Oil Doesn't Come From Dead Dinosaurs

Yes a youth, I lived in florida, collected shells and caught some - once I made soup of them as I had read the sea urchin soup is very popular in Japan. It was OK, but nothing special to me.

But you are diverting - trying to hide the silly contra-factual posts you made.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That is interesting.. are there any clues that natural oil has formed this way ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes. For more information you may read the links on the OilIsMastery blog.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The only problem with abiotic oil, is that there isn't any.
It's a theory, supported by what amounts to a smallish group of geologists, mostly from Russia, or rather the former USSR.

It's looking a bit like X-files, though there is some experimental (not field-science, artificial science, like in a laboratory), support.

 

I don't think so, that's your website.

 

ROFL @ U: http://oilismastery.blogspot.com/

Russia is the largest petroleum producer in the world.

 

China is the fastest-growing oil market in the world, too...? How about that?

P.S. Good to see you chuckling away, again.

 

I agree it is interesting and appears to be careful argument, the essence of which is promissed in the introduction as follows:

"The second section examines, applying the constraints of thermodynamics, {to} the notion that hydrocarbons might evolve spontaneously from biological molecules. Here are described the spectra of chemical potentials of hydrocarbon molecules, particularly the naturally occurring ones present in petroleum. Interpretation of the significance of the relative differences between the chemical potentials of the hydrocarbon system and those of biological molecules, applying the dictates of thermodynamic-stability theory, disposes of any hypothesis of an origin for hydrocarbon molecules from biological matter, excepting only the lightest, methane. ..." (Bold added by Billy T)

I am not a well versed chemist, but doubt this claim as others who are well versed obviously do not agree. I think the key explanation is in his words "spontaneously from biological molecules ..." but have not yet carefully read the second part referred to. Anyone with a little knowledge would agree that oil can not "spontaneously {come} from biological molecules" because in most cases the energy available and releasable by oxidation fo oil EXCEEDS that avaiolble by oxidation of the same mass of dried "biological materials." (Some, like dried sugar cane, may have more energy per pound than oil - I do not know; but it is fun to throw a little sugar into an open fire.)

This extra energy in oil, compared to the "biological materials" is stored thermal energy. I.e. oil is made only whem both high pressure and some, but not too much, thermal energy is available. (Too much will decompose it.)

A petroleum drop, like coal and wood, does not directly burn, but is decomposed by heat into gases that can burn. Finely dividing gasoline grades of oil (by carborator of fuel injectors) facilates the vaporazation of the oil. I am not sure, but think, that the very heavy grades of crude, such as power plants use (because they give more energy per dollar of cost) may be thermally "cracked" into lighter molecules as the first step of their combustion. I think, however, this does not significantly occurr with the lighter molecule frations of oil, like octane. I.e. octane molecules can oxidize without pre-break down into lighter fractions.

I hope to get back and read section 2 more carefully but if someone well versed in this chemistry can comment on it first, that would be appreciated.

Clearly the article presents a non-standard (not widely accepted by chemists) POV.

 

Ok, you asked...

GENESIS 6:1
¶ And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

MATTHEW 24:37
But as the days of Noe [were], so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
MATTHEW 24:38
For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
MATTHEW 24:39
And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

ECCLESIASTES 1:9
¶ The thing that hath been, it [is that] which shall be; and that which is done [is] that which shall be done: and [there is] no new [thing] under the sun.
ECCLESIASTES 1:10
Is there [any] thing whereof it may be said, See, this [is] new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.

Gen 6 says the world was multiplied with "men".....heavily populated.
Mat. 24 says as it was in the day of Noah, so would it be again today when the Son of Man is revealed.
Ecclesiastes tells about the cyclic nature of time and was written by the wisest man that ever lived.

Conditions would be exactly the same....it's all a great cycle.
Advanced science, nuclear weapons, aircraft, spacecraft, overpopulation, etc...

Consider these verses from the ancient Mahabharata: ...

"A single projectile Charged with all the power of the Universe.
An incandescent column of smoke and flame As bright as the thousand suns Rose in all its splendour... a perpendicular explosion with its billowing smoke clouds... ...the cloud of smoke rising after its first explosion formed into expanding round circles like the opening of giant parasols... ..it was an unknown weapon, An iron thunderbolt, A gigantic messenger of death, Which reduced to ashes The entire race of the Vrishnis and the Andhakas.
The corpses were so burned As to be unrecognisable. The hair and nails fell out; Pottery broke without apparent cause, And the birds turned white. After a few hours All foodstuffs were infected... ...to escape from this fire The soldiers threw themselves in streams To wash themselves and their equipment.

This book is verified by accepted peers around the world to be at least 5000 years old.

There are 6 billion people today.
If you take these things all together....then there were approx. that many back then.
It is not impossible.

This is not just in the bible in Ecclsiastes, but the Veda's and other texts tell of the cyclic nature of time, of a great war with nuclear weapons.....
Oppenheimer referred to it at the 1945 A-bomb test.
It was a judgement from God(s) against mankind.
An extermination.
Just like what's coming again today.

 

Wtf.. :bugeye:

 

Where is this "God" dude, that you mention?

 

What about the holocaust ? Another judgment of God ?

 

ditto. They had extremely good health care back then apparently

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

That is described under the fifth seal in Revelations.
It was part of the events leading up the judgement.
The Jews had to be back in their homeland so the tensions in the middle east would lead up to WWIII.

 

Stalin and the CP ideology forced many scientists in several fields to proclaim the CP's official theoretical line.

The most famous cased is Lysenko. - He may have believed that genetics was not of any importance to produce good crops, but probably knew better.

The CP ideology was that eventually the "Soviet Man" would emerge. He would not suffer from the self-serving greed of earlier man. He would work for the society, supplying what he could and receiving what he needed from it. This promised society would endure forever and capitalism, its greed, etc would fade away and vanish from the Earth. The "soviet man" could be produced, as could good crops, from any genetic stock, (the "proletariat") if their environment (education and nutrition) was correct.

Only a finite supply of oil on Earth was not an acceptable theory to Stalin or the theorist of the CP as that would imply the new society that the USSR would create would be finite in its duration. (Hitler only envisioned a 1000years for the third Reich).

The CP envisioned the transformation of the very nature of man and a creation of a new soviet society that would last "forever." Scientists who disagreed, and said so publicly that oil was finite, went to labor camps in Siberia. Thus, it is not hard to understand why the a-biotic oil theory was born in the USSR under Stalin.

Modern Russian oil industry does not believe in the a-biotic theory. Russia has hired experts from the West to help it explore for oil as most Russians who knew much about oil, died in labor camps.

During the Stalin era with Lysenko in charge of food production and a-biotic theory in charge of oil exportion, the Russians had to import both food and oil. Now Russia is the world's largest exportor of oil and becoming a very significant exporter of food. The damage Stalin and CP did by letting idology dictate to science is huge. A-biotic oil theory is a significant part of that damage. With it as a guide, oil production fell below the internal needs. Fortunately for Russia, it is discredited in the country that gave birth to it under the CP and Stalin.

 

Which one are you asking about?

There is the god of the Earth.
Then there is the God of heaven.

These would be so close in this day, very few will be able to tell them apart.

But in my opinion, one of them is going to make an appearance openly very soon.

Which one is it?
That's will be what you will have to figure out.

 

No, you invented them, you figure it out.

 

The point wasn't to claim exactly how many people there were.

It was a statement made for the shock valve about oil being like the crackers in the movie "Soylent Green"
Your driving your car, heating your homes....with the fat from the carcases of a previous world that was destroyed.

"It's people"

 

But everyone already knows that. :shrug: So why add all the extra 6 million people, urchin, giants garbage in there. :bugeye: I mean seriously, just ask the Scientologists, we all know it was the leader Xenu's victims.

 

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Link