Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nickbat]

..well this theory, which I have mentioned in the past is covered in a new paper here:

http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/09/oil-is-not-a-fossil-fuel-and-co2-is-an-innocent-victim-of-green-hysteria-by-peter-j-morgan/

I must admit, I've always thought it strange that all those dinosaurs and so on would congregate to die in places like Saudi Arabia. And how come oil can be found 12km beneath the surface? I know it was a long term ago, what flora and fauna was around that deep?

Just a thought.   

[Banjax]

..well this theory, which I have mentioned in the past is covered in a new paper here:

http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/09/oil-is-not-a-fossil-fuel-and-co2-is-an-innocent-victim-of-green-hysteria-by-peter-j-morgan/

I must admit, I've always thought it strange that all those dinosaurs and so on would congregate to die in places like Saudi Arabia. And how come oil can be found 12km beneath the surface? I know it was a long term ago, what flora and fauna was around that deep?

Just a thought.   

nurse!!! the meds!!!! 

[Nickbat]

Don't be so quick to judge, BJ. 

[Banjax]

Nickbat - I know you don't believe this tosh - but thanks m8 for brightening up a dull Monday 

i may even buy the Mail to celebrate 

[Banjax]

are you serious? oil's a hydrocarbon - it the decomposed remains of plants and animals subjected to intense heat and pressure over millions of years - i'd love to see that recreated in a lab 

[Banjax]

mind you - whats fully synthetic oil then?  :-?

is that what they mean? 

[cem_devecioglu]

..well this theory, which I have mentioned in the past is covered in a new paper here:

http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/09/oil-is-not-a-fossil-fuel-and-co2-is-an-innocent-victim-of-green-hysteria-by-peter-j-morgan/

I must admit, I've always thought it strange that all those dinosaurs and so on would congregate to die in places like Saudi Arabia. And how come oil can be found 12km beneath the surface? I know it was a long term ago, what flora and fauna was around that deep?

Just a thought.   

nurse!!! the meds!!!! 

 

 Peter J Morgan needs urgent attention me thinks

[cem_devecioglu]

from wikipedia..

Abiogenic origin

Main article: Abiogenic petroleum origin
A number of geologists in Russia adhere to the abiogenic petroleum origin hypothesis and maintain that hydrocarbons of purely inorganic origin exist within Earth's interior. Astronomer Thomas Gold championed the theory in the Western world by supporting the work done by Nikolai Kudryavtsev in the 1950s. It is currently supported primarily by Kenney and Krayushkin.[15]

The abiogenic origin hypothesis lacks scientific support. Extensive research into the chemical structure of kerogen has identified algae as the primary source of oil. The abiogenic origin hypothesis fails to explain the presence of these markers in kerogen and oil, as well as failing to explain how inorganic origin could be achieved at temperatures and pressures sufficient to convert kerogen to graphite. It has not been successfully used in uncovering oil deposits by geologists, as the hypothesis lacks any mechanism for determining where the process may occur.[16] More recently scientists at the Carnegie Institution for Science have found that ethane and heavier hydrocarbons can be synthesized under conditions of the upper mantle.[17]

[Banjax]

what he said 

[Nickbat]

Nickbat - I know you don't believe this tosh - but thanks m8 for brightening up a dull Monday 

i may even buy the Mail to celebrate 

If you're so clever, read this paper and tell me where they get it wrong. I'm not saying they're definitely right, but dismissing the theory as "tosh" in two minutes flat is not a logical, or helpful, response. 

[Banjax]

Nickbat - I know you don't believe this tosh - but thanks m8 for brightening up a dull Monday 

i may even buy the Mail to celebrate 

If you're so clever, read this paper and tell me where they get it wrong. I'm not saying they're definitely right, but dismissing the theory as "tosh" in two minutes flat is not a logical, or helpful, response. 

i'm not dismissing it in 2 minutes nick,- its an interesting theory, but its been bandied about for years and never been proved - crude oil is a hydrocarbon - or are all the petrochemical scientists whose processes they use to refine crude into thousands of uses - are they just getting lucky or do they actually know the chemical composition of what they're dealing with?

[Banjax]

Nickbat - I know you don't believe this tosh - but thanks m8 for brightening up a dull Monday 

i may even buy the Mail to celebrate 

If you're so clever, read this paper and tell me where they get it wrong. I'm not saying they're definitely right, but dismissing the theory as "tosh" in two minutes flat is not a logical, or helpful, response. 

don't you dare accuse me of being clever!! 

[Nickbat]

"Our results support the suggestion that hydrocarbons heavier than methane can be produced by abiogenic processes in the upper mantle."

Anton Kolesnikov, Vladimir G. Kutcherov &  Alexander F. Goncharov, published in Nature Geoscience, 26 July 2009

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v2/n8/abs/ngeo591.html

Also

"Supporting Evidence, Briefly

Oil being discovered at 30,000 feet, far below the 18,000 feet where organic matter is no longer found.
Wells pumped dry later replenished.
Volume of oil pumped thus far not accountable from organic material alone according to present models.
In Situ production of methane under the conditions that exist in the Earth's upper mantle."

http://www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/Theory/SustainableOil/

Like I said earlier, I'm not saying that I necessarily believe it all to be true, but it's very intriguing and also somewhat logical.

[Banjax]

"Our results support the suggestion that hydrocarbons heavier than methane can be produced by abiogenic processes in the upper mantle."

Anton Kolesnikov, Vladimir G. Kutcherov &  Alexander F. Goncharov, published in Nature Geoscience, 26 July 2009

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v2/n8/abs/ngeo591.html

Also

"Supporting Evidence, Briefly

Oil being discovered at 30,000 feet, far below the 18,000 feet where organic matter is no longer found.
Wells pumped dry later replenished.
Volume of oil pumped thus far not accountable from organic material alone according to present models.
In Situ production of methane under the conditions that exist in the Earth's upper mantle."

http://www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/Theory/SustainableOil/

Like I said earlier, I'm not saying that I necessarily believe it all to be true, but it's very intriguing and also somewhat logical.

if we didn't explore every avenue - we'd discover nothing 
but this looks a dead-end 

[Banjax]

"Our results support the suggestion that hydrocarbons heavier than methane can be produced by abiogenic processes in the upper mantle."

Anton Kolesnikov, Vladimir G. Kutcherov &  Alexander F. Goncharov, published in Nature Geoscience, 26 July 2009

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v2/n8/abs/ngeo591.html

Also

"Supporting Evidence, Briefly

Oil being discovered at 30,000 feet, far below the 18,000 feet where organic matter is no longer found.
Wells pumped dry later replenished.
Volume of oil pumped thus far not accountable from organic material alone according to present models.
In Situ production of methane under the conditions that exist in the Earth's upper mantle."

http://www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/Theory/SustainableOil/

Like I said earlier, I'm not saying that I necessarily believe it all to be true, but it's very intriguing and also somewhat logical.

if we didn't explore every avenue - we'd discover nothing 
but this looks a dead-end 

oils well that ends well