The planet is full of oil

[EE_]

Never again will I listen to anyone that says we've reached peak oil.
Peak manipulation and manufactured shortages are another matter.

[singular_me]

no matter how we look at the picture, the peak oil has always been a deception as alternative energy technology has been suppressed for decades. I already was denouncing peak oil fraud on GIM - and writing about it in my internet columns.

[chad]

the russians proved this years ago.

[JohnQPublic]

Abionic oil?

[Twisted Titan]

When you think about things logically its is truly astounding how badly we have bern snookered.

Case in point.

This planet is covered by 2/3 of water yet millions die for thirst ,unclean water or warfare breaksout over the 2% fresh water.

You would think that desalinization would be at the forefront.

[aeondaze]

When you think about things logically its is truly astounding how badly we have bern snookered.

Case in point.

This planet is covered by 2/3 of water yet millions die for thirst ,unclean water or warfare breaksout over the 2% fresh water.

You would think that desalinization would be at the forefront.

I agree TT, though you see the thing is, desalination plants are horrendously inefficient energy wise .

Its all because of a little thing called osmotic pressure. The pumping pressure has to be largely in excess of the osmotic pressure across the membrane and this can cost BIG dollars when you scale it up.

It's actually much cheaper to use rain water tanks, I know in North America its not always convenient due to winter temps, but here its a no brainer...

[JohnQPublic]

The one thing that has served me well is my conviction that the earth is not billions of years old. With that, I am naturally skeptical of the claim of "fossil" fuels (not that fossils do not exist, they just might not be millions of years old).

[aeondaze]

The one thing that has served me well is my conviction that the earth is not billions of years old. With that, I am naturally skeptical of the claim of "fossil" fuels (not that fossils do not exist, they just might not be millions of years old).

Wow, just wow. In regard to the earths age I personally don't go by conviction, just established facts.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3087/2742916836_1946a6e44c.jpg

[mick silver]

I have two tanks that rain water run into plus a spring that run year round , I think I oil and gas under my dirt but it hard to get someone to drill for the stuff around here you see oil pumps all over the place that has oil but there not pulling the oil out now because of the low prices

[JohnQPublic]

Wow, just wow. In regard to the earths age I personally don't go by conviction, just established facts.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3087/2742916836_1946a6e44c.jpg

And how did you establish those facts?

[aeondaze]

And how did you establish those facts?

In a far more rigorous way than mere "conviction" :)

[madfranks]

Abionic oil?

I believe the correct term is "abiotic" oil. I heard about it first on Coast to Coast years back, and it made perfect sense to me.

[mick silver]

Abiotic Oil. The abiotic oil formation theory suggests that crude oil is the result of naturally occurring and possibly ongoing geological processes.

[Twisted Titan]

I agree TT, though you see the thing is, desalination plants are horrendously inefficient energy wise .

Its all because of a little thing called osmotic pressure. The pumping pressure has to be largely in excess of the osmotic pressure across the membrane and this can cost BIG dollars when you scale it up.

It's actually much cheaper to use rain water tanks, I know in North America its not always convenient due to winter temps, but here its a no brainer...

Dollars are unlimited

We spend billions on bridges to nowhere
Ghost cities for no occupants
Billions on munitions that are never even fired they are just buried and forgotten

The money is there...the technology can be created or improved.

There is just no political will...because those at the helm are not about empowering humanity but enslaving it.

[Twisted Titan]

I believe the correct term is "abiotic" oil. I heard about it first on Coast to Coast years back, and it made perfect sense to me.

I kinda scratched my head at the thought the entire exsitence of mondern day humanity depends on a bunch a dinosaurs getting stuck in a tar pit.

How many dinos could find a pit to die in?

[JohnQPublic]

I kinda scratched my head at the thought the entire exsitence of mondern day humanity depends on a bunch a dinosaurs getting stuck in a tar pit.

How many dinos could find a pit to die in?

corrected: abiotic oil.

The usual story is that it is more plankton and plants than dinos.

[gunDriller]

speaking of dinosaurs, i am reminded of some of the pick-up driving locals who stomp the gas ... when they're 50 or 100 yards from a stop-sign or red-light.


how many of you think rednecks will be able to AFFORD stomping the gas in 100 years - on an internal combustion engine of 2014 ?

[Santa]

When you think about things logically its is truly astounding how badly we have bern snookered.

Case in point.

This planet is covered by 2/3 of water yet millions die for thirst ,unclean water or warfare breaksout over the 2% fresh water.

You would think that desalinization would be at the forefront.

Scarcity=fear=control.

[crimethink]

Wow, just wow. In regard to the earths age I personally don't go by conviction, just established facts.


Assumed "facts."

[crimethink]

In a far more rigorous way than mere "conviction" :)

Avoidance of the question.

The age of the Earth is belief, regardless of whether one is an Evolutionist or a Creationist. Unless you've got a Time Machine we don't know about.

[Carbon]

Dollars are unlimited

We spend billions on bridges to nowhere
Ghost cities for no occupants
Billions on munitions that are never even fired they are just buried and forgotten

The money is there...the technology can be created or improved.

There is just no political will...because those at the helm are not about empowering humanity but enslaving it.

And who is 'at the helm'? Whom do they worship. It's biblical ... but who wants to believe that? It's easier to put the buds back in one's ears and turn up the iThing.

Ironically, participation in this culture on just about any level is participation in Satanic worship ... and it empowers those at the helm every time we do it.

[midnight rambler]

Diamonds are so rare! And there's no way to duplicate them artifically! /sarc Therefore we need to manage the 'shortage' and drive up the price on these VERY RARE items! PLUS we need to convince young men and women that the ONLY way to affirm their relationship is for the young men to go into BIG debt for THOU$AND$ of dollar$ for one of our EVER SO RARE PIECES OF CARBON so those young men can SHOW HOW MUCH THEY LOVE their betrothed.

[expat4ever]

Doesnt matter how old the earth is or how much oil there is. If the oil was put here its here for a reason. Everything in nature is here for a reason.

[aeondaze]

I don't buy this BS.

The theory makes no sense at all.

How do carbon rich oil deposits end up deep within the earth in the first place, second what is this fabled mechanism for regeneration by the abiotic theory again?

How does this theory explain certain chemical markers in oil that could only have come from compounds like chlorophyll?

Sometimes you guys throw out the most solid evidence for phantasm because you want to believe everything is a lie.

Not so.

[Hitch]

Fog nets. You set these up in areas where the fog rolls in.

They can capture a lot of water. There is towns in South America, where all the water they need they get from fog nets.

7047

[midnight rambler]

I don't buy this BS.

The theory makes no sense at all.

How do carbon rich oil deposits end up deep within the earth in the first place, second what is this fabled mechanism for regeneration by the abiotic theory again?

How does this theory explain certain chemical markers in oil that could only have come from compounds like chlorophyll?

Sometimes you guys throw out the most solid evidence for phantasm because you want to believe everything is a lie.

Not so.

Know what's even more fantastic than the notion of abiotic oil? The notion that 'fossils' have been buried as deep as petroleum is found (1-4 miles deep in the case of fracking).

http://media.angelnexus.com/images/depth-of-oil-wells-energy-and-capital.png

[chad]

after the dinosaurs died they got covered up by 4 miles of compacted dirt and made deep oil fields, yo. and there must have been a shitload of those little bastards running around considering the oil down there.

[aeondaze]

Know what's even more fantastic than the notion of abiotic oil? The notion that 'fossils' have been buried as deep as petroleum is found (1-4 miles deep in the case of fracking).

That doesn't sound fantastic at all. That sounds perfectly sound and reasonable when one accepts all the evidence that points to the movement of plates and subduction at the plate boundaries.

Of course fossils are found at these depths!


Several of them, such as the Hawaiian Islands, came from mantle plumes originating in the lowest part of the mantle. This geological process is similar to the movement of a Lava Lamp: hot rock that used to be part of the oceanic crust rises in cylindrical columns from a depth of nearly 1,900 miles (3,000 kilometers). Near the surface, where the pressure on it is reduced, the rock melts and forms volcanoes.

Scientists had thought this process took about 2 billion years to complete, but new data suggest it could have happened in a quarter of that time.

[aeondaze]

after the dinosaurs died they got covered up by 4 miles of compacted dirt and made deep oil fields, yo. and there must have been a shitload of those little bastards running around considering the oil down there.

Who said oil came from dinosaurs, WTF?

[midnight rambler]

Who said oil came from dinosaurs, WTF?

The graphic that I posted. lol

[chad]

Who said oil came from dinosaurs, WTF?

don't mind me, i'm just making fun of statist "scientists." i believe the russians have pretty much proven it comes from plankton deposits being compressed at high temps against carbon deposits. all my life though, until recently, i've heard about how oil came from "dead dinosaurs." lol

[7th trump]

Ever notice that an old lime stone wall basement such as the basement of the old farm house I grew up on smells like oil?
I've been in lime stone caves where they dig the white rock to make Portland...and it too smells like old oil.
Oil is not fossil...its made deep in the earth...and theres plenty of it.

I believe the Russians drilled into granite and found oil..so the theory its fossil is made up. Don't forget the fossil theory of oil came from the late 1800's when chemistry was virtually nonexistent. Adults of that time had an equivalent education of todays 2nd grade. Most couldn't write.

250 ft down for the first oil wells isn't far enough down to cook anything into oil. It could seep into cracks....but?

Coal is another problem against the fossil theory....coal is virtually on the surface....wheres the oceans of oil on the surface if coal is that close to the surface?
Has anyone drilled into coal as deep as the oil drills?

[aeondaze]

don't mind me, i'm just making fun of statist "scientists." i believe the russians have pretty much proven it comes from plankton deposits being compressed at high temps against carbon deposits. all my life though, until recently, i've heard about how oil came from "dead dinosaurs." lol

No worries.

Plankton I can accept. But it doesn't happen over night that's for sure, which is what proponents of abiotic oil would have us believe and the reason why at some point, considering our current usage, we must run out of oil, no I'm not going to quote HT here, lol

[midnight rambler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kZotftLE0A

[7th trump]

No worries.

Plankton I can accept. But it doesn't happen over night that's for sure, which is what proponents of abiotic oil would have us believe and the reason why at some point, considering our current usage, we must run out of oil, no I'm not going to quote HT here, lol

I highly doubt plankton deposits that vast. Most of the plankton would rot or turn to stone before being covered up fast enough to get pressure and heat.

[osoab]

must be dinosaurs that are older than the dinosaurs that we know about. how big were those suckers?


/sarc

[aeondaze]

I highly doubt plankton deposits that vast. Most of the plankton would rot or turn to stone before being covered up fast enough to get pressure and heat.

I think your overthinking this one.

have you ever seen the black ooze that settles on the bottom of ocean floors rich in phytoplankton?

If by 'rot' you're mean decomposition, then yes that black ooze is decomposed organic matter!

[7th trump]

I think your overthinking this one.

have you ever seen the black ooze that settles on the bottom of ocean floors rich in phytoplankton?

If by 'rot' you're mean decomposition, then yes that black ooze is decomposed organic matter!

Biblically speaking the oceans didn't exist. Off the coast of Cuba theres a pyramid bigger than Giza that's 800 feet below the surface. Off the coast of cailifornia there is a vast unnatural landscape a 1000 feet down seen by satellite images.
God took the firmament down (water layer in the sky) and flooded the earth causing it to pool as the oceans. Earth was a tropical paradice where the poles never had snow....Russia is finding flash frozen mammoths in the tundra way up north still chewing on buttercups (tropical plants).
When God destroyed the first earth age he took the firmament down. The earth was watered with a very heavy dew as it rotated.

I'm not buying the plankton theory either.

[7th trump]

I think your overthinking this one.

have you ever seen the black ooze that settles on the bottom of ocean floors rich in phytoplankton?

If by 'rot' you're mean decomposition, then yes that black ooze is decomposed organic matter!

By rot I mean it would fossilize before being covered that deep with sediment to reach that temperature.

[Glass]

I'm pretty sure that fossil fuels are mineral based aren't they? Not organic at all.

[Cebu_4_2]

I'm pretty sure that fossil fuels are mineral based aren't they? Not organic at all.

Perhaps a by product of Pyramids?

[aeondaze]

I'm pretty sure that fossil fuels are mineral based aren't they? Not organic at all.

You don't understand chemical nomenclature at all, just saying.

[aeondaze]

Biblically speaking the oceans didn't exist. Off the coast of Cuba theres a pyramid bigger than Giza that's 800 feet below the surface. Off the coast of cailifornia there is a vast unnatural landscape a 1000 feet down seen by satellite images.
God took the firmament down (water layer in the sky) and flooded the earth causing it to pool as the oceans. Earth was a tropical paradice where the poles never had snow....Russia is finding flash frozen mammoths in the tundra way up north still chewing on buttercups (tropical plants).
When God destroyed the first earth age he took the firmament down. The earth was watered with a very heavy dew as it rotated.

I'm not buying the plankton theory either.

And neither am I selling. 7th, you do know I'm an atheist, right?

[crimethink]

Who said oil came from dinosaurs, WTF?

You're kidding, right?

That's been seriously taught for decades.

Sinclair Oil's mascot, "Dino":

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8162/7463828572_bbec052971_z.jpg

[crimethink]

I'm pretty sure that fossil fuels are mineral based aren't they? Not organic at all.

They are hydrocarbons, hence, organic compounds. Their chemical composition is not in dispute, but their origin is.

[aeondaze]

You're kidding, right?

That's been seriously taught for decades.

Sinclair Oil's mascot, "Dino"

Let me correct that Was used in marketing oil for decades , not anymore.

And yes, I'm aware of Sinclair Oil, though we never had it down under that I know of, maybe some of the old farts can validate that...

[crimethink]

And neither am I selling. 7th, you do know I'm an atheist, right?

Cataclysm-based geology (catastrophism) is non-sectarian. Sure, most of us are Christian, but not necessarily so. There are plenty of phenomena which are inexplicable by any means other than cataclysm.

[aeondaze]

Cataclysm-based geology (catastrophism) is non-sectarian. Sure, most of us are Christian, but not necessarily so. There are plenty of phenomena which are inexplicable by any means other than cataclysm.

I would never use the word "cataclysm". It just seems to be a loaded term used by creationists.

Sure there were plenty of mass extinction events, the paleontological record is littered with them, so I don't quite see the need for such a term as "Cataclysm-based geology"

[7th trump]

They are hydrocarbons, hence, organic compounds. Their chemical composition is not in dispute, but their origin is.

Hydrocarbon huh?
Everything is carbon based and theres plenty of hydrogen on this earth in the form of water molecules.
The water seeps into the ground...........heats up under pressure...and who knows what kind of chemical process is going on deep in the mantel.

Who ever said hydrocarbons are plant based?
And how have they ever proven this theory hydrocarbon are plant based?
I wouldn't believe the theory of fossils in the oil they bring up.

[aeondaze]

And how have they ever proven this theory hydrocarbon are plant based?

There are specific bio-markers found in oil as below; chlorophyll on the right and a compound isolated from crude petroleum oil on the left.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/40/Treibs%26Chlorophyll.png/350px-Treibs%26Chlorophyll.png

The evidence is clear and emphatic!

[crimethink]

I would never use the word "cataclysm". It just seems to be a loaded term used by creationists.


So-called "science" has its own political-correctness then. :)




Sure there were plenty of mass extinction events, the paleontological record is littered with them, so I don't quite see the need for such a term as "Cataclysm-based geology"

"Cataclysm" comes from the Greek for "wash down," so, yes, it's related to belief in a widespread flood. Such "flood myths" are worldwide, not only in Genesis. The likelihood they're all mythical as in "made-up-with-no-basis-in-ancient-fact"? That's a matter of faith, again.

Velikovsky, a Zionist Jew, is perhaps the most notable of non-Christians who have put forth cataclysm-based geology, and despite his ethnicity, has been rendered persona non grata. Shoving him and his work down the Memory Hole is not due to his "pseudo-science," but because his ideas "don't fit" within the "consensus-based" (faith-based) "science" of "accepted" geology & astrophysics.

[crimethink]

There are specific bio-markers found in oil as below; chlorophyll on the right and a compound isolated from crude petroleum oil on the left.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/40/Treibs%26Chlorophyll.png/350px-Treibs%26Chlorophyll.png

The evidence is clear and emphatic!

Not exactly. It's presumed the former derives from the latter. That's probably true, but not "fact." Unless facts are synonymous with belief.

Those molecules are similar, of course, but there are many instances of assumption or presumption being wrong. Further, there are multiple variants of chlorophyll (Oxygens moved around the molecule). Ultimately, what if hydrocarbons parallel chlorophyll, rather than derive therefrom?

On a trivia note, I find it interesting that "Nazi science" is the basis for the currently-accepted position, LOL. (Treibs developing the theory in the Third Reich; his role at TU-München is kept very quiet - it is alleged that he "lost his post" due to his "attitude towards Nazism," but this is belied by the fact he published again in 1940 in a Berlin-based journal).

[aeondaze]

So-called "science" has its own political-correctness then. :)

No, I have my own preferences, of which using the word cataclysm is not one


"Cataclysm" comes from the Greek for "wash down," so, yes, it's related to belief in a widespread flood. Such "flood myths" are worldwide, not only in Genesis. The likelihood they're all mythical as in "made-up-with-no-basis-in-ancient-fact"? That's a matter of faith, again.

Sure. there probably were widespread floods in the past, but they have naught to do with the Genesis myth as it pertain to origins of life on this planet, that is nothing more than wishful thinking, I accept this is where we depart ideologically, but there it is.


Velikovsky, a Zionist Jew, is perhaps the most notable of non-Christians who have put forth cataclysm-based geology, and despite his ethnicity, has been rendered persona non grata. Shoving him and his work down the Memory Hole is not due to his "pseudo-science," but because his ideas "don't fit" within the "consensus-based" (faith-based) "science" of "accepted" geology & astrophysics.

Politically loaded, subjective and for the most part irrelevant to the argument at hand.


Not exactly. It's presumed the former derives from the latter. That's probably true, but not "fact." Unless facts are synonymous with belief.

Maybe you fail to grasp the concept of probabilistic determinations in the greater sciences. Its larger probability means in all likelihood that is exactly what happened. You have to take into consideration the elevated temperatures and pressures that are required to form petroleum based hydrocarbons, hence the displacement of Mg for Vanadium as an example.


Those molecules are similar, of course, but there are many instances of assumption or presumption being wrong. Further, there are multiple variants of chlorophyll (Oxygens moved around the molecule). Ultimately, what if hydrocarbons parallel chlorophyll, rather than derive therefrom?

Highly doubtful when there is a perfectly reasonable explanation, I suggest you're clutching at straws.



On a trivia note, I find it interesting that "Nazi science" is the basis for the currently-accepted position, LOL. (Treibs developing the theory in the Third Reich; his role at TU-München is kept very quiet - it is alleged that he "lost his post" due to his "attitude towards Nazism," but this is belied by the fact he published again in 1940 in a Berlin-based journal).

Again, politically loaded, subjective and for the most part irrelevant to the argument at hand. An attempt to misdirect and malign the arguments made for modern scientific thought, which counter to your assertions is nothing like "faith-based".

[JohnQPublic]

Hydrocarbon huh?
Everything is carbon based and theres plenty of hydrogen on this earth in the form of water molecules.
The water seeps into the ground...........heats up under pressure...and who knows what kind of chemical process is going on deep in the mantel.

Who ever said hydrocarbons are plant based?
And how have they ever proven this theory hydrocarbon are plant based?
I wouldn't believe the theory of fossils in the oil they bring up.

Organic chemistry is really the study of the chemistry of carbon based compounds (excluding graphitic compounds). Much of what is studied in organic chemistry does not occur directly in nature, but it is still called organic chemistry. basically any carbon based covalently bonded compound including minimally carbon and hydrogen (but adding oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorous, sulfur as well as metallics and others including halogens) is called organic chemistry. Typically if a compound never occurred in nature, it is called a synthetic organic compound. It is semantics.

Regardless of the origin of petroleum, the chemistry of petroleum falls under the field of organic chemistry due to the nature of the chemicals in petroleum.

I guess you could complain if they called it biochemistry (but even that pushes into synthetics).

[JohnQPublic]

the problem with non-abiotic pertoleum, or fossil fuels, is that petroleum is being extracted every day at depths far below where any fossils are found. This is mentioned in the video that midnight rambler posted (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?80515-The-planet-is-full-of-oil&p=742405&viewfull=1#post742405). On the other hand, specific marker compounds; though disputable, are evidence that some type of bio materials are at least mixed into some petroleum sources. Oil is a good preserver of bio-compounds. Ever had pesto?

[expat4ever]

I would imagine that there are lots of reasons why the oil could be so deep. It could seep down there, get moved down there through plate techtonics by plates moving and fissues opening up to allow the oil to penetrate lower, ect. Super volcanoes that can put down 100's of feet of dirt over a forest in one shot, comet strikes that obliterate most of whats on earth and buries everything in dust and billions of years and I can see how things could disappear below the surface.
A million years is a very long time. 100 million or a billion and we can only imagine what went on on this planet that long ago.

[JohnQPublic]

I would imagine that there are lots of reasons why the oil could be so deep. It could seep down there, get moved down there through plate techtonics by plates moving and fissues opening up to allow the oil to penetrate lower, ect. Super volcanoes that can put down 100's of feet of dirt over a forest in one shot, comet strikes that obliterate most of whats on earth and buries everything in dust and billions of years and I can see how things could disappear below the surface.
A million years is a very long time. 100 million or a billion and we can only imagine what went on on this planet that long ago.

Things don't seep down against pressure. Things tend to get pushed up, not vice versa. It is the scientists (geologists especially) who do not expect fossils that deep. I don't know, it is just what I read. There may be some explanations.

[expat4ever]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangaea

300 million years ago there was 1 land mass on the planet. 100 million years ago it started breaking up. I'm sure lots of things happened along the way and there really is no way to know exactly what took place since noone was there. Unless we are very fortunate or unfortunate, however you want to look at it, we will never see any meaningful changes in the earths techtonics where we lose miles of coastline or gain miles of coastline.
We tend to think of things in terms of our lifetimes or in terms of human existence even but there's a lot more timeline and history than we can even imagine.

[expat4ever]

Things don't seep down against pressure. Things tend to get pushed up, not vice versa. It is the scientists (geologists especially) who do not expect fossils that deep. I don't know, it is just what I read. There may be some explanations.

I dont know enough about geology to know how it all works. My basic understanding of plate techtonics tells me that if there's an oil depoit 500 feet down and the plates collide that 500ft deep oil deposit could get pushed even lower. Someone more knowlegable on the subject can probably tell me if I'm wrong.

[mick silver]

the earth core is heated right could that help move the oil down . so is the earth twice as big as it was lets say a million years ago ?

[Neuro]

The hydrocarbon lakes of Titan, has about 100 times the known earthly deposits of hydrocarbons. But I would assume an abiotic process is responsible for Titans deposits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakes_of_Titan

[JohnQPublic]

The hydrocarbon lakes of Titan, has about 100 times the known earthly deposits of hydrocarbons. But I would assume an abiotic process is responsible for Titans deposits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakes_of_Titan

Maybe Titan is where rich Martians vacation when not subjugating earthlings? :)

[Neuro]

Here is a scientific article discussing the abiotic vs fossil theory of oil creation.

Heavier carbon chains than octane (C8H18) are simply not produced in biotic circumstances, in fact a case is made that heavier carbon chains in a low pressure environment would rather degrade to methane.

Meanwhile experiments has shown that the combination of marble, rust and water in a pressure and temperature equivalent to or more than 100 kms down in the mantle of the earth can readily create heavier carbon chains in concentrations similar to what is found in crude oil...

read more here:
http://m.pnas.org/content/99/17/10976.full

[Serpo]

Russia Proves 'Peak Oil' Is
A Misleading Zionist Scam
While Moscow invests heavily in unlimited oil production for the
future, New York squanders America's dwindling oil
profits on fast cars and fast women
Copyright Joe Vialls, 25 August 2004
2-16-7 In 1970, the Russians started drilling Kola SG-3, an exploration well which finally reached a staggering world record depth of 40,230 feet. Since then, Russian oil majors including Yukos have quietly drilled more than 310 successful super-deep oil wells, and put them into production. Last Year Russia overtook Saudi Arabia as the world's biggest single oil producer, and is now set to completely dominate global oil production and sales for the next century. http://www.rense.com/general75/0_oilwar2.jpghttp://www.rense.com/general75/0_oilwar3.jpg If the opening paragraph of this report started by claiming that completely unlimited crude oil reserves exist inside planet earth, readers might be tempted to regard the entire text as preposterous ghostwriting for a novelist like Frederick Forsyth. If the report then went on to claim that the Russians have exploited this stunning reality for nearly thirty years, right under the largely unwitting noses of western intelligence, readers could be excused for mistaking the author for a lunatic, or perhaps as a front for spy novelist John le Carré. The problem here is that unlimited oil reserves do exist inside planet earth, and the Russians long ago developed the advanced technology necessary to recover these unlimited oil reserves in an efficient and timely manner. Profoundly disturbing hard intelligence like this does not sit well with the frantic cries of western academic shills and lobbyists, determined to convince you all that the end of the oil world is nigh, or, more accurately, that America faces an imminent catastrophe when global production capacity "Peaks", i.e. when world demand for crude oil finally exceeds the rate at which we can physically pump the required product out of the ground. The gist of these false claims are outlined in a speech given at the at the University of Clausthal, by lobbyist Doctor Colin Campbell during December 2000: "In summary, these are the main points that we have to grasp: Conventional [Free flowing] oil provides most of the oil produced today, and is responsible for about 95% of all oil that has been produced so far. It will continue to dominate supply for a long time to come. It is what matters most. Its discovery peaked in the 1960s. We now find one barrel for every four we consume. Middle East share of production is set to rise. The rest of the world peaked in 1997, and is therefore in terminal decline. World peak comes within about five years" [circa 12/2005] Campbell is just the tip of a giant iceberg of academic Peak Oil 'experts' who suddenly appeared en-masse to give you this frightening news, right after President Saddam Hussein suddenly started trading his oil in Euros rather than in US Dollars, a devastating switch with the easy capacity to destroy the US Dollar in less than five years if it was left unchallenged and unchecked. So these shills [decoys] were carefully positioned to deflect your attention away from the obvious greed and incompetence of the United States Government and its Wall Street masters, and focus it elsewhere instead. Then, hopefully, a few years later down the track when prices start to bounce through the roof, and America has no Euros to buy crude oil, you will blame gasoline prices of $5.00 + per gallon at the pumps on an 'inevitable decline' in world oil production, rather than march furiously on Washington DC with locked and loaded firearms. Though attacking Campbell and his ilk is not the purpose of this report, his idiot claims can be debunked readily enough. While it is true that nowadays we only officially find one barrel of oil for every four barrels we consume, this is primarily because we temporarily stopped the incredibly expensive process of looking for crude oil when we had already physically established more than two trillion barrels of reserves in known reservoir locations around the world. When those known reserves drop to [say] one trillion barrels we may be tempted to go and find more, but not until then. And while it is true that the production rate from each individual oil well ever drilled has slowly declined over the years, there is a perfectly valid technical reason for this predictable reduced flow rate, which will be explained later. In order to understand how Russia has left the rest of the world standing in its wake, it is essential to know a little bit about where oil is located, and how it is extracted from the ground for refining and commercial use. It is an enormously complex subject, especially when considering the ultra-deep wells, which should really have a separate category all of their own. Many years ago I was personally involved at the sharp end of two ultra-deep drilling operations [one of them in direct liaison with Russian experts from the Moscow Drilling Institute], and will try to keep this drilling lesson as simple as I can. Thankfully perhaps, the underlying principle of how and where oil is recovered from is not difficult to comprehend, as illustrated by the diagram below. http://www.rense.com/general75/0_oilwar4.jpg The theory underlying how oil is formed at such enormous depths in the mantle of the earth is not central to this report, because the Russians have already proved its point of origin in absolute drilling terms more than 300 times. Those interested in the exact process should research the archives, where there are more than two hundred Russian papers on the subject. Probably a good place to start would be "The Role of Methane in the Formation of Mineral Fuels", written by by A.D. Bondar in 1967. What is central to this report is the massive advantage that Russia's ultra-deep drilling discoveries and technical achievements give it over the western nations. The first advantage I intend to explain is nowhere near as important in global terms as the second, because it is the second advantage that finally drove the Zionist Cabal to illegally invade sovereign Iraq, and thereby bring us all to the very brink of thermonuclear war. However, from where I sit, the first advantage is much more important in simple humanitarian terms, although "humanitarian" is not an acceptable trading process on Wall Street. As we have already discovered, oil can be produced virtually anywhere on earth, provided the host country can afford the expensive [and sometimes classified] technology, and the massive cost of drilling a well to extreme depth through extremely hard rock formations. But just think what even 20 or 30 deep producing oil wells can mean for the people of a country that has no natural resources of its own, or worse still, for people who have been told by glib western lobbyists that they have no natural resources of their own. Anyone who can prove that the western nations were lying or simply wrong, will become a trusted friend forever. Vietnam is a classic example. After more than 60 years of being enslaved, pillaged, and raped by the French and then by the Americans, the poor Vietnamese were told officially by American oil multinationals that their country was barren; that western 'cutting edge' technology had failed to find anything to help them recover financially from the mess left behind by American bombs, Agent Orange, and a host of other delightful gifts from Uncle Sam. This of course was exactly where America wanted the Vietnamese to be: desperately poor and unable to take action against their former invaders. The Russians had other ideas and a very different approach. After telling the Vietnamese that the Americans had lied to them, oil experts were flown in from Moscow to prove this startling claim in a no-risk joint venture, meaning the Russians would provide all of the equipment and expertise free of charge, and only then take a percentage of the profits if oil was actually found and put into production. Vietnam had absolutely nothing to lose, and swiftly gave Russia the green light. The Vietnamese White Tiger oil field was and is a raging success, currently producing high quality crude oil from basalt rock more than 17,000 feet below the surface of the earth, at 6,000 barrels per day per well. Through White Tiger, the Russians have assisted the Vietnamese to regain part of their self respect, while at the same time making them far less dependent on brutal western nations for food-aid handouts. All of a sudden in a very small way, Vietnam has joined the exclusive club of oil producing nations, and a stream of cynical U.S. Senators and Congressmen have started making the long pilgrimage to Ho Chi Minh City in order to 'mend fences'. Predictably perhaps, the Vietnamese are very cool, and try hard to ignore their new American admirers. Welcome to the White Tiger oil field in Vietnam. Observe the truly amazing oil flares, in an area the Americans officially declared 'barren' of oil reserves ! http://www.rense.com/general75/0_oilwar5.jpghttp://www.rense.com/general75/0_oilwar7.jpghttp://www.rense.com/general75/0_oilwar6.jpg http://www.rense.com/general75/0_oilwar8.jpg It is truly amazing how quickly good news travels [outside of CNN], and in a very short space of time China was also engaged in a joint super deep venture with Russia. Nor did it end there. As I write this report, intelligence reports that the Russians have already moved three deep-drilling rigs into impoverished North Korea, where they intend to repeat the Vietnamese production cycle by drilling thought solid granite and basalt, with not a single trace of the 'decaying marine life' so essential to blinkered western geologists for the 'accepted' production of crude oil. It may take a while, but ultimately the North Koreans will be able to go about their sovereign business without the Zionist Cabal in New York being able to blackmail them over a few ship loads of food-aid rice. Yes indeed, Korea will eventually have an oil surplus of its own, allowing it to tell the latest in a long line of terminally insane "New World Orders" to go to hell. The White Tiger project was the first outside Russia to openly exploit and showcase this ultra-deep technology and oil production from basalt rock to the world, though the original intent was to do so much earlier in India during 1983. During that year a large drilling rig in the Ganges Delta was scheduled to drill down to below 22,000 feet into basalt, and then dramatically flare "impossible" ultra deep oil. Oil well Bodra #3 was directly supervised by teams of experienced Russian drillers and scientists from the Moscow Institute of Drilling, with the author the only westerner on site, contracted to control one of the critical advanced systems needed to reach target depth smoothly and efficiently. If Bodra #3 had been allowed to drill ahead unhindered, there is no doubt the resulting impact would have sent shock waves around the oil world, and gained enormous international prestige for the Russians. Even more importantly perhaps, the desperately poor people of West Bengal would have gained access to their own energy reserves. Unfortunately, Bodra #3 was not allowed to drill ahead unhindered. The Americans were determined to stop the project one way or the other, and played on New Delhi's obvious fear of the Communist State Government in West Bengal. After bribing a handful of corrupt central government officials, US intelligence sent in professional American saboteurs, who managed to wreck the drilling project while the author was away on a visit to Sydney in Australia. Before we continue to the second massive advantage derived from ultra deep oil, and thus the primary reason why Wall Street decided to illegally invade Iraq, it is essential to look briefly at the way in which America devours a massive portion of global oil supply. You see, the 'Peak Oil' scam is not really about the world running out of oil reserves or being incapable of producing sufficient quantities to provide for its various national users. Instead, Peak Oil was fabricated to disguise America's individual increasing greed for crude oil, and its imminent inability to pay hard cash for the product. Put simply, America is going broke fast, and Wall Street wishes to blame someone else before the angry Militias appear with their locked and loaded weapons. This sorry situation is best summarized by Professor Victor Poleo of Venezuela's Central University, who told IPS in April that, "The mechanism by which global oil prices are set is intact, but the normal behaviour of supply and demand is not." According to Poleo, the root of the problem is that the United States ''is a terminal victim of its energetic metastasis. It has neither the oil nor the natural gas needed to feed its style of development. With just six percent of the world population, it consumes nearly 25 percent of the oil and gas produced worldwide.'' Professor Poleo went on to explain that there were expectations that demand for gasoline in the United States would stabilize at around 7.2 million barrels a day by the mid-1990s, ''but that didn't happen,'' he said. ''The United States' voracity for gasoline rose to nine million barrels by 2003, one of every two liters burnt in the world.'' And domestic demand for crude oil will continue to grow. The United States imports today six of every 10 barrels of oil and two of every 10 cubic meters of gas that it consumes, and by 2020 it will import eight of every 10 barrels of oil and four of every 10 cubic meters of gas, according to U.S. government reports. Despite the fact that American intelligence already knew of Russia's achievements with ultra deep oil production from the mantle of the earth back in the early eighties, it was obvious that this slow and expensive method of adding to national oil reserves could never keep up with America's voracious appetite for gasoline. So ultimately when domestic demand grew too fast, or cash reserves were finally depleted, America would either be obliged to halve its own use of gasoline, or steal it from someone else by force. Halving gasoline usage was out of the question, so instead of building hundreds of ultra-deep drilling rigs, Wall Street squandered the cash building more aircraft carriers, with the desperate objective of attacking and permanently occupying the Middle East. This is the point at which the second massive advantage derived from ultra-deep oil comes into play. Do you remember how puzzled the reservoir engineers were when they discovered that their existing reserves were being "topped up" from below? They later discovered that what they were really observing were naturally occurring ultra-deep oil wells, leaking vast quantities of oil from the mantle of the earth upwards through fractures into what we nowadays refer to as "sedimentary oilfields", located relatively close to the surface. As the production companies draw oil out of these known reservoirs through oil wells, field pressure is slightly reduced, thereby allowing more ultra-deep oil to migrate up from the mantle and restock the reservoir from below. Russian studies of their own ultra-deep wells and those in the White Tiger field in Vietnam, indicate in very rough terms that migration from the mantle is probably 20-30% less than production at Middle East wellheads, meaning in turn that if the flow rates of existing Iraqi and Saudi wells are reduced by about 30%, oil supply and production can and will continue forever, constantly replenished by ultra-deep oil from the mantle itself. It goes almost without saying that even with production reduced by 30%, there is more than enough oil in the Middle East to provide for America's increasing usage for at least the next century. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why your sons and daughters have died and will continue to die in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East. http://www.rense.com/general75/spintool.gif http://www.rense.com/general75/0_oilwar9.jpg http://www.rense.com/general75/0_oilwar10.jpg In direct conflict with the 'Peak Oil' myth, the under-reamer shown in these photos can restore an oil well's original production rate, using basically the same principle as changing the oil filter in your automobile engine Now we come to the completely false [or deliberately misleading] claim by Peak Oil shills that production from existing oil wells is "slowing down", thereby proving that the oil fields are "running dry". This is so wrong that it is almost breathtaking. Think of this slowing down process in the same way you might think of the engine oil in your automobile. The longer you run the engine, the higher the level of contaminates that get into the oil. The higher the level of contaminates, the higher the level of friction. Sooner or later you have something closely akin to glue coating your piston rings, and the performance of your engine declines accordingly. This is an inevitable mechanical process well known to all automobile owners. Henry Ford and others managed to slow down the rate of contamination in engine oils by inventing the oil filter, through which the oil has to circulate each time it passes around inside the engine. A high percentage of the contaminates stick to the filter element, thereby allowing extra miles between oil changes, though heaven help the careless motorist who thinks he can get away without ever changing his clogged oil filter when recommended. When oil is extracted from a producing formation underground, it flows out through pores in the reservoir rock, and then into the open borehole, from where it is transported to surface by the production tubing string. So by the very nature of the beast, the bottom section of the well is "open hole" which allows the oil to flow out in the first place, but because it is comprised of exposed and sometimes unstable rock, this open hole section is also continually subject to all manner of turbulence and various contaminates. For example, tiny quantities of super fine silt may exit through the pores but not continue to the surface with the oil, tumbling around in the turbulence instead, until the silt very slowly starts to block off the oil-producing pore throats. Yes, of course there are a variety of liners that can be used to slow down the contamination, but there is no such thing as a Henry Ford oil filter 10,000 feet underground. The inevitable result of this is that over time, the initial production rate of the well will slowly decline, a hard fact known to every exploration oilman in the business. However, this is certainly not an indication that the oil field itself is becoming depleted, proved thousands of times by offset wells drilled later into the same reservoir. Any new well comes on stream at the original production rate of its older cousins, because it has not yet had time to build up a thin layer of contaminates across the open hole. Though as we shall see it is possible to "do an oil change" on a producing well and bring it back to full production, this is extremely expensive, and rarely used in the west. Look at a simple example: Say we have a small oil field in Iraq with ten wells that each started out in life producing 10,000 barrels of oil per day. Fine, for a known investment we are producing 100,000 barrels of oil per day from our small field, at least for a while. Five years later contamination may have slowed our overall production down by ten percent to 90,000 barrels per day. So we are now faced with a choice: either "do an oil change" on all ten existing wells at vast expense and down time, or simply drill one additional well into the same reservoir, thereby restoring our daily production to 100,000 barrels with the minimum of fuss. Take my word for it, ninety-nine percent of onshore producers will simply drill the extra well. Naturally, there are times and places where this simple process is not an option, for example on a huge and very expensive offshore platform, which may have only 24 drilling 'slots', all of which have been used up. To restore your overall production after five years you can either build another giant platform next door for two billion dollars, or "do an oil change" on each of your existing 24 wells, one at a time. Clearly this time you are forced to carry out the time consuming business of restoring the open hole section at the bottom of the well to its old pristine condition, before various contaminates started to slow down your production rate. For this task you first pull the production tubing out of the hole, and then run back in with a drill string, to which is attached an underreamer as shown in the pictures above. When the reamer is directly opposite the top of the open hole producing section, the drill string is rotated to the right and the blades fly out under centrifugal force to a distance preset by you before lowering the tool into the hole. The objective is to cut away the contaminated face of the well to a depth you consider will once again expose pristine producing pores. As the spinning underreamer is slowly lowered, it enlarges the size of the hole, with the contaminated debris cut away and flushed back to surface by the drilling fluid. Hey presto, you have a new oil well, and it only cost one or two million dollars to restore Remember, I said this process is rarely used in the west, which is true, but it is not true of Russia, where the objective for many years has been to dominate global oil supply by continual investment. With no shareholders holding out their grubby little hands for a wad of pocket money every month, the Russian oil industry managed to surge ahead, underreaming thousands of its older existing onshore wells in less than ten years. Then along came Wall Street asset Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who fraudulently got his hands on Yukos oil for a mere fraction of its value, and was on the point of selling the entire outfit to the American multinationals when Vladimir Putin had him hauled off his private jet somewhere in Siberia. So Wall Street was finally 'cheated' of its very own 'free' Russian oil, and poor old Mikhail had better get used to the taste of prison food. To recap, 'Peak Oil' claims that because today we only find one barrel of oil for every four that we use, world oil reserves are running out. Completely misleading propaganda. as the Russians [and the CIA] know perfectly well, reserves of oil in the mantle of the earth are infinite. 'Peak Oil' also claims that we will shortly be unable to pump sufficient oil out of the ground to keep up with demand. Completely misleading propaganda again. We could drill more wells, but Wall Street cannot afford to pay for them, and never intended to, at least not while it still believed conquest and eternal occupation of the Middle East was a realistic possibility. Professor Poleo makes it quite clear which direction the west needs to go in if it is to survive in the long term, and that is to follow Russia's example by sharply reducing domestic consumption. Back in 1990 America was using around 6 million barrels per day compared to Russia's 8.4 million, but how things have changed since then. Thirteen years later in 2003, American consumption was up to 9 million, while Russian consumption had been reduced to a mere 3.2 million. A few billion folk over there in America might like to walk around their houses and switch off any electrical appliances they don't actually need. Believe me, I can almost hear the oil surging through the pipelines in New York, and I live more than 12,000 miles away in Australia. In closing, I would like to pass on my greetings and thanks to the cheerful Russian drillers and scientists I had the pleasure of working with at Bodra #3 in West Bengal, without whose expertise we might all be dead today, as a direct consequence of repeated American sabotage attempts on the high pressure well. My thanks also to the Moscow Drilling Institute for the unrestricted flow of information and documents on ultra deep oil production technology, without which I could not have written this report. http://www.vialls.com/wecontrolamerica/peakoil.html (http://www.vialls.com/wecontrolamerica/peakoil.html)

http://www.rense.com/general75/zoil.htm

[gunDriller]

i sure would like to discuss this subject for money. debate-style, $20 a point.


but perhaps we can agree that it's wise to have some fuel storage, as a general practice of prepping.

i've been surprised by how much gas cans have gone up the last 4 years.

[Hatha Sunahara]

Many years ago I looked into this topic. I ran into a book by Thomas Gold called The Deep Hot Biosphere. Here is a link to an abstract of that book:

http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/7764.pdf

It's not so difficult to imagine some organic chemistry that involves minerals. For example, if you have a large deposit of Limestone, which is Calcium Carbonate that is buried at several thousand feet below the surface whewre it is hot, and if you can imagine water seeping down to that limestone deposit. How hard is it to imagine a chemical reaction that takes the hydrogen from water and the carbon from limestone and combining them under heat and pressure. It seems reasonable that you would get hydrocarbons. It is also not unreasonable to assume that there are very very large quantities of limestone and water on this planet, and ample opportunities for them to combine in environments of heat and pressure. That would explain the quantities of oil on the planet, and the abiotic origins of it. I find this theory of the origin of oil much more believable than the fossil fuel theory.

BTW, THomas Gold is an astronomer--not a geologist, so he's prone to think outside the 'box'.


Hatha

[crimethink]

Maybe you fail to grasp the concept of probabilistic determinations in the greater sciences. Its larger probability means in all likelihood that is exactly what happened.


Operative root same as that of "probably." In other words, belief in.

I always frustrated my professors with my lack of faith in statistics..."1 in 1,765,387" does not mean that said variable will occur in 1,765,387 repetitions...only that it probably will...it could also happen twice in 50,000 repetitions. :)




Again, politically loaded, subjective and for the most part irrelevant to the argument at hand. An attempt to misdirect and malign the arguments made for modern scientific thought, which counter to your assertions is nothing like "faith-based".

"Probably," "suggests," and "appears to" are not equivalent to "facts."

In other words, definitely faith-based.

Modern "scientific thought" has conflated actually-observable phenomena with "facts decreed by opinion," also known as "consensus." The actually-observable are fact; the extrapolations based on faith (in statistics, or even one's own "expertise") are not. Their hubris of "we know" equals or exceeds the most fanatic religious nut. Instead of "revelation from Heaven," so-called "scientists" derive their "knowledge" from committees and/or circle-jerks known as "peer-review."

The inability to discern between fact and opinion is a chronic ailment of our civilization, and extends across cognition levels, from the most obtuse morons all the way to post-doctorates with "genius" level IQs. Although, in the case of the latter, it's not so much inability, but unwillingness to.

[crimethink]

The hydrocarbon lakes of Titan, has about 100 times the known earthly deposits of hydrocarbons. But I would assume an abiotic process is responsible for Titans deposits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakes_of_Titan

We're not gonna talk about that. It doesn't "fit" the "scientific consensus." :)

[Glass]

are there or were there dinosaurs on titan? And yes the science of big numbers does not provide absolute predictive capabilities.

[Cebu_4_2]

i sure would like to discuss this subject for money. debate-style, $20 a point.


but perhaps we can agree that it's wise to have some fuel storage, as a general practice of prepping.

i've been surprised by how much gas cans have gone up the last 4 years.

1 Morgan for a point..

[Hatha Sunahara]

The inability to discern between fact and opinion is a chronic ailment of our civilization, and extends across cognition levels, from the most obtuse morons all the way to post-doctorates with "genius" level IQs. Although, in the case of the latter, it's not so much inability, but unwillingness to.


This is the essence of political correctness. You go along with the 'conventional wisdom' because you know if you don't, you'll be marginalized right out into the street. So, you self censor when you have doubts. If you don't, the first thing you'll hear is "That sounds a bit far-fetched'. The net effect of this ploy is to make the geniuses indistinguishable from the mediocre--and effectively turns everybody into a self-selected idiot. Nobody puts up any resistance to nonsense,and it becomes an accepted truth. Just look at global warming, or peak oil.It's from our legal system where silence is consent. Bottom line is tat it's YOU that chooses to be silent.


Hatha