Posted on 03/20/2013 8:38:08 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
This is amazing.
Oil is a renewable resource. It’s not ancient. It’s made every day.
*********************EXCERPT**************************************
The late Lance Endersbee believed that water was created in the mantel, some believe oil is similarly created, we know nothing about our planet and how it works. It’s still one of the greatest mysteries on earth.
Lets see how the peer reviews if ever come forth.
From the comments to the article:
**********************************EXCERPT**************************************
Photosynthesis and Chemosynthesis both are endothermic storage of heat as energy. So does more CO2 cause cooling? Also does getting oil out of the way help this life to cool the planet? Does this mean that in the right conditions oil could be quickly renewable without being abiotically produced?
So many questions for the “settled science”.
Until we know for sure, I suggest we continue to use level one.
It sure beats the pixie dust at level.
See #7.
Blah, blah, blah... more government grants.
Any idiot who paid attention in high school biology knows that life can and probably does occur anywhere there is a large and stable gradient in the oxidation reduction potential.
They’ll probably give these bozos a Nobel Prize or something.
****************************EXCERPT********************************************
Siliggy, if more CO2 means more cooling does that mean that we’ll see a change of story from our warmists? You know, CAGC (catastrophic anthropogenic global cooling) and see policies to reduce CO2 to avoid freezing?
>> “storage of heat as energy” <<
.
Word games?
Or did he mean chemical potential energy?
**********************************EXCERPT***********************************
I’m going to nit-pick and point out that 3.5 billion years is extraordinarily old for oceanic crust. Wikipedia says typically 200 million years … OK, I know it’s not always a reliable source but I’ve read the same number in various books. Oceanic crust is continuously “recycled” by subduction in the course of tectonic plate activity so it’s on average way younger than continental crust. If this bit of oceanic basalt was so old, it’s not typical of most oceanic basalt. Does the study extrapolate from this to most or all the ocean crust and if, so how do they justify it?
Before anyone gets the wrong idea, no I’m not a warmist troll. Just taking a sceptical look at the information given.
I didn’t understand that either.
So the Russians were correct afterall.
The earth is a hydrocarbon still. Always has been.
You’re not nit picking at all. The only way I could figure to find oceanic basalt that old is if it became part of a very old crust and thus never went back into the mantel. Help me out if there is another way.
The two most abundant elements in the universe is Hydrogen and Stupidity.
And Obama is trying to cut back on the Hydrogen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.