Oil is not of fossil origin and is inexhaustible

reply to post by polar


Oil may not be from fossils but I highly doubt it is "inexhaustible". I don't think anything is inexhaustible, eventually the fuel needed to run the chemical processes that create oil will run out. Matter/oil is not being spontaneously regenerated and so eventually it will run out (though it may be much farther down the line than we think)...

I think we can find better energies and will have to if we hope to move into a Type 1 Civilization during this millennium...

I really like the way science is sold to ignorant people. Lets see...

How many of you know why we have seasons? Many believe it has to do with elliptic orbit of Earth around the Sun. Seriously, we have winter when Earth is further from the Sun... Check it out.

At first, it was believed that Earth circles Sun in perfect circle, then it turned out it was the ellipse. Now, despite the philosophy which confirms the ellipse theory, the further the planet from the Sun, the more elongated ellipse it traverses. And then, in accordance to this, the gravitational Universe was conceived. But, it turned out that stars away from the center of Galaxy are traveling much faster "than expected", so scientists invented the so called "dark matter" and "dark energy" which cannot be proven, but they "must exist" or else their theory of gravitation controlled Universe would collapse...
Really...

And now the good example.
Not long ago US Navy scientists declared they have created cold fusion in their lab. If this is true, and also it appears that cold fusion is more economical and easier to control, the question is: is there cold fusion in the Universe (perhaps inside stars)? Or are we humans so much advanced and left behind the whole Immense, by inventing cold fusion, compared to which existing stars are nothing but cosmic wildfires

I won't be surprised if it turns out, very soon, that inside the Sun there is an immense ocean of water, where cold fusion occurs. And heated corona, well, just a side effect, like swamp gas burning...

reply to post by Solenki


OK, so if you agree that hydrocarbons/oil can arise from abiotic processes, then how can you assume that those processes don't occur at all on Earth? From my understanding of how life arose, the early Earth would have needed a source of abiotic formed organic molecules produced initially in order for it to take a foothold on our planet. If this process can't or doesn't occur naturally on our planet then, to me at least, it raises some serious problems of how life arose here. Without abiotic hydrocarbon production on this planet, we can't have life arising at any stage, the beginnings of life essentially require abiotic hydrocarbon processes to occur and thus it *must* occur and could still be an ongoing processes that compliments organic processes.

I remember an article a while back, where some so called drained oil wells, back in the 50's and 60's, were capped off because they went dry, amazingly they popped and started to gush oil again in the late 70's.

Scientist's then wanted to know why and this type of theory is exactly what they concluded.


Excellent. Starred and Flagged.



[edit on 16-11-2009 by Realtruth]

Originally posted by polar

Have you ever really gone to an oil platform and drilled the hell out of a hole and talked with experienced people in that area? Did you talk with some oil extractor expert about what he thinks of it?

Thats the problem in the society we live today, it´s all learned from books and few actually go for the real deal. Do you guys say that for real life experience?

I have worked as a Roughneck. Those who work on the rigs have no or little knowledge of the why's or how's to do with Petroleum or NG. I can locate the "F**k Stick" or the "Mouse Hole" for you or speak about the "Draw Works", the "Table", the "Chocks", how to work the "Worms Corner", or properly throw a chain while "Tripping" and how to run a "Survey", but I'd not be able to speak intelligently to this topic.

Since I have a Bachelors in Geology (not worth much) and Chemistry, when I had time I'd go to the Geologist who lived on the site of the rig with questions. Every rig I worked on had a Petrologist or more correctly a Lithologist if memory serves, on site. They would do the Mud Logging and let us know what type of layer we were in which determined the mud mixture among other things like how long the bit would last before we would "Trip" to change the bit.

Those who worked on the rigs, like me could have given you a lot of drunken pseudo-science, but none of us were qualified to speak to this topic. Roughnecks were hired off of bar stools in those days. You had to be large, strong and not afraid to work on what was then listed as the most dangerous profession in the US, which is now listed as Fire Fighting since rigs have improved dramatically in safety.

You should listen to the real expert who was kind enough to participate and remember he speaks French and not read anything into his words that may not be there.

When somebody corrects a mistake or mistruth in a post the appropriate response is "thank you".

reply to post by polar


Most geological research is not done in books or in the classroom, but out in the field and in the labs, only then are the results of the findings put in book form. So therefore the knowlege comes from experience and not just out of a book. Btw, i too have geology degrees, i do not work in the field, but can assure you that solenki is absolutely correct. End of story.

Etymology Dinosaur...(or DNA-saur)

1841, coined by Sir Richard Owen, from Gk. deinos "terrible" + sauros "lizard," of unknown origin. Fig. sense of "person or institution not adapting to change" is from 1952.

Those who refuse to adapt to change (NWO, any regime, for that matter) are destined to become food of the reptiles.


Wrap yer head around that.


--------------


Did not mean to slight Japan, China and Korea.

Nanking Massacre, 13 Dec. 1937-Feb. 38:

Iris Chang, The Rape of Nanking (1997) cites these:
Liu Fang-chu: 430,000
James Yin & Shi Young: 400,000
Sun Zhaiwei: 377,400 corpses disposed of
Wu Tien-wei: 340,000
District Court of Nanking: 300,000
International Military Tribunal of the Far East: 260,000
Fujiwara Akira: 200,000
John Rabe: 50,000-60,000
Hata Ikuhiko: 38,000-42,000

Unit 731, Manchukuo (bio-warfare center: 1937-45)
Discovery Channel: "as many as 200,000 people — Chinese soldiers, private citizens and prisoners of war — had died" [dsc.discovery.com...]
Global Security: Up to 3,000 died in this facility. Perhaps as many 200,000 Chinese died from germ war campaign in Yunnan Province, Ningbo, and Changde. [www.globalsecurity.org...]
Bombing: 71,105 Chinese k. by Japanese bombing (Clodfelter)


users.erols.com...

Do you think there are possibly more people listed here than what there are graves for?

Wow, there's so many layers to conspiracy theories. I always thought the petrochemical industries were against alternative sources like hemp in the profit and even at the cost of expending fossil fuels. I never considered that fossil fuels might be abundant. It's hard to know what to believe anymore.

Originally posted by Solenki

- Oil can not have 500 million years and remain so fresh in the ground today. The long molecules of carbon have would be decomposed. The oil we use is recent, otherwise it would have already volatilized long. This contradicts the appearance of oil reserves, but proves the theory of abiotic oil.

Wrong, the kinetics about oil formation are so slow, that's why we can extract oil formed a long time ago.
By the way, the old fields produces mainly gaz, and in fact it is explained by the fact that during maturating process we go form organic matter to oil, to gaz and then to coal or over burden matter

sure that quote might be wrong, though what happens when the tectonic plates move around, and whole continents are made. Wouldn't a lot of oil be lost then?

reply to post by Selahobed


And Solensk noted that he has seen this evidence.

People, look at THIS AGAIN

Video presentation from Carnegie Institute for Science



edit to add-Well Selahobed, as long as you are satisfied this is absolutely factual, can you help us with another theory? Is faster than light speed possible? What is the absolute contents of the Earth's inner core? How about the ANSWER TO LIFE, THE UNIVERSE, AND EVERYTHING? Is the answer 32?

JJJJJJJJJJEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ


[edit on 11/16/2009 by endisnighe]

Originally posted by die_another_day
reply to post by polar

 

However, it would be interesting if petroleum can be produced under "natural conditions" in a lab.

That would be a conspiracy against the oil companies who might have advertised all of this "peak oil" to gain profit.

[edit on 11/16/2009 by die_another_day]

What? You mean like diamonds. You know they used to teach you that it took billions of years to make those.....They kept telling everyone that for decades while they were making them in the lab..........oops.

William Cooper Said this twenty years ago in his book "Behold a Pale Horse"

Interesting. Seems to be the oil industry reported "peak oil" to increase profits around the same time the Fed. Res. act was implemented to increase bank profit. Now a carbon tax & cap&trade. We are took again. Oil is replenishing itself & those in control are profiting once more.

This is complete bollocks. *Nothing* is inexhaustible. There is nothing to suggest that petroleum is anything but a fossil fuel created by ancient organic matter that was compressed over millions of years. Not a shred of evidence...

But let's pretend that this is all true, just for fun. OK, we have a never-ending supply of oil. Well, we're slowly but surely poisoning our atmosphere with emissions from burning this oil. Never mind global warming and all that fun stuff, which is also a problem. Let's pretend that never happened. Even so, we're gassing ourselves to death by burning oil. Not to mention we're using petroleum to make various plastics and other chemicals, which are also poisoning us.

It is pleasant to pretend that we have no problems, that oil will always be plentiful, that energy will always be available. Most of us will not live long enough to see the end of oil, so we can still ignore the problem without consequences to ourselves. However, we're dumping huge problems onto our descendants, who will not thank us for doing so. Oil is not inexhaustible. We will run out of oil, sooner rather than later. Our demand for oil continues to increase, while reserves begin to dwindle. Pretending there isn't a problem isn't going to work. There is a problem, and it's getting worse. Moreover, the consequences of burning oil are also getting worse.

We're running out of oil. We need to find other ways of getting our energy, and we also need to reduce our need for energy altogether. Playing make-believe doesn't make the problem go away.

reply to post by chiron613


I will not argue with anything you just stated, except one thing.

We cannot just blow over scientific discovery.

I would love to be able to see all of the energy patents that have been declared National Security Top Secret, wouldn't you?

And no, calling us delusional or childish, gets you no where.

reply to post by chiron613


Funny thing is that either you have no proof of anything you said, or it can be highly contested.

reply to post by endisnighe


Ohhhh brother lol... As has been previously stated, oil samples can be broken down, analysed and the various genus of individual plants and animals can be identified. I have seen this with my own eyes and is not conjecture or hypothesis, but FACT... There is no doubt that some compounds can be created through thermodynamic processes at depth, however what needs to be taken into account is oceanic plate that gets recycled back into the earths interior at subductiuon zones will contain those fossil elements also. Whether or not inorganic compounds created at depth is viable is still unproven, however it would be interesting to see where the research could lead.

No it is not possible to travel faster than light however spacial folding is theoretically possible.
The core is iron, which creates the earths magnetic field, geophysics proves this.
And the answer to everything is 42, have you even read hitchhikers guide to the galaxy?Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzz

[edit on 123030p://f30Tuesday by Selahobed]

Great article. O.k. lets say its all true, and Oil is not made from fossils and we have an unlimited supply.

This is just more Proof of why we Must stop using oil and look for other means of energy.

The reason is that Oil companies must know this too. They keep going up on their prices making everything higher because the world believes we have a shortage. They will not lower the price so we can all have dirt cheap energy/fuel. There is too much money in Oil. They are not going to give themselves a cut in pay!

Therefore we must stop using oil and find Free or cheaper sources of energy. We already have that.. Tesla proved it. Now we just need to form our own government, power our own country with free energy and onl then will the peoples of the world demand from thier governments to do the same.

reply to post by polar

The authors of this tosh you're posting are a political hack and a coin salesman. That makes them authorities on petroleum geology?

Hahahahaha!

Of all the self-serving lies put about by selfish, bloated right-wing dinosaurs, the 'oil isn't organic' claim has to be the most idiotic and repellent.

It's simply a justification for their wasteful wallowing and guzzling.

Oil is dirty stuff, but it's nowhere near as filthy as the motives of these liars.

Originally posted by Selahobed
reply to post by endisnighe

 

And the answer to everything is 42, have you even read hitchhikers guide to the galaxy?Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzz

[edit on 123030p://f30Tuesday by Selahobed]

After reading his vacuous rants, I doubt he's read Adams' or any other authors work!

His claims of being an engineer are just as doubtful.

He is a classic example of the new era of internet "researchers" who have never picked up a text in their life and cobble together the most spurious assertions, in an attempt to delude others into believing they are speaking with authority.

If any of my undergrad students constructed arguments as incoherently as his, I would have drowned them in a bucket during the first term.