You tell me.
I did not watch the video.
Thomas_Gold explored that idea. It did not pan out, as best I recall.
it starts half way through but its a interesting video worth going to the front. He was in Govât and it was worth watching.
Yes, oil is a fossil fuel. Are we done now?
4 Likes
Leroy Fletcher Prouty served as Chief of Special Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President John F. Kennedy.
I happened to be listening to different UTube talks and this one popped up. He said that putting a price on Oil was like putting a price on a pale of water. He said the reason they said it was a fossil fuel was to suggest that it was a scarce commodity and it wasnât about science but keeping the price up. Rockefeller apparently was the one to push the Idea that it was fossil fuel.
He says that there are no fossils below 16,000 ft. He says they mine for Oil at 18 to 23,000 ft every day of the week.
âŚ
Deepwater Horizon - the well responsible for the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico - sits at 35.505 feet beneath the surface. And the worldâs deepest oil well - Sakhalin-I in Russia - reaches an incredible 40,604 feet. Thatâs 7.7 miles or 15 times the height of the worldâs tallest building the Burj Khalifa in Dubai. - petro online.
âŚ
To find oil petro online says, First and foremost, there must be a source rock, rich in organisms, which is responsible for producing the petroleum itself. Seismic testing has also suggested that there may be much more life present underground than previously imagined.
âŚ
Petro online is saying that its possible there is life on other planets, Oil that is.
âŚ
I guess the point is, that unlike the belief that plate tectonics pushed organic matter under the plates and that floods and geological upheaval created layers of rock with rotting plant material under it, its more likely there is bacteria that is in the sand and grains of mud and materials under the earth that are living producing these hydrocarbons. And While coal layers produce methane and possibly other plants may produce Oil this is not the only or primary source of Oil.
âŚ
Fletcher Prouty brought this up in the start of his video without the knowledge of todays drilling and biology.
âŚ
âOur research has revealed this extensive habitat in the subsurface for microbes that we didnât know for sure was there. This proves it is, and that itâs been there for at least 600 million years.â
The research also has wider scientific ramifications in terms of shedding light on the distribution of life on Earth.
âThis research means it is quite possible that there is more life in the subsurface of the Earth than on the surface itself. Microbiologists have been discussing for a long time what the ratio is and if weâre showing thereâs a big new habitat in the subsurface then weâre shifting that balance towards there being more life in the subsurfaceâ, Professor Parnell added. âIt also informs us about where life may have evolved because it may have evolved below the surface as opposed to on the surface. - petro online dot com.
âŚ
So is that really fossil fuel as we know it Or Microbe fossil fuel or Microbe fuel/manure? Are the chemicals like carbon dioxide, Hydrogen and other materials there to make biofuels. Elon musk suggests he can make jet fuel out of the air⌠Why not a natural process from chemicals under the ground? Elon tweeted âSpaceX is starting a program to take CO2 out of atmosphere & turn it into rocket fuel,â
So is that yes a maybe?
Per Proutyâs obituary in The Guardian, even by the early 1990s âhe had been relegated to the fringes along with countless other conspiracy crackpots.â
Given this, and Proutyâs apparent complete lack of any background in geology, I see no reason to take anything he says on this remotely seriously.
Nothing in the petro online article suggests that the âDeep Biosphereâ may be the source of oil. I rather suspect that although life may exist that far down, it is so sparse and low-energy that it would not constitute a viable fuel source.
And what would be the equivalent CO2 source for creating all this oil in the Deep Biosphere?
A long time ago, people invented reading and writing. They are far more efficient for communication, and you can take your time over them and think about what you are reading.
Video communication is mostly about flash and about bamboozling people. I wonât be watching the video.
3 Likes
Oil was created down there. Either by a entirely biological process or possibly a chemical process. I was never down there. But I would think that water filled with minerals could get down there and then get covered up with sediment or seep in between tectonic plates. I presume these materials did not have to come from the top of a ocean bed to get down there. Maybe some did. That is sort of the underground point of it I guess.
âŚ
As far as I know which aint much fossils are generally thought to be mostly actual plants and trees but they only make coal. And the type of fossil I think they suggest is making oil is dead algae. Still there would have to be microbiology going on not just rot to convert these things into fuel. Maybe I am wrong. So does that make it Fossil fuel?
âŚ
And here is the other side issue. If there is massive upheaval such to turn rock layers on their side as seen at the bottom of the grand canyon, wouldnât it be possible for hundreds of billions and trillions of gallons of water filled with micro biology to seep in to some of the deepest recesses on the planet and in some cases explode like a Church boiler on a Saturday night out of water but on high for Sunday morning. Is it possible that Yellowstone park is proof of that. Maybe this Idea of the earth cycling all its oceans under continents to get Oil or for it just to be surface layers of sediment on top of sediment is short sighted. Why cant water and bacteria and algae of various kinds get carried deep into the earth without the traditional view of fossils/marine life from up top being carried their?
âŚ
Is the rush to say fossils just an attempt to create deep time in the history books to discount a creation event and not science at all. Is the lust or hate of Atheism by some causing an oversight?
I guess the same sort of source for CO2 on many of the planets in the solar system without life. Im no chemist but I am pretty sure you can get CO2 from making everything from Beer to Bread. Volcanoes produce about 2 days worth of CO2 every year. It is produced by thermal decomposition of limestone. CO2 can come directly from natural carbon dioxide springs, where it is produced by acid water on limestone or dolomite. If I remember correctly the Ice in Greenland has records showing astronomically high CO2 levels in the past.
âŚ
I see no reason to discount the presence of CO2 under ground without life on the planet. Suggested by some Oil can be produced without life on the planet and others that life started underground.
Of all the failings in my life, my biggest failure was to continue in the construction trade building homes etc. I should have went back to school again and got a chemistry degree. Physics and chemistry is where its at. You scratch out just a few things in any of those fields and everything becomes a dumpster fire.
The issue is that oil isnât just any random liquid found in geological formations, it is an energy source.
All that energy has to come from somewhere.
How many joules of energy can photosynthesis produce per square kilometer on the surface? I would suggest the amount would be very large.
How many joules of energy can the Deep Biosphere produce (excluding converting surface biomass) per cubic kilometer? I would expect it would be tiny by comparison.
This means that, when we discover a large source of carbon-based fuel, the logical conclusion would be that it has its ultimate source in surface photosynthesis.
If somebody wants to suggest an alternative explanation then they would first need to show (i) how this alternative explanation could produce this much energy, and (ii) how that energy could get concentrated together to produce oilfields of millions of barrels of oil.
I would hardly call more than two centuries of scientific consensus, around the geology of an Old Earth a ârushâ. I would further point out that, your fevered persecutory fantasies not withstanding, that this consensus was originally forged by Christians in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, not âthe lust or hate of Atheismâ.
Everything in biology, geology and cosmology points to deep time. The idea that this is all a hoax or a conspiracy â an endeavor that would require the cooperation and silence of hundreds of thousands, many of whom are devout theists, is ludicrous in the most extreme.
Nixon couldnât keep Watergate a secret when it only involved a handful of conspirators, how could this have remained a secret?
2 Likes
I wasnât aware of a consensus. Again I am not a Chemist but there is a Bosch reaction. So like a Catalytic Converter there are chemical processes to change one chemical into another. Like the process they use in a Nuclear sub to remove CO2 from the air. The chemical is not used up. It is sprayed over the air, it is pressurized and it lets the CO2 out. no organics needed. They also have âcandlesâ which through a chemical process get hot and produce Oxygen.
As for solar power I think there is about 2000 watts per meter square outside the atmosphere and about 1000 watts on the surface of the earth. And that light in the ocean would be a great source for life absorbing CO2. I donât discount that process.
There is no secret that Evolution is a Hoax and people are denying it. People do disagree and one will discount the other. And its always over little things. Of course there is variation every time there is a child born from two parents. Every time a DNA sequence is copied there is a possibility of a error. But with 7 billion examples we are 99.9% exactly the same and there is nothing like us. Not even close. And if evolution was true there would be dozens and no mitochondrial Eve.
But that is another thread⌠The issue is Oil? is there only one kind or various. Obviously Alberta Oil is something to look at.
How do you think corporations such as Chevron, Shell, Exon, and BP discover hydrocarbon resources? Tank up at your local station. That gasoline was not found by studying creationism but by earth science, and it would be a dry pump otherwise. Exploration requires a precise understanding of the geological time, pressure, and heat applied to source biomass, and that is what yields the expected specific gravity fractions.
If that makes you happy, persist in believing what you want. From your various posts, I consider you a lost cause who has zippo interest in actually learning anything and your radio set is stuck on transmit. But I will point out that here in Alberta there are thousands of fellow Christians who work in the patch, and I have never met any who would subscribe to an abiogenic origin for hydrocarbons. So far as I can tell, even folk at AiG, CMI, and ICR hold to some sort of biogenic mass origin of oil, but I suppose they may be blinded by, oh yes, lust and hate.
2 Likes
Then you clearly have read nothing of the field of geology or its history.
A fact that does not seem to stop you from making wild claims about the field.
A process that only turns CO2 and Hydrogen into carbon and water, not into any complex hydrocarbons.
Again, no complex hydrocarbons.
Yes, this is the energy source for the surface biomass to kerogen to oil explanation.
It does not explain how the vast amounts of energy in oil could have been created endogenously in the Deep Biosphere.
It is a secret to much of the world. I hadnât heard the âEvolution is a Hoaxâ claim until I was in my late 30s, and would suspect that the majority of my country has never heard of it.
The same is true, to an even greater extent, for geological and cosmological deep time being âa hoaxâ.
You have not presented any credible evidence that other sources of oil are even a remote possibility, let alone a likelihood.
Hoaxes require intent.
If you know that it is a hoax (and not just well-intentioned people being wrong), you also must know who is perpetrating the hoax on whom. In which group do you place the scientists posting here, and why? Start with me.
2 Likes
I learn stuff all the time. If someone proves⌠Proves a point rather than harasses I am glad to accept the information.
I am not a young earth creationist. I am a creationist not a evolutionist and I see no reason to believe the world wasnât around for millions of years. I donât think life was. I do believe in intelligent design, not a progressive designing. I think the complexity of the human body proves that. There is no biological process or random selection that could answer how a body can have a spine with things weaving in and out of it and arteries whole doing the same through the body such planning could not come from small changes or large changes in DNA. A change in some chemical process, sure why not but to create a lymphatic system or connections to a eye and ear etc. Nope not something DNA could naturally develop. But again that is a totally different subject.
âŚ
Here is another possibility. Since there is sedimentary rock on every continent proving everyone of the was under water. Is it not possible that like a pool the world was mixed up in a jumble several times and algae was in all the water and that when it started to settle when plates shifted that Trillions of gallons of clay and silt and biological species got soaked into rocks miles under the continents through cracks and sand and such and some filtered the water and some water boiled etc. and pressure and a few thousand years happened and poof the Pool turned green than black then into Oil and gas.
Im saying that a conveyor belt to put these materials under continents and oceans was not needed. And deep time is not needed. If there was deep time and some Algae so be it. It doesnât Negate God or creation what it does is say that the bible does not sufficiently lay out the order of Ecological events. I personally donât think it does anyways. I donât think it was meant to do that. I think we read into things and entrenched Ideas that it had to be only 7 days when I donât think it says just that. I think Moses and the writers of the first 5 books took the information they had about these events passed down through history and wrote them down in the bible. I think there was a global flood and that it was one of many Cataclysmic events but this one God intervened and saved a few people and there are a few records which I think we have in the sketch that Genesis 1 to 8 provide.
âŚ
That also seems to be true because Moses spends little time on the things he does not have first hand knowledge of and spends the bulk of his writing on things happening around him. It shows a maturity in how things were written. And the genealogy also shows an effort to be a matter of fact and historical. Its very possible and probable that there is a world wide amount of information left out.
âŚ
I think its a great privilege to have this parse snapshot and unlike most of my writing which is speculation these people wrote in a historical way as to what happened not what they thought might have happened like we today do.
âŚ
Unfortunately people try to create a conflict between Science and Creation and biblical events. I see no need too.
What I do see is a concerted effort to misstate things to disqualify Biblical events. I see this both in science and religion. I see Muslims for example destroying artifacts. I should say its seems to be sects because another muslim group are currently guarding Josephs tomb from being burned by another muslim group. we see this in the news this week. That same attack is happening in science. The example is that sedimentary layers are found around the world with fossils in them. Sediment so large it suggest every continent was under water. You cant live on land and be under water. Is it possible that a bible writer exaggerated and said that the flood covered every mountain top. Sure why not⌠how could he know for sure. The world is a big place. But to suggest that the whole story is wrong would be a lie because there is actual geological proof of it. The grand canyon and grand stair case thousands of feet above sea level are proof of it. just lowering them down so they are under water and the same for those layers in Africa and China and Europe and Chili puts the world under water. We donât have to discount the bible and God etc. to prove science.
No, it is not possible.
-
It would require an impossible amount of biomass to exist at one time.
-
This biomass + clay + silt would be too thick to âsoakâ into the deep earth in any time shorter than deep time.
-
Even if it could, the pressure and heat down there would expel it straight back up.
I would suggest that this only seems âpossibleâ to you because you donât know sufficient geology to know why it is impossible.
All that biomass exists today down there. I donât see the problem. And there is as much under ground water as any lake above ground. If you look at water distribution on earth in wiki you will see there is KM cubed of water down there.
The lower mantle of inner earth may hold as much as 5 times more water than all surface water combined (all oceans, all lakes, all rivers).[17]
Yes, and its been building up over hundreds of millions of years.
Create a compost heap. That heap isnât going to get itself deep underground unless you bury it. Thatâs the problem.
And all that water is trapped there. Water soaking down from the surface wouldnât be trapped, so the pressure and heat from deep underground can force it back to the surface.
Also, if you had read the cited source for that claim, you would see that the vast majority of this underground water is in the form of hydrated minerals, not free water.
What makes you think that?
Hydrated minerals seems perfectly fine with me. A lot of oil is available if you frack rock. And water comes out and gas and all kinds of sour stuff.
What I find interesting is that years ago I used to hear people mock saying the bible says that the fountains of the deep flooded the world suggesting it was a load of bull. But here it shows there is a lot of water down there and when I have drilled you go through sections where water will gush out and you have to use bentonite to seal it up or you cant go to where you want. The Govât makes you as well so you donât mix Aquifers. Some layers are nasty.
And if you go to lake Ontario all the way up to the Canadian shield I know there is water that goes in lets say at Lake Simcoe and comes out at lake Ontario. There are springs and a list of things and none of that water is flying out in a gusher.
Way over in Israel I know that the sea of Galilee has a constant flow of salt water leaking in from under ground Its very interesting stuff. And in Africa in desert places they can drill and find place to pump and pump and pump and there is endless water. It is like the world is a big spaghetti ball with many pockets and cracks and sediments and formations.