Nothing INSIDE the earth is infinite.
You need to go study logic. You constructed a “straw man” argument.
You won’t ever learn anything in discussions like you are conducting.
That was exactly what I was saying. My post said, specifically,
"The earth is finite, and so are fossil fuels. They may be renewable, however. And there might be more than we could ever use.
For that, I have been treated to several rounds of people trying to redefine infinity. My new definition of infinity is "the lengths to which people will go to redefine the language to suit themselves." I have learned that much in this discussion. Thank you for that.
Don't know what you mean by "straw man". I made a statement that is unquestionable. In fact, in the very article, it states:
"Far from being infinite, Laherrère said, petroleum supplies are finite by definition. The Earth contains only so many hydrocarbon molecules that can be extracted by human effort. “Once we have used up the easy oil, new types of cheap energy will not appear by magic. We will keep drilling for oil, and it will not be easy to get. Look at the enormously expensive equipment they use now only to keep up production.”
I agree with the part about petroleum supplies being finite by definition, and that is all I said. I disagree with Laherrere's opinion that we are advancing towards peak oil. We keep finding new source of energy, and there is a lot of evidence that the earth itself is creating more hydrocarbons. So, where is the straw man, man? I thought this was a place to discuss the article.
As infinite as growing wheat.