Oil Crisis

[OilIsMastery]

OilIsMastery: "Afraid to debate the topic?"

Not at all.

So why can't you stay on topic? Factually challenged?

Relax: I'm only trying to understand your perspective

No you are not. Creationism has nothing to do with the origin of petroleum. Your goal is too attack me personally for something that has nothing to do with the topic. That's called an ad hominem fallacy and it's the sign of a mental midget.

and advance the debate before this committee. Are you, or have you ever been a Creationist?

Red herring, off topic, and irrelevant.

If you want to attack certain religious views you may do so in the appropriate forum and the appropriate thread.

 

[iceaura]

Creationism has nothing to do with the origin of petroleum.

It provides a motive for one's espousing of nonsense, so everyone can avoid wasting their time on irrelevancies like the meaning of "abiotic" or the logical difference between the general category "hydrocarbon" and a subcategory such as "oil", and deal with the actual issue at hand,

which is the impossibility of fitting a biotic origin for vast oil deposits into a literal reading of the Christian Bible as a physical history of the planet.

 

[synthesizer-patel]

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.

The oil window is the window for the FORMATION of oil - not necessarily where it can be found - after formation oil can migrate downwards through the rock as in this case (see info on the Brent field):

http://www.ukooa.co.uk/education/storyofoil/geological-12.cfm

Or the source rock itself can migrate downwards through processes like subduction, burial or other tectonic activity - off the coast of Brazil, one of the areas you have mentioned where they are finding deep oil/deep hyrocarbons, has a massive subduction zone - could the oil bearing rock simply have been subducted below the oil window after it formed?

Problems with biogenic oil theory, do not by default verify abiogenic oil hypotheses as you seem to think - that's like saying gaps in the fossil record verify creationism.

In short - you need a better answer as your current one doesn't stack up fully - I'm not saying that abiotic hypothesis doesn't have some merits, just that you seem to struggle to articulate them properly, and to put together a cohesive and consistent list of explanations and predictions - you're too reliant on your little links to explain things simply yourself.
For some reason you are so desperately keen to beleive it that you are jumping to conclusions to what you think is definitive evidence, only to find that it isn't as conclusive as you thought - or you find you haven't quite thought things through properly - like I've just demonstrated to you.

What I was hoping for - to help you as much as me - was a more definitive list of predictions from you - for example how can we differentiate between biotic deep oil and abiotic deep oil?

what specific geology and tectonic conditions gives rise abiotic oil?

Given the specific conditions that give rise to abiotic oil - which areas where we have not yet found or explored for oil, are the best candidates to find it?

 

[OilIsMastery]

It provides a motive for one's espousing of nonsense, so everyone can avoid wasting their time on irrelevancies like the meaning of "abiotic" or the logical difference between the general category "hydrocarbon" and a subcategory such as "oil", and deal with the actual issue at hand,

which is the impossibility of fitting a biotic origin for vast oil deposits into a literal reading of the Christian Bible as a physical history of the planet.

Your attempt to link religion with the confirmed science of abiogenic petroleum is a blatant sign of desperation.

You have yet to present one fact to support your case.

 

[OilIsMastery]

The oil window is the window for the FORMATION of oil - not necessarily where it can be found - after formation oil can migrate downwards through the rock as in this case (see info on the Brent field):

http://www.ukooa.co.uk/education/storyofoil/geological-12.cfm

FYI oil migrates upwards not downwards because water is heavier than oil. This is why we have oil seeps and why we used to have blowouts not blowdowns.

Or the source rock itself can migrate downwards through processes like subduction, burial or other tectonic activity - off the coast of Brazil, one of the areas you have mentioned where they are finding deep oil/deep hyrocarbons, has a massive subduction zone - could the oil bearing rock simply have been subducted below the oil window after it formed?

The source rocks are igneous not sedimentary. Sedimentary rocks are merely reservoirs.

you're too reliant on your little links to explain things simply yourself.

At least I use links. You don't have any evidence whatsoever to support your case. Not one scientific paper. Not one scientific link.

What I was hoping for - to help you as much as me - was a more definitive list of predictions from you - for example how can we differentiate between biotic deep oil and abiotic deep oil?

There is no such thing as biotic crude oil so it's impossible to differentiate.

what specific geology and tectonic conditions gives rise abiotic oil?

Given the specific conditions that give rise to abiotic oil - which areas where we have not yet found or explored for oil, are the best candidates to find it?

http://books.google.com/books?id=2UcLAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA73&lpg=PA73
http://books.google.com/books?id=2lALAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA1-PA288&lpg=RA1-PA288n
http://books.google.com/books?id=bCkLAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA504&lpg=PA504

 

[iceaura]

Your attempt to link religion with the confirmed science of abiogenic petroleum is a blatant sign of desperation.

I am not attempting to link the Russian politically influenced theories of abiotic oil formation with Creationism. The Russians had their own motives for rejecting the Darwinian base of evolutionary theory and its consequences or uses, not connected with Creationism.

I am linking you to Creationist "geology", and speculating that some such foundation underlies your posts here.

 

[OilIsMastery]

I am linking you to Creationist "geology", and speculating that some such foundation underlies your posts here.

A) You haven't linked to anything because there is no evidence supporting your argument. B) Creationist "geology" is the biogenic theory which believes that hydrocarbons are somehow (miraculously) created in the Earth's crust shallower than 15,000 feet TVD in sedimentary rock lmao.

 

[hypewaders]

I applaud your rejection of Creationism, OIM. You're no mental midget.

So how did you fall for the abiotic snake-oil (it's from abiotic snakes)?

Can I interest you in some homeopathic therapy products?

 

[IJesusChrist]

Im not sure if their is any threads on this but on google if you search somethings on oil, humanity is heading into the stone ago within the next 30 years. Oil prices are sky rocketing, its getting harder to get oil as we run out. Cost of barrel oil is sky rocketing. Eventually we will run out and then what? Everything stops no cars, no electricity, billions loose jobs. Would it really be the end of civilization as we know it?

We will run out of oil within 200 years.
We will not be able to sustain our society in the next 55
Solar and wind panels will be built everywhere.
People will go on living....
Until about 2080, when the climate becomes too hot along the ecuador and many people in india and africa will die out.
This is truth.

 

[OilIsMastery]

We will run out of oil within 200 years. ...

This is truth.

ROFL. Jesus said so so it must be true.

"Several times in the past we have thought we were running out of oil whereas actually we were only running out of ideas.” -- Parke A. Dickey, 1958

"It is obvious that the total amount of petroleum ... is large beyond computation." -- Edward Orton, 1888

Solar and wind panels will be built everywhere.

How is that possible with petroleum? The average semiconductor requires 630 times it's weight in hydrocarbons to produce.

 

[TruthSeeker]

"Several times in the past we have thought we were running out of oil whereas actually we were only running out of ideas.” -- Parke A. Dickey, 1958

"It is obvious that the total amount of petroleum ... is large beyond computation." -- Edward Orton, 1888

I guess you, like everyone else, have ignored my post....

 

[TruthSeeker]

So... why are we debaing wheter the freaking thing is abiotic or not? That's irrelevant. What is relevant is wheter we are running out of it or not.

 

[OilIsMastery]

If you're saying the world can't recover or produce oil you are wrong.

We're not running out either.

 

[TruthSeeker]

If you're saying the world can't recover or produce oil you are wrong.

The world can recover, but oil will become too expensive.

We're not running out either.

As I said before, there is tons of oil out there. It's just not recoverable.

 

[iceaura]

A) You haven't linked to anything because there is no evidence supporting your argument.

The evidence - your line by line corrsepondence in rhetoric with typical Creationist rhetoric, and in fact one particular Creationist who posted here exactly as you do - is all over this thread and this forum.

B) Creationist "geology" is the biogenic theory which believes that hydrocarbons are somehow (miraculously) created in the Earth's crust shallower than 15,000 feet TVD in sedimentary rock

Only some. There's a lot like this: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47529

 

[synthesizer-patel]

FYI oil migrates upwards not downwards because water is heavier than oil. This is why we have oil seeps and why we used to have blowouts not blowdowns.

The oil industry disagrees
http://www.ukooa.co.uk/education/storyofoil/geological-12.cfm
http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2005/11/4/15537/8056

The source rocks are igneous not sedimentary. Sedimentary rocks are merely reservoirs.

Strawman - regardless of the nature of the source or reservoir rock - it can still migrate downwards through processes like subduction / burial etc.

At least I use links. You don't have any evidence whatsoever to support your case. Not one scientific paper. Not one scientific link.

Posting links and references that don't say what you think they say is worse that providing no links - a great deal of your links are merely op-ed, the science is either ignored, out-of date, or discredited - look at those google books links you posted - stuff from 1904 FFS!

here's some more links that you have misunderstood:

http://www.geotimes.org/june03/NN_gulf.html
- describes hydrocarbons being generated by jurassic marine carbonates - marine carbonates are predmoninatly biogenic.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47673

Oil is seeping from sediments into granite - not being spontaneously generated from deep in the earth -furthermore Wallace G. Dow, an AAPG member and consultant in The Woodlands, Texas states "the oil's components indicate a lacustrine organic facies with lipid-rich, land-plant debris and fresh-water algal material, refuting theories of abiogenic origin in this area."
http://www.aapg.org/explorer/2005/02feb/vietnam.cfm
http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2005/11/4/15537/8056
I have edited your Wikipedia article on this oilfield to include this information just in case someone gets misled by it

http://www.gasresources.net/DisposalBioClaims.htm
contradictory claims of biomarkers - Gold claims they ARE biomarkers from the hot deep biospehere - others claim they aren't biomarkers at all - fundamental contradictions like this need to be resolved to elevate this from hypothesis to theory

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/101/35/12818
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/relea...05/06/07a.html
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/319/5863/604
describe the abiotic generation of methane by means of reactions with basaltic types rock - contradicts abiotic predictions of oil generated in granitic sequences.
Furthermore this does nothing to prove that all hydrocarbons are abiotic - indeed some of the articles stress the difference between biotic and abiotic hydrocarbons.

You have also been extremely selective with this http://www.aapg.org/explorer/2002/11nov/abiogenic.cfmarticle - picking out bits that have suggestions of abiotic oil and ignoring the bits that don't agree 100% with what you say - its a technique called Quote Mining - its what creationists do.



I can quote mine from the same article look

Katz said Western science recognizes that abiogenic hydrocarbons can result from natural processes, including the possibility of hydrocarbons originating at great depth.

"I don't think anybody's arguing that gas couldn't be generated from the mantle," he said.

However, even the Russian scientists he has worked with accept the organic origin of petroleum found in large, commercial accumulations.

"I have yet to have anyone show me that there are commercial quantities of these hydrocarbons," Katz said.

"I'm a scientist, so I have to keep an open mind. But I need to see some evidence."

This is why I have asked you to explain it in your own words instead of relying on links that don't quite say what you think they say.
I'm doing you a favour pal - offering a way for you to look less of a fool

Finally to save you from complaining that you are not getting any peer review from other posters here, here's a doozie for you to refute:

http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio.jsp?osti_id=7052010

the median abiogenic methane content of commercial gases is estimated to be less than 200 ppm by volume

this calculation suggests that little confidence should be placed in the resource potential of abiogenic natural gas

 

[OilIsMastery]

The oil industry disagrees
http://www.ukooa.co.uk/education/storyofoil/geological-12.cfm
http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2005/11/4/15537/8056

FYI the oil drum is not the "oil industry." It's a political propaganda website that doesn't allow any opposing viewpoints to comment in the comment section.

 

[OilIsMastery]

http://www.geotimes.org/june03/NN_gulf.html
- describes hydrocarbons being generated by jurassic marine carbonates - marine carbonates are predmoninatly biogenic.

Obviously you have no idea what you're talking about.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/319/5863/604

Radiocarbon evidence rules out seawater bicarbonate as the carbon source for FTT reactions, suggesting that a mantle-derived inorganic carbon source is leached from the host rocks. Our findings illustrate that the abiotic synthesis of hydrocarbons in nature may occur in the presence of ultramafic rocks, water, and moderate amounts of heat.

 

[Read-Only]

FYI the oil drum is not the "oil industry." It's a political propaganda website that doesn't allow any opposing viewpoints to comment in the comment section.

What a poor mass of undereducated human flotsam you are! For one thing, you display the worst case of bad reading comprehension I've ever seen! The VAST majority of the links you have provided don't even come close to saying what you think they do - in fact, many times they provide information that is in direct opposition to your silly idea. And I think that's absolutely HILARIOUS!!! Your foot must be so full of bullet holes that you can't even stand up.

 

[OilIsMastery]

What a poor mass of undereducated human flotsam you are! For one thing, you display the worst case of bad reading comprehension I've ever seen! The VAST majority of the links you have provided don't even come close to saying what you think they do - in fact, many times they provide information that is in direct opposition to your silly idea. And I think that's absolutely HILARIOUS!!! Your foot must be so full of bullet holes that you can't even stand up.

Wow. I think that's the strongest case for biogenic theory I've ever seen LOL.