Oil Doesn't Come From Dead Dinosaurs

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by OilIsMastery, Aug 1, 2008.

  1. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    To OilIs Mastery:

    Here is copy of the report I just sent on you. (First I have every made, if memory serve correctly.):

    In post 55, OilIs Mastery presents a statement as if I stated it. (I did quote it.) I pointed this out to him in subsequent post and warned that I would report him if he did not appoligize. He refursed and again in post 59 stated it was from me. Please do more than warn him this time. He is misreprenenting both me and the article by Glasby of a few post earlier (why I made post 54, or 53 pointing out his cherry picking and added false , misleading statements.)
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Thanks. I appreciate your work. If only you would put as much effort into learning about abiotic oil science.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bishadi Banned Banned

  8. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Don't worry. The biogenic cultists have beat you to it. According to them diamonds are made by fossils.


    LOL. Yeah diamonds come from lipids that's why they are found in kimberlite rofl.
  9. Bishadi Banned Banned

    i will bet the majority of all diamonds are carbon, let's go at almost 100%.... i could be wrong here but don't believe much bone matter is carbon....

    well i was wrong in the sense of carbonate..... but that would mean a big oxygen release for each C atom assumed

    hey who knows maybe today is a day to learn a little more than yesterday

    have you ever read up on kimberlite?

    have you ever noticed they really have no idea how the carot shape of a kimberlie pipe forms?

    because like a volcano, the bigger side should be from below and not inverted
    in which the kim pipes are narrow at the deepest point and wide at the top

    it shouldn't be that way if the pressure is from below

    i.e... see a volcano or a caldera

    oil guy, you trying too hard to not see reality
  10. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Yes diamonds are pure carbon.

    But they aren't alive and never have been.

    Diamonds are generated under mantle conditions and no biological molecule or lipid can survive in the mantle.

    "Statistical thermodynamic analysis has established clearly that hydrocarbon molecules which comprise petroleum require very high pressures for their spontaneous formation, comparable to the pressures required for the same of diamond. In that sense, hydrocarbon molecules are the high-pressure polymorphs of the reduced carbon system as is diamond of elemental carbon. Any notion which might suggest that hydrocarbon molecules spontaneously evolve in the regimes of temperature and pressure characterized by the near-surface of the Earth, which are the regimes of methane creation and hydrocarbon destruction, does not even deserve consideration." -- Emmanuil B. Chekaliuk, 1968
  11. Bishadi Banned Banned

    Statistical thermodynamic analysis has established

    just like virial theorem and dark matter/energy

    the math is wrong!

    that is what i have been trying to assist you with in comprehending your errors of logic.

    as much as anyone; math is how we can perfect understanding but if the math does not match the data, then the math is wrong!

    ie.... we now have found oil and diamonds in oil, and not in the 'mantel'...

    or from volcanic sites where we actually have a real live tube of mass coming up from the mantel, yet your data (oil/diamonds) are not there

    then when we look into space we see that the galaxies turn a little different than what the math predicts

    and what is the foundation to that math, plancks constant and max maintained 100% observance to the 2nd law..........

    and have anyone mentioned how 'life abuses entropy'

    seems no matter how you skin it, maybe there is a little weeeeee bit of rehashing to be done in what math you observe as true.
  12. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    At least abiotic theory uses math unlike the religion of fossil fuels.

    Fossil fuel theory doesn't use logic. It's a religion.
  13. Bishadi Banned Banned

    hey, i am with you on that......

    effort is a good thing

    fossil fuels is not a theory, that be big business

    you making an argument that fossil fuels come from the mantel based on math predictions that it cannot come from anywhere above 5 miles from the surface of the earth

    but they find oil well above that.

    they find coal well above that


    and every hydrocarbon in use

    such is exaclty what i was saying about dark matter/energy/bosons/higg/gravitons..... and the equilibriating life

    the math is wrong
  14. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    LOL. That is not the abiotic argument. The fossil fuel argument is that oil cannot be found below 15,000 tvd, in igneous rock, in pillow lava, in diamonds, in outer space, and on other astronomical bodies, but it is.
  15. Enmos Registered Senior Member

    Where ?
  16. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Oil companies have been drilling for oil in igneous rock since 1915 and past 15,000 feet TVD since 1938.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Oil has been found in igneous rock all over the world, in pillow lava in Mitov Czech Republic among other places, on carbonaceous meteorites, in nebulae, Titan, etc etc.
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2008
  17. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Which is why you have resorted to cherry picking, strawman fallacies, false flag fallacies, falsehoods, and citing articles that are factually inaccurate in order to support your point?

    You know, I can play your game to.

    "First and foremost is the fact that the mantle is too oxidizing for methane to form there in abundance. Furthermore, most volatiles including methane are transported from the mantle to the Earth’s crust in magma and not by faults as required by the theory." -Geoffrey P Glasby, 2006

    Therefore, abiogenic theory is invalid.
  18. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member


    Invalidated by the 1993 LLBL paper which I linked to elsewhere (same post I linked to Glasby).
  19. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Most of this statement is a falsehood constructed of strawmen and false flag fallacies.
  20. Bishadi Banned Banned


    well i found the oilmonkeys blog



    and he even suggested

    and then has the gall to mention fullerene (buckeyballs)

    but here is our guy

    a salesmen looking for a job
  21. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    NO, not true. That is your lying distortion. That WAS a problem for the fossil POV many years ago before the migration of oil was established.

    Both {abiotic} theories have been overtaken by the increasingly sophisticated understanding of the modes of formation of hydrocarbon deposits in nature." - From last sentence of Glasby's Abstract (See post 54 for full abstract or link in Trippy's post below for the full article)

    Part of post 48:
    Part of Post 54:
    You must accept Glasby - you have quoted him several times (with false addition of your own, and great distortion of his review article.)
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 8, 2008
  22. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Yes. Biogenic theory is invalid because, according to Glasby, "Formation of higher hydrocarbons in the upper layers of the Earth's crust occurs only as the result of Fischer-Tropsch-type reactions in the presence of hydrogen gas but is otherwise not possible on thermodynamic grounds."
  23. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    For the third time Glasby does not say that about biologic origin. He says that about one of the two abiotic theories (T. Gold's). See details in post 54 or post 78, two back.
    You still are distoring and lying.*

    *Perhaps you do not lie, but just can not read Glasby with comprehension?

Share This Page