Oil is NOT a fossil fuel...

[Eclogite]

Wow! Are you serious?

Yes. Totally. I see you are too.

 

Can you point up the role that scientists had in controlling and directing any of these events/decisions.

1. The invasion of Iraq.

2. The Versailles Treaty

3. The founding of the United Nations

4. The construction of the Berlin Wall.

 

If these are not to your liking, please select any world event of comparable significance and explain, with evidence, in what way the 'science mafia' controlled and directed said event.

[nkt]

The testosterone theory is another one of those crack-pot politically correct Science theories designed to hide the truth. The fact is that the testosterone level of males in general is far higher than that for females, but in practice women tend to be far more cranky than males. In fact a recent study on lesbians showed that violence in lesbian couples ( of which there is a lot) was caused by the partner who had the lowest testosterone level.

So you are saying that a scientific study found a negative correlation? Yet that runs counter to your idea that science self-edits and hides things which don't fit the agenda... So how did you find out about it?

[erich]

To get back on topic:

 

http://www.world-science.net/othernews/051018_poprocksfrm.htm

 

Maybe the study of these rocks will bring new light on the abio- Oil:

[biochemrex]

Dear nkt, I agree that a lot of good work is done in sports science - which coaches ignore since they prefer to prescribe illicite drugs for the quick fix. But which I though being anti-sport read avidly for the health info which I use for myself.

Deae Eclo The Science Mafia burns with envy at such power and seeks to extend such power to itself by fraud - ie Global Warming. HIV causes AIDS etc etc. Their hope is to panic the ignorant into obeying them and to hide the truth so that they will not be prosecuted for crimes against humanity.

How do i find out? By reading the stuff the Science Mafia suppresses.

But to get back to the topic I have just read a new book by Deffeyes ( 2005) "Beyond Oil"

and he makes a good case that Oil is a fossil fuel. Keith

[goku]

God flooded the earth and killed man, beast, creeping thing, and fowls of the air.

that's where the oil comes from, dead stuff.

[Skippy]

God flooded the earth and killed man, beast, creeping thing, and fowls of the air. that's where the oil comes from, dead stuff.

Doesn't make sense. While the flood is the only plausible reason for us being able to find vast pockets of oil today, there was not enough vegetation and other life forms available at that one point in history to have supplied the many billions of gallons of oil which have been used up and are still to be found and used.

[Pyrotex]

Debunking the mythology of 'oil' as we were taught in school...

"In the first place what is oil? Is it 85% carbon, 13% hydrogen and 0.5% oxygen with traces of sulfur and nitrogen. Most geochemists ( in the pay of oil companies) believe that the oil originates from the decomposition of organic matter.

This is a powerful clue to the source of oil. What on Earth has the ability of concentrating carbon out of common sources of carbon? These sources would be carbon dioxide from the air, and carbonates from the ocean. There really isn't much else. The most important "concentrator" is plants. Only plants can extract carbon out of air, soil and water (even the ocean) and form thick layers that are more than 50% carbon.

"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.

You are referring probaly to fossil animals. And you are probably assuming that a "fossil" has to be some kind of imprint in a rock. Not necessarily. Oil IS the "fossil" of thick layers of plant (organic) material put under great pressure and heat, which drives out most of the lighter elements leaving 85% carbon.

 

It is possible that coal is also a "fossil" of plants. Or in some cases, oil may be an end product that had coal as one of its intermediaries.

 

Just because there is a "lowest" geological layer containing fossils of lizards doens't mean that NOTHING lived before the lizards.

"Furthermore, if all the plants, insects and animals that ever lived were all squeezed into a massive ooze, there is no way they could have amounted to the volume of oil that has been found to date. They just would not make that much juice. ...

Hmmm... I would disagree with that. From what I have read in Richard Dawkins' books, only a tiny, tiny fraction of all organic life ever died in such a way that it became fossilized. Otherwise the top kilometers of the entire surface of the Earth would be nothing but fossils. The vast majority of organic life died, decomposed, and had its carbon recycled.

 

It may be important to repeat that we are speaking here not of fossilized bones, or even tissues, but of the condensation and compression of the carbon itself from organic sources, mostly plants. Which have no bones. Except for asparagus.

[erich]

Here's a post from Vince Page concerning Abiotic oil, He is a former GE technology officer, now with Mustang Engineering working on rotating equipment issues on the BP Thunderhorse platform. Details can be found at:

http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9002799&contentId=7005415

 

 

"My personal opinion is that there are now two theories which predict why and where oil is to be found. I see nothing wrong with using both of them, even though they are mutually exclusive. It would not be the first such occurrence of two contrary theories proving useful. Dr. Gold's hypothesis that oil can be found in igneous rock has now been confirmed and -- excepting for the rather weak "crack in the earth" hypothesis proposed by biogenics -- his theory is the only one that can explain such a thing. This has led to other successful igneous rock explorations in the East which have proven fruitful, so the results are also repeatable. This cannot be easily dismissed.

 

With regard to DNA, Dr. Gold contends that the hopanoids are the bacteria which prove his theory, since living matter is known to contain hopanoids at the lower end of the carbon number spectrum, but only bacteria contain carbon molecules C35 and higher. As the following article shows, both are typically present, but the article also states, "In all of the environments studied, the C-32,33,34,35 tetrafunctionalised hopanoids were by far the most abundant biohopanoid group. Of these, bacteriohopanetetrol was generally only a minor component, suggesting that composite hopanoids (i.e. those with a biochemical functionality at C-35) are abundant constituents of sediments of diverse origin." Why should that be, if the sedimentary material is not uniform? Biogenics has no answer.

 

http://www.ceg.ncl.ac.uk/activities/hopanoid/hd2.htm

 

We also have photos of the sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB) that produce H2S (and other components) when seawater is injected into wells to maintain pressure. The spherical objects in the attached photo are ZnS being formed by the surrounding SRB. The bacteria in this process are so well-known that I can inject chemicals into the well to change what the bacteria produce. Nitrogen injection is one option which will reduce H2S formation (H2S is poisonous to humans and will cause sulfide stress cracking in many carbon steels above a critical partial pressure). I can achieve a similar result with a product known as Envirosweet, and I've attached some info on it.

 

One other piece of information that I found persuasive is Dr. Gold's explanation for the presence of C13 in petroleum and the lack of a C13 increase in the oceanic carbonate rocks. Plant life preferentially "inhales" C12 due to the passive diffusion involved in photosynthesis, to the exclusion of C13. Thus, the carbon created by vegetation should be deficient in C13 while the C13/C12 ratio in the atmosphere should increase over time, resulting in a C13 increase in oceanic carbonate rocks. No such process is observed. The carbonate deposits show a remarkably constant isotopic ratio from early Archaen times to the present, while C13 data is used by petroleum experts to indicate the age and origin of various oil deposits. Why should this be if biogenics is the only correct theory to the exclusion of all others? Abiotics asserts that most of the unoxidized carbon deposits in the crust are derived from upwelling hydrocarbons, and therefore have no effect upon the isotopic ratio.

 

Finally, there is an article followed by an interview with Dr. Gold on the internet at:

 

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.07/gold_pr.html

 

As I mentioned before, I'm only half-way through Dr. Gold's book, but so far these are the important takeaway points in my opinion.

 

Vince"

 

 

 

 

 

I'm on the fence. The helium seems the strongest argument; also, the field in the gulf, whose name I can't recall, that seems to replenish itself without surrounding source rock.

 

Erich J. Knight

[Wabdatl]

Hemley received a prize for showing that Methene could be manufactured from calcite and water under high pressure:

 

Balzan Prize Winner 2005 for Mineral physics

 

What happens at extremely high pressures? The two physicists Russell J. Hemley and Ho-kwang (David) Mao have focused on this question in their research. Hemley and Mao both work at the Geophysical Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution in Washington, USA, and devote themselves to investigating the properties of substances under extreme conditions. This particularly means at high temperatures, but also at pressures of up to 2.5 megabars. In 1976, Ho-kwang (David) Mao and his colleagues were the first to create a static pressure of 1 megabar – one million times the ambient pressure at sea level and double what had previously been achieved in a laboratory. Since 1985, in collaboration with Russell J. Hemley, he has further improved the technique of creating such pressures as well as the methods of analysing what happens to substances exposed to them. Hemley and Mao have observed and described numerous extreme-pressure phenomena such as the occurrence of new types of molecular bonds, the creation of new, extremely hard materials, superconductors and magnetic structures, as well as pressure-induced crystallisation and amorphisation. The two scientists are also particularly interested in planetary materials, leading to conclusions about processes taking place within Earth and other planets. Both researchers have already won many awards: Hemley was most recently honoured with the Hillebrand Medal of the American Chemical Society in 2003, while in 2005 Mao received both the Gregori Aminoff Prize of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and the Roebling Medal of the Mineralogical Society of America.

 

 

 

Russell J. Hemley: Speech made at the Prize Award Ceremony 2005

(pdf, 40KB)

Ho-kwang (David) Mao: Speech made at the Prize Award Ceremony 2005

(pdf, 39KB)

Biographical data and publications of Russell J. Hemley and

Ho-kwang (David) Mao (pdf, 41kb)

Research projects 2005

 

source - http://www.balzan.com/EN/preistraeger/hemley.cfm

[Moontanman]

WorldNetDaily: Sustainable oil?

 

Anyone who tells you oil is a fossil fuel and a finite resource obvioulsy hasn't talked to an oil man lately..

Makes you wonder why they keep raising the price..or why we needed to drill in Alaska..and why they insist on calling it a fossil fuel of which there is a looming shortage...

 

Zohaar

 

Actually there good reason to believe what you say is true, read The Deep Hot Biosphere by Thomas gold. that being siad iol is still a limited resource since we use at at a rate many times that at which is it made deep within the earth.

 

Michael

[Tormod]

...which is it made deep within the earth

 

Explain how oil is made deep within the earth, please, and how it is deposited into layers of rock.

[Moontanman]

Explain how oil is made deep within the earth, please, and how it is deposited into layers of rock.

 

I sugest you read The Deep Hot Biosphere by Thomas Gold since it is his idea I am sure he could explain it first hand better than i can by reading his book but it has to do with organisms that live deep within the earths crust using hyrogen and carbon to make hydrocarbons that slowly percolate up through the crust. I won't attempt to explain this in detail but he has some pretty good evidence for oil coming from a non fossil source.

 

Michael

[Tormod]

Can you at least define "deep within the earth"? It seems to me you are saying that the theory states that oil comes from organisms living in the Earth's crust (which is hardly deep within the earth).

 

What causes the percolation?

 

Don't ask me to read the book. If you've read it you should be able to tell me something about it rather than just point to it!

[Moontanman]

Can you at least define "deep within the earth"? It seems to me you are saying that the theory states that oil comes from organisms living in the Earth's crust (which is hardly deep within the earth).

 

What causes the percolation?

 

Don't ask me to read the book. If you've read it you should be able to tell me something about it rather than just point to it!

 

 

The percolation is caused by heat and pressure, deep with in the earth means many miles down where the temps are well above the normal boiling point but intense pressures allow organisms to use water. When the earth was formed it formed with lots carbonaceous chondrite material much like the meteorites that contain this tar like substance. It is fluid at the temps and pressures under the crust. These hydrocarbons continuously well up from the upper and lower mantel, at a point where water can support microorganisms. In some places more than 200 kilometers under the earth these up welling hydrocarbons support a biosphere that is much bigger than the surface biosphere we are familiar with. It is this biosphere if I remember correctly that either produces the oil or at least lives on it as it up wells from the mantel. In his book gold describes many reasons this is true from the isotopes of noble gases contained in oil to the fact that oils is full of microorganisms that can only live at high temps and pressures. It has been several years since I read this book and my son who is at UNC Chapel Hill took it to school with him because one of his professors wanted to read it. If I get it back when he comes home from school I'll read it again and if you want give you a better synopsis of Thomas Gold's ideas. Again you really should read his book. It is quite long and complicated and difficult to do justice to in a few paragraphs in this forum. I am really not comfortable explaining someone else's theories.

 

Michael

[Tormod]

I am really not comfortable explaining someone else's theories.

 

Then why bother discussing them? If you can present Thomas Gold's theories as fact but are not prepared to discuss them, it sounds to me as if you don't really know much about geology in the first place. Sorry.

[Moontanman]

Then why bother discussing them? If you can present Thomas Gold's theories as fact but are not prepared to discuss them, it sounds to me as if you don't really know much about geology in the first place. Sorry.

 

 

I never claimed to know anything about geology, I simply read the post and treplied that I had read about the theory that oil wasn't a fossil fuel and that more could be found in Gold's book. it sounds to me like you are rude!

 

Michael

[jackson33]

I never claimed to know anything about geology, I simply read the post and treplied that I had read about the theory that oil wasn't a fossil fuel and that more could be found in Gold's book. it sounds to me like you are rude!

 

Michael

 

Abeodic Theory, or that oil forms in the earths core, seeping up to the surface over time, into the earths thin crust where for the most part is trapped in rock, salt or other natural shells....may or may not be Mr. Golds idea in total.

 

certainly many along the line of usage have wondered just how much life must have existed to create the poundage of what we have used, believe still is available or what may be found. add to this all life, certainly would not just turn to oil and we have no current reason to think any thing in the past million years or so has turned to crude oil.

 

there are other factors which give cause to questioning all, so called fossil fuels as well, with todays technology. the earths crust is about 40-60 miles deep (as i recall) and the deepest life remains have been found are about three miles deep. oil however has been found near six miles deep. Jack-2, the newest found deep gulf also is very deep and takes explaining to have been from fossil in making. many oil field abandoned, in many places around the world, have been revisited and oils found, in some cases near to the original thought total reserves. there is a current rush to explore for and test for oils in places not previously thought life ever existed, unless we are way off in platonic shift in theory. the Arctic and Antarctic or in those areas a couple.

 

i do believe or at least wonder if life of sorts does form during or very shortly after formations of a planet. we have records of micro-life dating back 3.6 billion years which could be descendants from this period. but i would rather think the oil is more like cooled lava or a final product produced from natural heat/pressure process on nature core elements, then seeps up to the service by natural pressure means.

 

moon, if you think Tormod was rude to you, wait till he/she responds to this post. i rarely get into abeodic principles because it does go against the trend, goes against peak oil or peak that and is controversial. it also leads into global warming or other controversial topics. much is my pure opinion and only my understanding of what i also have read.