosyfraudes.8k.com...


[Edited on 16-3-2004 by kinglizard]




posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 12:55 PM
link   
It's interesting, but it really doesn't disprove the idea that fossil fuels can be just what we think they are.
I mean, it is fairly certain that hydrocarbons can take shape on their own, not from fossilized remains, but just during solar fusion or anything else out in space.

Either way, it doesn't sound like this guy cares much about anything other than sucking the earth clean.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Oil could be formed anywhere or from anything as long as the ingredients are there as well as the right conditions. Maybe we have some oil from both earth and asteroids. Thanks for the cool post. It's something to think about.

It kinda reminds me of that oil from the X-Files, let's hope asteroid oil isn't an intelligent being that can get into our eyes. Just kidding of course


[Edited on 16-3-2004 by Mandalorianwarrior]



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mandalorianwarrior
Maybe we have some oil from both earth and asteroids


I dont see how we could have oil created from organics and asteroids. How could two totally different processes produce the same thing? If you ask any geologist or biologist how oil is formed from organic material they wont be able to tell you because they simply dont know. The article says if 100% of the organic material was somehow converted into oil it wouldnt account for more than 10% of the oil extracted during the last 130 years. It must have been brought to earth by millions of years of bombardment by asteroids.

[Edited on 16-3-2004 by kinglizard]



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   
I think it would be possible to get oil from earth and space. It doesn't become oil until the right ingredients are kept and the wrong ones are filtered out. It doesn't matter where the ingredients come from at all. It just matters what the ingredients needed are. Asteroids and earth share most all of the same elements, just in different proportions.

So we know for sure how much organic material has existed on earth throughout history? I highly doubt it. Just cause we have found such a minor amount of organic matter to have existed doesn't mean we have found all organic matter to have existed. Most of the eveidence is probably lost since it has turned into oil, if that's where we get oil from.

and so much more space debri has fallen on earth than earth has had organic matter? That could lead to another good debate no one could prove.

Maybe the only way we get so much oil is if we got the ingredients from two different sources. It's pretty hard to say that oil from outer space is the correct answer after it still has to be proven. Maybe it is true but more proof would be needed. It may be neither from Organic matter or space debri. It could be from the center of the earth (which actually would have been space debri long ago) from some kind of cooling down process.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 03:13 PM
link   
While I do not agree that space "oil carrying asteroids" contributed to the oil on Earth. I do agree 100% to where oil comes from. It is the conversion of the Earths outer core material from internal heat that creates oil. How vast this layer of the "right" material compostion is, is unknown. But the magma channels that form volcanic features are the same channels that build the oil tables. Just hundereds of miles below the surface.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 03:46 PM
link   
I have heard extremist of Gold's theory say we should never have to worry about running out of oil because there are plenty reserves in the world, and more is constantly being made within the Earth. Whatever.

Swampy areas covered by sediment and sealed of for a time in seems quite resonable im my imagination for making petrolium. Swamp gas can ignite, microrganism in compost piles can produce the heated needed for chemical process and cooking for a million years is plenty.

I do not doubt that some asteriods, and other wanderers and such are largely carbon, perhaps even black carbon which could explain why there is so much dark mater in the universe.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:00 PM
link   
very interesting theory, and it does have valid points. until it's proven though i'll continue believing that oil is from dead plants and whatnot.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:03 PM
link   
There is a slight problem with the reasoning of the oil-asteroid theory.

According to contemporary observations and limited extrapolation, only about 4x10^14 cubic meters of asteroid have hit the earth since the "beginning" of earthliness. If we were to assume that earth-oil is the product of these asteroids, based on known oil reserves, these asteroids would have to average roughly 0.04% oil by volume.

This, on the surface, does not seem extraordinary at all. However, on the grand scale of averages we are talking about (7 billion years, 40 trillion cubic meters, etc) there should be no discernible difference between the oil concentration by volume of earth, and the asteroids (since their material source is the same: space-floaty-#). We now see we have a problem: the earth is only 0.000000015% oil by volume. The difference between the two figures is astronomical.

Since this theory requires such a massive difference in composition between the space-crap that formed earth and the space-crap that forms the average asteroid over a time-scale spanning 7 billion years, it seems very unrealistic. To put it into perspective: there would have to be as much oil in the earth as carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere for this theory to be plausible.

Cas



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:05 PM
link   
If it were true:





posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:12 PM
link   
KingLizard
Good Information
It was basically on this line of oil theory that prompted me to look for other reasons for such things as invading other countrys.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:12 PM
link   
The Author of that theory has convienetly overlooked the other major source of fossil fuel, coal. Coal beds have all of the traits that oil formations do plus one more, there are distinct fossil impressions/ tree trunks, etc that have been found associated with coal.

This sounds like another disguised attempt at refuting the theory of evolution.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by robertfenix
While I do not agree that space "oil carrying asteroids" contributed to the oil on Earth. I do agree 100% to where oil comes from. It is the conversion of the Earths outer core material from internal heat that creates oil. How vast this layer of the "right" material compostion is, is unknown. But the magma channels that form volcanic features are the same channels that build the oil tables. Just hundereds of miles below the surface.



As usual, Bob, I can't figure out what you are trying to say.

Are you suggesting that petroleum is formed in the subduction process, or are you just trying to explain the process of sedementaion and metamorphism?



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:23 PM
link   
I have heard of this theory before, but could not remember where I heard it from. Thanks for posting. I do not think we have been bombarded by enough asteroids to account for all the oil in the earth though.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
I have heard of this theory before, but could not remember where I heard it from. Thanks for posting. I do not think we have been bombarded by enough asteroids to account for all the oil in the earth though.


I think the earth is 4.6 billion years old, plenty of time to accumulate oil from meteorite impacts. Im not suggesting that every comet and meteorite impact contributed to oil buildup on earth because they are made of different stuff. Take a look at the moon through binoculars and you will see craters on top of craters. The earth would look similar if we didnt have an atmosphere and weather to erode the marks. Its likely that earth would be more pot marked and struck more often because of the greater gravity this planet creates. It can pull in more stuff.
I dont think we can have it both ways, oil is from organic life or its not.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Well, I thought it was Extremely Bad Science until I looked up Gold's website... and yes, he's a prof emeritus of astrophysics at Cornell and yes he's got books and research papers out and yes, that IS what he was saying in 1993.
people.cornell.edu...

Lots of people (including geologists) have problems with his interpretation:
www.news.cornell.edu...

However, even his students have found weaknesses in this and other theories of his (in this one, he says that solar sails aren't possible... and we know this to be wrong):
www.planetary.org...

He's very vocal about scientists who tend to avoid controversial or unusual ideas:
www.amasci.com...

I suspect that this is because people criticize him so heavily. I personally think it's too farfetched; that I haven't seen any evidence that comets are tarballs or that there was enough of that stuff floating around that hit the earth. But I could be open to other interpretations if better evidence came up.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Yes Coal=Carbon=Oil

Granted to make Oil you need more then Carbon, but it is still the building block.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by robertfenix
Yes Coal=Carbon=Oil

Granted to make Oil you need more then Carbon, but it is still the building block.


It's easy to say but can you prove it? Is this a new theory of yours, or do you have a link? I don't understand how we get oil from coal.

Does coal come from oil, or does oil come from coal?


[Edited on 16-3-2004 by kinglizard]



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Question: How were the layers of coal made?

Answer: A great many trees and plants, blown down by the waves and wind, became thick layers in the flood waters. They became soaked with water and sank. Then they were buried deep in the mud. Pressure crushed them together and turned them into black substance (material) called carbon. It takes 12 feet of wood to make one foot of coal. There are coal layers which are 60 feet thick. Today, there is no place on earth where coal layers are still being formed from plant life. Trees and plant life that fall on the ground decay (rot) and become part of the topsoil.

The argument is that this doesn't happen, and that these materials came from asteroids.

[Edited on 16-3-2004 by kinglizard]



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Well let's see,

Even if there is a inexaustable supply of abiotic oil coming from somewhere in the core and feul is free. What are we to do about global warming or is that a myth also?

Polar Bear





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join