[speechlesstx]

One would need to see the whole report. What you have posted here is inconclusive.

If evidence of such an oil field exists then that would be reliable evidence. One would need to see the whole study before making a decision.

I didn't post it as conclusive evidence of anything other than the deceptiveness of the OP, it was his own source.

[talaniman]

Endless Oil? - Forbes

American geologists might be convinced if the abiotic theorists can find big new oil fields using their methods. Kutcherov has developed a methodology for searching for deep migration channels where abiotic oil might rise to the surface. If he can raise money from investors, he hopes to begin searching for abiotic oil deposits in east Texas.

The proof is billions of barrels of oil, in which for now he is billions of barrels of oil short. I mean he even admits his own experiments have failed to produce the desired results.

In the 1980s, he convinced the Swedish government and investors to drill four miles through solid granite in central Sweden. They eventually recovered 84 barrels of oil. Gold considered it a scientific success, even though the project was a commercial failure.
To prove that abiotic oil is possible, in 2002 Kutcherov superheated calcium carbonate, water and iron in a pressure chamber and then cranked it up to produce 30,000 times atmospheric pressure, simulating the conditions present in the earth's mantle. Sure enough, about 1.5% of the material converted into hydrocarbons, according to results in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Most of it was methane and other gases, but about 10% was heavier oil components.

It's a theory with high promise but yet to be proven and too expensive. But you never know.

[tomder55]

It's a theory with high promise but yet to be proven and too expensive. But you never know

Let's make no mistake about it ...even if there was an endless supply of petro-carbons to exploit ,we still need to transition away from using them . We transitioned away from whale oil when a new technology was discovered and developed ;and the same will happen when the technology is discovered to replace oil.

[talaniman]

I can go with that idea, mean while we are stuck with processing and transporting that dirty stuff from Canada so they can make a few bucks. Even sweet crude stinks as its being processed.

[Tuttyd]

I didn't post it as conclusive evidence of anything other than the deceptiveness of the OP, it was his own source.

But, wasn't the OP source the WND report and MSNCB interview?

What you posted was AAAS Science and a Wall Street Journal report about global warming. If this is the case then why did you post the AAAS report?

[Tuttyd]

yes I know that ..it's mostly decomposed plankton ,krill ,etc..... and one of the promising technologies is creating fuel from algae . Again that is a fine explanation for oil at certain depths . It doesn't explain the oil being found well below the strata where organic matter would be found.

Who says that dinosaurs were converted to liquid hydrocarbon goo? Has anyone ever actually made that claim?

I think you can safely cross that one off your possible list.

[paraclete]

Who says organic matter cannot be found at any depth, we are ignorant of the conditions below the top layer of skin on this planet, in fact our ignorance is so great we think we can control conditions in the atmosphere

[speechlesstx]

But, wasn't the OP source the WND report and MSNCB interview?

What you posted was AAAS Science and a Wall Street Journal report about global warming. If this is the case then why did you post the AAAS report?

Did you the WND article? It was based on the report, I said that in post #3. I'm not going to rehash it all, read it yourself. You're a smart guy and can make the connections.

[tomder55]

Who says that dinosaurs were converted to liquid hydrocarbon goo? Has anyone ever actually made that claim?

actually yes .. that was the original "consensus "science on the origins of oil .It was taught in schools for years ;and in truth ,a portion of the oil may have originated from dinosaur remains.

[cdad]

Man oh man. You guys keeps dancing in circles. One of the ways material gets deep into the earth is through subduction. It is part of the process that we call plate tectonics that carries parts of the sea floor down to the mantle of the earth. The sea floor is rich in organic materials as well as many other chemicals including H2O. Those plates that have gone under may be returning as minerals in seperate form including oil. It is very possible that the oil supply is not at a finite level as far as being an ongoing process but it is finite in the amounts that can be taken at any given time. Just a thought.

Plate tectonics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[paraclete]

well done dad, there is indeed a process for renewing the resources of the Earth, but of course subduction doesn't fit flat Earth religious views. I like the idea that oceanic waste can be subjected to enormous heat and pressure that melts rocks and can form oil, personally I thought it formed diamonds, but...

getting back to reality, yes our resources are finite as long as we insist on increasing population and consumption at expotential rates and conversion of consumption to some other media is going to run up against the same hurdles. Growth cannot be maintained.

[speechlesstx]

This is not about the need for alternative resources, it's about an agenda that pretends it's scientific while slamming anyone who goes against the consensus. That isn't science, it's groupthink.

[speechlesstx]

Case in point, a Harvard student has called for abandoning academic freedom in lieu of "academic justice," which apparently means only such research that meets our approved worldview may be published.

Harvard Urged to ‘Give Up on Academic Freedom,’ Shut Down Research Not Aligned With ‘Justice’ | TheBlaze.com

[speechlesstx]

Another case in point, according to CNN there is only one side to climate change, the consensus. Anyone that challenges that consensus is not a scientist.

The rundown for this Sunday's show – Reliable Sources - CNN.com Blogs

And there are some stories which do not have two sides. The climate change debate is one of them. Nevertheless, many news organizations continue to equate the skeptics with the scientists. This week NBC’s Meet the Press faced criticism for its debate between Bill Nye the Science Guy and Rep. Marsha Blackburn. We’ll talk to Michio Kaku from the City University of New York and CBS News as well as Jack Mirkinson, Senior Media Editor at the Huffington Post.

Excuse me, but I believe the two men that wrote the WSJ column I cited earlier are not only scientists, but participated on the IPCC. If science means ignoring the data, hiding data that conflicts with your view (hide the decline), adjusting your computer models to soften your spectacular fails on predictions, and silencing and impugning those who challenge your failures, then that isn't science. I hope you aren't in charge of any medical schools.

[excon]

Hello again,

Data, schmata. I'm NOT a scientist. I'm just a guy looking around. I wouldn't know data if it smacked me in the head.. What I DO know, is that the atmosphere is FINITE, just like the oceans are, and just like the land masses are. I KNOW that throwing our trash on the ground isn't good.. I KNOW that throwing our trash into the ocean isn't good..

It DOESN'T take a great deal of scientific knowledge, therefore, to GRASP that throwing our trash into the air, also ISN'T a good thing.

excon

[talaniman]

Science is proving your data, and applying it in the real world. And getting people to give you money for it. Research and development isn't cheap. No company is going to take the word of a scientist unless he can show them the money.

[speechlesstx]

You guys are a riot, you argue we must believe the science then say the science doesn't matter. Make up your freakin minds, these fluid values of yours are impossible to understand, but I get it, you lefties just change the rules of the game when your arguments are proven ridiculous.

[talaniman]

Its not lefties or righties applying or denying science speech, it's the guys with money who want to make money. Talk to them about your scientific opinions and let me know what they tell you.

Money is reality in THIS world.

[speechlesstx]

Its not lefties or righties applying or denying science speech, it's the guys with money who want to make money. Talk to them about your scientific opinions and let me know what they tell you.

Money is reality in THIS world.

So you stick to the money argument and ex can make up his mind whether or not the science matters.

[tomder55]

yes this issue goes across ideological divides. The 1st time I heard of abiotic oil was on the Thom Hartmann show. He called the notion of 'Peak Oil ' a conspiracy by the fossil fuel industry to keep prices high.