Congratulations. You're capable of learning after all.
Last edited:
Oil Crisis
- Thread starter ck27
- Start date
- Status
There are many water wells in Brazil and a few do have traces of oil. Also PetroBras did drill of oil on land years ago, with no economic success - why the started the much more expensive off-shore drilling.
One Brazilian man recently torn down his house as it was built over an old swamp that had filled in and he had for several years been able to collect a barrel or two of oil each month in shallow water wells he hand dug. (I read his story in my local paper.) I guess that the ancient swamp water kept part of the decaying organic matter form oxidizing, but this "old swamp oil" is rare and not economical on a commercial scale, except by hand work of a poor man who has little alternative ways to make a even a poor living.
Bolivia has natural gas (probably decomposed oil from when the tectonic pacific plate motions made the Andes mountains) and was being exploited by PetroBras/ Brazil before Evo Moras became president. (Now the tables are turned, exactly reversed. Bolivia keeps 80% of the profit and Brazil gets only 20% and that is only for a limited period, granted as compensation for the wells and pumping station etc that PetroBras built in Bolivia.)
The price of natural gas in Sao Paulo increased by 18% on 1 June, (yesterday) to encourage greater conservation. PetroBras is now frantically drilling in many locations in Brazil, especially where they drilled years ago and did find some traces of gas. They are going deeper now.
The way you can be certain that Brazil is deep Earth raised to the surface is by the huge crystals that are found here. They only form deep in the Earth by slowly cooling for millions of years. I do not know what your "LMFAO" means, but assume it is appropriate comment to give you for your erroneous idea that Brazil has significant on land oil.
PetroBras is exclusively finding oil off-shore. They are the world leader in ultra deep ocean drilling and have currently 80% of all the world's UDW drill ships under contract. I know a lot about PetroBras as I have owned their stock for more than 6 years. I just sold 1200 shares of it about 10 days ago at the then all time peak (a little too soon as it went about 8% higher still.)
yes if counting water wells, old dry holes, and the current effort to find gas to escape from being dependent upon Bolivia, but no, if referring to producing oil wells. I DO NOT THINK THERE ARE ANY, but certainly if there are, I could count them on one hand.
BTW, as far as I know, Thomas Gold was the only real scientist outside of the USSR's political control that supported the a-biotic origin of oil. See my just made post to understand why Stalin MANDATED that the origin of oil was a-biotic, just as he mandated that genes were not important in agriculture and for the same ideological reasons. That is why (only? or just almost all?) older communist era literature supports the now discredited a-biotic origin theory, with rare, if any exceptions, even in modern Russia literature.
Last edited by a moderator:
If any of them have published anything supporting the a-biotic origin in the last 10 years (when not a necessity to advance their career) I will try to look up and read it. Just give me a link to it.
BTW, as I have stated before, I too agree that a small amount of oil (1% PERHAPS) may be of a-biotic origin. I hope you do not grossly miss-quote this as you did spidergoats statement that he believes also, as I do, that a-biotic oil does exist.
Last edited by a moderator:
Show me a peer reviewed scientific paper by a geologist who says petroleum comes from fossils.
OIM - what did Gold get wrong when he used abiotic oil hypothesis to predict that oil would be found in the Siljan Ring?
How has the science of oil prospecting using abiotic hypothesis improved from this?
What predictions changed as a result?
What basic predictions can you make?
How has the science of oil prospecting using abiotic hypothesis improved from this?
What predictions changed as a result?
What basic predictions can you make?
You say that based upon ignorance of petroleum geology and a lack of education. See Von Humboldt, Gay-Lusac, Berthelot, Mendeleev, Sadtler, Becker, Dott, and Kenney.
The Biogenic theory, was what Karl Popper would call, a good scientific theory: it made definite predictions, which could be tested by observation, and possibly falsified. Unfortunately for the theory, they were falsified. Biogenic theory predicted an oil window with a 15,000 foot TVD limit. It also predicted oil can only be found in sedimentary rock. Both predictions were wrong.
Abiogenic theory predicted that oil can be found below the mythological biogenic oil window and in igneous rock. Both facts are confirmed by experience.
http://static.scribd.com/docs/j79lhbgbjbqrb.pdf
I am not good at searching (have said that many times) and seldom do any. I doubt if I could fined these guys that you know of. Need their full names I would guess. Why not give me a link to at least one who has published something in support of the a-biotic theory after the fall of the USSR? Before that time many scientist in the USSR were compelled to publish what they knew to be Nonsense in fields related to biology as the political powers demanded that man was "transformable" (despite his genes) into the greed-free creature that was to be the "new soviet man" and that the victory of communism over capitalism would last forever - not be threaten by that western "peak oil" idea.
Thus far, all your references supporting a-biotic oil, which I have seen, come from this period when politicians told scientists what they could publish.
Give at least one modern paper support an a-biotic origin oil for most oil. I and others here admit that trace amounts of it probably do exists. So a paper showing a slight amount is not very impressive. As far as your oil is found in igneous rocks etc. argument is concerned that proves nothing - oil from algae should be found there. On a geological time scale, even the rocks of South America have moved many thousands of miles. Surely a liquid like oil can be sub-ducted, flow under igneous rocks and up thru cracks in them etc. or even now be decomposed if it got too deep and turned into CH4 and H2 - fact that these gases do appear instead of your a-biotic oil deep in the earth supports the biologic origin of most oil and the fact that even if oil were formed down deep, it would decompose into these gases.
You, as a supporter of a-biotic oil, have no bussiness telling exactly the opposite of what biologic oil supporters are predicting as if your statements were their predictions. We perdict that oil will be mobile and flow under ignious rocks, not that it will not. Setting up this straw man to then knock down is silly. Stop doing it.
Last edited by a moderator:
You can say that again.
You call yourself a scientist?
I charge $100 an hour to teach petroleum geology. I can give you my pay pal account if you'd like.
You haven't provided one geological peer reviewed reference for biogenic origin.
I've provided you with more than one but you seem to be illiterate.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080131151856.htm
Is that modern enough for you?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/319/5863/604
Now show me a geological peer reviewed reference for biogenic origin.
LOL. So now you admit oil can be found in igneous rock even though biogenic theory predicted that it couldn't. How much algae does it take to yield a barrel of oil?
Last edited:
Apparently you think the source you posted contradicts my statement there. It does not. The author of the article you cite has made a simple mistake in paraphrasing the already silly statements of his elderly and deceased professor source.ice age said:
Here's the relevant section, with the generally goofball author's most relevant mistake bolded for you:
typical Ice age source said:
For more reality based efforts, google CO2 or Mauna Loa or any relevant Wikipedia article or whatever. This isn't hidden and obscure knowledge.
And the W adminsitration hires from these Christian schools, to staff federal regulatory agencies.ice ages said:
Yes that is recent, but does not even mention oil. It has been known that there is hydrogen in water for a long time and the at high temperatures in the presence of carbon or some carbon compounds Hydrocarbons like mentane will form. Your reference states HYDROCARBONS, never even used the word oil. LOL - is that the best you can do?
FYI: oil is a hydrocarbon.
Yes that is recent, but does not even mention oil. It has been known that there is hydrogen in water for a long time and the at high temperatures in the presence of carbon or some carbon compounds Hydrocarbons like mentane will form. Your reference states HYDROCARBONS, never even used the word oil. LOL - is that the best you can do?
I just checked your other reference also:
It is the same story - not one word about oil or its origins.
that is true but your refererence are not about that hydrocarbon. They are about a gas CH4, commonly called methane.
There are millions of different hydrocarbons. We are talking about oil but your references are not.
Again LOL. Is that the best you can do?
Billy: Once you learn that petroleum is a hydrocarbon then we can continue this converstaion.
To synthesizer-patel:
http://www.aapg.org/explorer/2002/11nov/abiogenic.cfm
To synthesizer-patel:
http://www.aapg.org/explorer/2002/11nov/abiogenic.cfm
Yes as I already stated oil is a mix of liquid hydrocarbons. Once your learn that the hydrocarbon CH4 your references speak about is NOT oil, but is a gas, then it might be useful for you to try to find some reference that does support your POV or at least mentions oil. Your already given references do not even mention oil, only non-oil hydrocarbons, mainly the gas CH4.
So you're not retarded then.
At least you concede that methane is abiotic.
You still haven't shown any evidence that petroleum comes from fossils or biological detritus.
Last edited:
Are you also a Creationist, OilIsMastery?
Afraid to debate the topic? Why would you care anyway? As a biogenic theorist you obviously believe in miracles.
http://www.gasresources.net/DisposalBioClaims.htm
OilIsMastery: "Afraid to debate the topic?"
Not at all. Relax: I'm only trying to understand your perspective, and advance the debate before this committee. Are you, or have you ever been a Creationist?
Not at all. Relax: I'm only trying to understand your perspective, and advance the debate before this committee. Are you, or have you ever been a Creationist?
- Status