Posted on 02/02/2008 1:52:27 AM PST by Fred Nerks
New evidence supports premise that Earth produces endless supply
------------------
A study published in Science Magazine today presents new evidence supporting the abiotic theory for the origin of oil, which asserts oil is a natural product the Earth generates constantly rather than a "fossil fuel" derived from decaying ancient forests and dead dinosaurs.
The lead scientist on the study – Giora Proskurowski of the School of Oceanography at the University of Washington in Seattle – says the hydrogen-rich fluids venting at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean in the Lost City Hydrothermal Field were produced by the abiotic synthesis of hydrocarbons in the mantle of the earth.
The abiotic theory of the origin of oil directly challenges the conventional scientific theory that hydrocarbons are organic in nature, created by the deterioration of biological material deposited millions of years ago in sedimentary rock and converted to hydrocarbons under intense heat and pressure.
While organic theorists have posited that the material required to produce hydrocarbons in sedimentary rock came from dinosaurs and ancient forests, more recent argument have suggested living organisms as small as plankton may have been the origin...
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
LOL!
I still have a disk:
5.25 floppy
It says:
Personal Computer
Computer Language Series
________________________________________________
DOS
Version 1.10 Copyright IBM Corp. 1981-1982
Licensed Material - Program Property of IBM All Rights Reserved
Maybe I’ll try to boot it later...
;-)
It is as I suspected. You ARE lazy and you apparently “know” things that just aren’t true because of that, and because you think of yourself as a “scientist” as opposed to “normal” people like me. It may surprise you to know that I have a technical education I suspect is at least comparable to your own, and I am in no way normal.
Maybe it’s just because I don’t yet consider my education complete after nearly 70 years of finding out that there are many things that we think we know that just aren’t so.
I’d be on quite solid ground if I were to say that something over 99% of the methane on earth (and IN the Earth) has been present since planetary accretion, and that deep earth, abiogenic methane is many orders of magnitude more plentiful than the methane found near the surface (i.e. at depths of <1km).
Robots take scientists into sea depths
Seattle Post-Intelligencer | 7/29/05 | Tom Paulson
Posted on 08/02/2005 3:42:11 PM EDT by LibWhacker
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1455539/posts
Shedding light on deep-sea thermal vents
Cosmos magazine | Thursday, January 10, 2008 | Agence France-Presse
Posted on 01/15/2008 3:20:49 PM EST by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1954189/posts
Deep-ocean vents are a source of oil and gas
(evidence of abiogenic hydrocarbons)
Nature News | 31 January 2008 | Rachel Courtland
Posted on 02/01/2008 12:42:53 AM EST by neverdem
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1963050/posts
Lost City pumps life-essential chemicals at rates unseen at typical black smokers
University of Washington | January 31, 2008 | Unknown
Posted on 01/31/2008 4:28:30 PM EST by decimon
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1962790/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=thomasgold
LOL
Thanks!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1963689/posts?page=8#8
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1963689/posts?page=92#92
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1963689/posts?page=96#96
Once the War on Climate Change is in full swing, it won’t matter if it were discovered that one could simply throw a magic bean in his gas tank every night and the tank would fill itself by morning; we will be disallowed its use because it will destroy the planet.
The Manley oil field, the last owner of record from the Manley family foisted it off on the city just to escape the liability.
Hoax or reality, there would still be a rate at which the process would work; anyway, why would the extractor be in any hurry to flood the market and reduce his own profit?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47448
The discussion of Kerogen (second article) made the case that the term mixes fact with theory. That is slippery ground. It reminds me of the term “instinct” which compounds fact and Darwinian theory. In each case, the factual components do not prove the theory. The theory, or hypothesis, provides an explanation for the facts.
I think the article is well written for intelligent people who are prepared to think scientifically. Others may disagree with the conclusion. Their challenge, it seems to me, is to respond with more persuasive writing. Reliance one credentials is not enough. I’m less interested in what “scientists” think, than in what people who think scientifically think. Not all credentialed scientists think scientifically. Not everyone who thinks scientifically has the credentials some would demand.
Not a global warming thread but something you might find interesting.
Do you think the oceans were at one time far deeper than they are now? If the oceans covered more of the land than they do now, then they were probably less deep. So how did all that plankton get under the ocean floor to create the evidence of petroleum discussed in the article? Did they did their way under the surface of the ocean floor and decompose there? Where are all the signs of life in the Middle East that would have created such vast quantities of oil?
It is far more likely that the petroleum we drill and distill was a geologic phenomenon just as the rock creation. The amount of carbon is irrelevant to me, as well as whether there is any sign of living things being found in the sludge. Hey, I admit I am no geologist and don't know much about the subject. But, as I said, it just seems ludicrous to me to think that oil comes solely from decomposing dinosaurs or plant matter.
A university power plant manager and I were looking out the window of his facility some years back and observed one of the students picking though the coal pile, putting little pieces of pyrite in his pockets. He would dart here and there as new pieces turned up. Really funny...
While the price of oil would be reduced a great deal, they would still be raking in cash by selling to China and other industrialized nations with little or no oil production.
They were the same with oil at $20 a barrel as they are at $100. Jihad is not very expensive.
You know, I was as nice as possible and quite straight forward in my reply to you. Unfortunately, both aspects appear to be lost on you.
In fact as I understand it, the middle east is part of a rift valley system.
It is being torn apart and sinking. Not rising from great ocean depths.
All is not lost. About 25% or so of kids are outside the public school system now. We have freedom of information. The USA is still a great country. It’s just that, as the great patriot Patrick Henry (?) said, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” We just have to be vigilant.
“my beloved wife has not yet brought me coffee.”
It’s ok to make your own. :)
It’s interesting how this article gets more comments than the original release. Title is everything.
Deep-ocean vents are a source of oil and gas (evidence of abiogenic hydrocarbons)
Nature News ^ | 31 January 2008 | Rachel Courtland
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1963050/posts
Posted on 01/31/2008 9:42:53 PM PST by neverdem
Rural inhabitants of areas of the Baltic States traditionally collected and burned oilshale as a lowgrade domestic fuel.
I noticed that...and the responses and links have been most interesting and informative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.