StarGateWars Forums

Oh yah this thread was about some guy stating petrol isn't cooked organic matter

well he's wrong
http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.j ... 54-cT5xip/

You would know that if you understood what hydrocarbons are.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

Dubby_CompGamerGeek2 wrote:
Since you, Avenger, have so far declined to avenge the discrediting of your fellow conspiracy theorist,

to which "theorist" are you referring? i have cited no "theorist" in words or film!

and just how pray tell have you discredited what the Col said in the film, all i've seen are words...remember, if you are going to call someone a liar then the burden of proof is on you, not the Col and certainly not me.

I believe the Colonel to be mistaken and misguided.

I didn't call Col Fletcher Prouty a liar.

DON'T YOU DARE EVER FALSELY ACCUSE ME OF SOMETHING LIKE THAT EVER AGAIN.



If I can beat you in a debate without even doing my own research, it would appear you need a new hobby.

You and the Colonel called academia a bunch of liars and he said that they had been apparently bought off.

yet neither one of you offered anything close to proof in this thread or his youtube video.

At the very least, the Colonel needs to offer real proof.

And since you started this topic here, so should you.

Thriller wrote:Oh yah this thread was about some guy stating petrol isn't cooked organic matter

well he's wrong
http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.j ... 54-cT5xip/

You would know that if you understood what hydrocarbons are.

at this point i have to be honest and say i didn't understand a single word of that document, and i'm not ashamed to say that its as far beyond my comprehensional ability as is brain surgery...

having said that, one thing has always bugged me about fossil fuels after watching the film the Abyss...no skeletal or fossil remains have ever been found lower than what 13k feet, roughly? so how come they are finding oil MUCH deeper than that?


[spoiler]Eugene Island is an oil field in the gulf of Mexico, 80 miles off the coast of Louisiana. It was discovered in 1973 and began producing 15,000 barrels of oil a day which then slowed to about 4,000 barrels in 1989.
But then for no logical reason whatsoever, production spiked back up to 13,000 barrels a day.

What the researchers found when they analyzed the oil field with time lapse 3-D seismic imaging is that there was an unexplained deep fault in the bottom corner of the computer scan, which showed oil gushing in from a previously unknown deep source and migrating up through the rock to replenish the existing supply.

Furthermore, the analysis of the oil now being produced at Eugene Island shows that its age is geologically different from the oil produced there after the refinery first opened. Suggesting strongly that it is now emerging from a different, unexplained source.

The last estimates of probable reserves shot up from 60 million barrels to 400 million barrels.

Both the scientists and geologists from the big oil companies have seen the evidence and admitted that the Eugene Island oil field is refilling itself.


Economics never hindered the theorists, however. One, Thomas Gold, a respected astronomer and professor emeritus at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y., has held for years that oil is actually a renewable, primordial syrup continually manufactured by the Earth under ultrahot conditions and tremendous pressures. As this substance migrates toward the surface, it is attacked by bacteria, making it appear to have an organic origin dating back to the dinosaurs, he says.

http://www.oralchelation.com/faq/wsj4.htm[/spoiler]

Okay, Avenger:

Where do you think petroleum, natural gas, and coal comes from?

What are their ingredients?

What processes create them?


Why do they burn so well?

And since we are being asked to believe that fossil fuels are a lot more renewable than we've been told all of our lives:

How fast are they created?


Because neither you nor Colonel Prouty have even scratched the surface of answering any of these questions...

look in the spoiler...i think i'm starting to answer some of those questions











hold on, i think i am being SEVERELY misunderstood here, when i post films like that of Col Prouty i never say i believe what they say 100% without question or research of my own. my reason for posting is because to my limited understanding, it made sense. so i post the link to the film and ask peeps to watch it in the hopes we can hammer out the truth via debate...


hope that helps you lot to calm down and approach such subject matter with a more open mind!

lol, I watched the youtube video... more than once.

including just now... the answers were not there.

I'm still not seeing any answers to my questions...

so I go to that source which I do not use in school,

because it is sometimes unreliable:

Wikipedia... and I start to read about petroleum...

and I understand your questions about petroleum,

but despite the wealth of information in Wikipedia...

which was much more complete and useful than Prouty's video...

I actually understand a little of the Russian-Ukrainian theory of abiotic origins of oil... I was first inspired to look in Wikipedia about petroleum thanks to the youtube user who commented about this theory...

Nonetheless, we do know that cows give off another hydrocarbon: methane gas in sizable quantities...

Petroleum is thought to be largely the product of algae, which has no bones... though I suggest that other very small very soft organisms,
(bacteria, mold, even earthworms), could play a sizable role...

I do not understand your need to raise questions about every single thing

that you can not prove with experiments in your own basement or backyard.

I believe that businesses and governments and public figures often act in corrupt ways, but as I said earlier, if the oil industry propagates that the world's petroleum is running out,

then that necessitates the need to find alternatives to petroleum...
which would be competition against petroleum...

that's not in the petroleum industry's best interest...

indeed... the American Petroleum Institute forcefully argues that there is plenty of oil...

http://www.energytomorrow.org/energy/

if only Americans would tell President Obama and Congress to let the petroleum industry drill where ever they darn well please, including your backyard...

and if they wreck the enviroment, meh... oh well.

I have no doubt that the petroleum industry has been in engaging in illegal conspiracy actions to further their business interests for a very long time.

but you picked the wrong conspiracy, mate.

did you check out the spoiler and the link in it?

good point, I totally missed it...

your link says there appears to be a deeper source to at least one reservoir of petroleum... that's good... because before we can convert to alternative fuels we are going to need a lot of petroleum for our lavish lifestyle... especially here in the USA.

Now, according to your article, it looks like the petroleum industry is going allow the good scientists to research this further... which is good.

I look forward to seeing this research...

but that is not exactly in line with your theory.

now you can go look at my link.

as much as some would think otherwise on these forums (not pointing fingers) i dont enjoy delving into the conspiracy side of things, because its EXTREMELY hard to prove and most people wouldn't buy it even if they see the proof...so, i welcome any research which is open and transparent, no matter what the conclusions are.

well, after reading the link to your article and after all whats going on in the gulf with the oil spill, i'm left with one question...why the hell do we need to go abroad destroying sovereign nations, risking the lives of our servicemen/women and killing civis-to grab resources when there is ample resources for all of us in our own backyards?! but again, thats the conspiracy side of it and not the road i wish to take in this topic, something thats getting increasingly hard to stay away from especially when you consider that Tesla had developed free and wireless electricity for the whole planet, to which JP Morgan replied "can i put a meter on it?" to which Tesla said "no" to which Morgan replied by pulling Tesla's funding and killing the wardenclyffe tower project: http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&q=warden ... bec9886e72


damn these conspiracy's

um, for starters, because while Americans and Britons would love to reduce their dependence on foreign energy, especially petroleum, they'd much rather it be extracted from the desert where nothing much lives, (cute animals or people that my countryfolk care much about), as opposed to our backyards, the Gulf of Mexico, the North Sea, or America's National Parks...



by the way, the persona that you portray,

including your name and siggy,

plus your lack of academic and reliable sources,

in my personal opinion,

contributes to your reputation here just as well

as the personal experiences of my friends and I with you...

maybe you find it hard to understand because of 2 reasons, 1 i'm self educated (including reading and writing, which is why i find EXTREMELY difficult to structure an argument that you guys would be able to comprehend as well as i comprehend it.
2ndly, because of the stigma surrounding "conspiracy's"...my siggy aside, could those be reason enough to misunderstand me?

I know the chemistry is difficult avenger, but that's science.. what your doing is sophistry

i'll do the best i can to make my argument/stance as easily understandable as i can...

the way i'm looking at is like this, what if a kid goes to school and gets a decent level of education all the while they've been taught that 2+2=5, then 1 day someone says "that's not right!", but the kid replies "but how can ALL the books, my years of education and all the teachers be wrong?!"...what if that scenario is over 100 years old and so ingrained in peoples psyche that they cant even comprehend 2+2=anything but 5?

what if that's the case here?


the link i posted above says the oil field is being replenished from deep underground, are you not even curious as to how that is even possible given the depths involved?

what about the oil that's replenishing the field being of different consistency, is it not logical to assume that oil in a field once it drops to a certain level and is then replenished, the fresh oil going into the existing field would be of the same consistency...if you follow my meaning?

Look more sophistry^

You argument is based on some hypothetical circumstance where your child is taught an obvious fallacy. You constructed it in away to lend some kind of inherent logic to your position. But it massively fails avenger cause your appeal to belief has no factual basis (aswell as being illogical).

.. your kid is not taught 2+2 =5, he is taught 2+2 =4. Like we all are. Schools get their information from peer reviewed articles, backed by people with years a research and academic dedication. Texts go though reviews boards, text updates, national standards. Your nonsense on the end, could have just come from some yahoo with an internet blog...

More often kids come to school believing some fallacy taught from the family (like the earth is 6000years old) than the other way around.

i've given you a hypothetical situation which i thought was plausible, in which a kid being taught 2+2=5 would have been taught that by a teacher who themselves learned as a kid from books which would also have been peer and board reviewed, and the peers and board members would also have learned that 2+2=5 from earlier books which were also peer and board reviewed. in that kind of situation is it not possible that scientific fraud may have been committed?


before you answer the above, lets consider the recent scandal with climategate...for the past 10+ years (even though the idea of man made climate change has been around a good 40+ years) all i've heard is "man made global warming this, anthropomorphic or man made climate change that", and yet its been proved that its nothing more than scientific fraud on an educational and global level running into the 100's billions if not trillions, and thats not even touched on just how much damage this has caused our industries which have been shut down because of this fraud.
the fraud of climate change becomes even more ridiculous when you consider that 1 volcano puts out more CO2 in 1 year than man has ever put out in every single endeavour he has engaged in from the moment the first man walked on the earth to the present day.

if they can convince the world that foisting a global carbon tax on the people will somehow fix the planet, what are "they" not capable of doing?

and to cap it all off, i recently told my sons geography teacher that i didn't want my son learning about "man made climate change" because it was a fraud and has been proved as such to which i got the reply "its part of the curriculum so he has to learn it" to which i said "even if its a fraud?" to which he replied "i don't set the curriculum, take this up with the head teacher and the educational board if you feel that strongly about it". its safe to say the man thinks all the info leaked about climategate is propaganda put out by Russians or the Chinese, such is his conviction that we are causing climate change without even considering why the Copenhagen climate change summit collapsed in total failure after the 3rd world country's walked out of the summit because they found out what a fraud the whole thing is...

do you see why i have a problem with mainstream academia and its books?