On Apr 11, 10:03*pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
Why Do Bad Fossil Fool Arguments Survive?

Please see:

http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/04...and-argumentat...

There are several good examples of bad fossil foolery surviving
on this alt.global-warming forum. *My favorite is the "world is now
cooling" argument. *The denier makes the claim like "There's been
no warming for the last X years," where "X" is typically 10 or less.

••*ROFLMAO
Roger Coppcock is the personification of
Bad Fossil Fool Arguments

•• BTW there is no such thing as fossil fuel.
Read on and learn:

• Crude oil forms as a natural
inorganic process which occurs between the
mantle and the crust, somewhere between 5 and
20 miles deep.

The mechanism is as follows:
• Methane (CH4) is a common molecule found
in quantity throughout our solar system –
huge concentrations exist at great depth in the
Earth.

• At the mantle-crust interface, roughly 20,000
feet beneath the surface, rapidly rising streams
of compressed methane-based gasses hit
pockets of high temperature causing the
condensation of heavier hydrocarbons.

• The product of this condensation is commonly
known as crude oil.

• Some compressed methane-based gasses migrate
into pockets and reservoirs we extract as "natural
gas."

• In the geologically "cooler," more tectonically
table regions around the globe, the crude oil
pools into reservoirs.

• In the "hotter," more volcanic and tectonically
active areas, the oil and natural gas continue
to condense and eventually to oxidize,
producing carbon dioxide and steam, which
exits from active volcanoes.

• Periodically, depending on variations of
geology and Earth movement, oil seeps to the
surface in quantity, creating the vast oil-sand
deposits of Canada and Venezuela, or the
continual seeps found beneath the Gulf of
Mexico and Uzbekistan.

• Periodically, depending on variations of
geology, the vast, deep pools of oil break free
and replenish existing known reserves of oil.

•• There are a number of observations across the
oil-producing regions of the globe that support
this theory, and the list of proponents begins with
Mendelev (who created the periodic table of
elements) and includes Dr. Thomas Gold (founding
director of Cornell University Center for
Radiophysics and Space Research) and Dr. J.F.
Kenney of Gas Resources Corp, Houston, Texas.

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!

wrote in message
...
On Apr 11, 10:03 pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
Why Do Bad Fossil Fool Arguments Survive?

Please see:

http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/04...and-argumentat...

There are several good examples of bad fossil foolery surviving
on this alt.global-warming forum. My favorite is the "world is now
cooling" argument. The denier makes the claim like "There's been
no warming for the last X years," where "X" is typically 10 or less.

 ROFLMAO
Roger Coppcock is the personification of
Bad Fossil Fool Arguments

 BTW there is no such thing as fossil fuel.
Read on and learn:

 Crude oil forms as a natural
inorganic process which occurs between the
mantle and the crust, somewhere between 5 and
20 miles deep.

The mechanism is as follows:
 Methane (CH4) is a common molecule found
in quantity throughout our solar system 
huge concentrations exist at great depth in the
Earth.

 At the mantle-crust interface, roughly 20,000
feet beneath the surface, rapidly rising streams
of compressed methane-based gasses hit
pockets of high temperature causing the
condensation of heavier hydrocarbons.

 The product of this condensation is commonly
known as crude oil.

 Some compressed methane-based gasses migrate
into pockets and reservoirs we extract as "natural
gas."

 In the geologically "cooler," more tectonically
table regions around the globe, the crude oil
pools into reservoirs.

 In the "hotter," more volcanic and tectonically
active areas, the oil and natural gas continue
to condense and eventually to oxidize,
producing carbon dioxide and steam, which
exits from active volcanoes.

 Periodically, depending on variations of
geology and Earth movement, oil seeps to the
surface in quantity, creating the vast oil-sand
deposits of Canada and Venezuela, or the
continual seeps found beneath the Gulf of
Mexico and Uzbekistan.

 Periodically, depending on variations of
geology, the vast, deep pools of oil break free
and replenish existing known reserves of oil.

 There are a number of observations across the
oil-producing regions of the globe that support
this theory, and the list of proponents begins with
Mendelev (who created the periodic table of
elements) and includes Dr. Thomas Gold (founding
director of Cornell University Center for
Radiophysics and Space Research) and Dr. J.F.
Kenney of Gas Resources Corp, Houston, Texas.

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!
=========================================
It's called abiotic and warmers don't like the theory because it means
the oil making process is not organic and thus not finite.

On Apr 13, 6:57*am, "James" wrote:

snip

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!
=========================================
It's called abiotic


"Idiotic" is the word you should have used.

and warmers don't like the theory because it means
the oil making process is not organic and thus not finite.

Even if such a process were taking place, that conclusion would not
follow. Available oil would still be finite. The Earth would not be a
giant magic pudding.

Fran

"Fran" wrote in message
...
On Apr 13, 6:57 am, "James" wrote:

snip

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!
=========================================
It's called abiotic


"Idiotic" is the word you should have used.

and warmers don't like the theory because it means
the oil making process is not organic and thus not finite.

Even if such a process were taking place, that conclusion would not
follow. Available oil would still be finite. The Earth would not be a
giant magic pudding.

Fran

Please google "abiotic oil" Miss knowitall. You'll find the pros and the
cons to the theory.

On Apr 13, 11:20*am, "James" wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message

...
On Apr 13, 6:57 am, "James" wrote:

snip

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!
=========================================
It's called abiotic

"Idiotic" is the word you should have used.

and warmers don't like the theory because it means
the oil making process is not organic and thus not finite.

Even if such a process were taking place, that conclusion would not
follow. Available oil would still be finite. The Earth would not be a
giant magic pudding.

Fran

Please google "abiotic oil" Miss knowitall. You'll find the pros and the
cons to the theory.

BTDT ... it's nonsense AND even if it weren't it would not be a factor
in what to do about crude oil.

Fran

"Fran" wrote in message
...
On Apr 13, 11:20 am, "James" wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message

...
On Apr 13, 6:57 am, "James" wrote:

snip

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!
=========================================
It's called abiotic

"Idiotic" is the word you should have used.

and warmers don't like the theory because it means
the oil making process is not organic and thus not finite.

Even if such a process were taking place, that conclusion would not
follow. Available oil would still be finite. The Earth would not be a
giant magic pudding.

Fran

Please google "abiotic oil" Miss knowitall. You'll find the pros and
the
cons to the theory.

BTDT ... it's nonsense AND even if it weren't it would not be a factor
in what to do about crude oil.

Fran

It's no more nonsense than the theory of organic oil and what to do
about crude oil was never mentioned. That's a different subject of which
I am sure you have an opinion.

On Apr 13, 1:34*pm, "James" wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message

...
On Apr 13, 11:20 am, "James" wrote:





"Fran" wrote in message

....
On Apr 13, 6:57 am, "James" wrote:

snip

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!
=========================================
It's called abiotic

"Idiotic" is the word you should have used.

and warmers don't like the theory because it means
the oil making process is not organic and thus not finite.

Even if such a process were taking place, that conclusion would not
follow. Available oil would still be finite. The Earth would not be a
giant magic pudding.

Fran

Please google "abiotic oil" Miss knowitall. You'll find the pros and
the
cons to the theory.

BTDT ... it's nonsense AND even if it weren't it would not be a factor
in what to do about crude oil.

Fran

It's no more nonsense than the theory of organic oil

So what are you claiming?

Is it

a) Crude oil is inorganic in origin?
b) Crude oil origins are both inorganic and organic?
c) All claims about crude oil's origins are nonsense -- it's
unexplained?


and what to do
about crude oil was never mentioned. That's a different subject of which
I am sure you have an opinion

Don't you see that in order to make use of commercial quantities of
crude oil you must have certain access to predictable quantities at a
predictable price and quality?

Firstly, and most obviously, oil is unlikely in practice to "run out".
What is likely to happen is that it will become progressively less
feasible to recover it either because it will be too expensive or not
of adequate quality or because the supply will be too volatile or
because the energy input to recover it will be nearly as much as the
energy being made available to end users.

Once that becomes a serious possibility within the timeline of someone
making investment decisions -- what kinds of vehicles to build for
example, whether there turns out to be more recoverable oil some place
will be moot.

Secondly, the Earth's resources are finite. Whether the oil is of
biotic or abiotic origin there is a definite quantity of feedstock, so
the supply is not inexhaustible. We don't know what that is and if we
can't assume a figure we had better rely on what we know now that the
dwidnling supplies being recovered in most of the world's wells are an
indication of the trend line.

Fran

James wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Apr 11, 10:03 pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
Why Do Bad Fossil Fool Arguments Survive?

Please see:

http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/04...and-argumentat...

There are several good examples of bad fossil foolery surviving
on this alt.global-warming forum. My favorite is the "world is now
cooling" argument. The denier makes the claim like "There's been
no warming for the last X years," where "X" is typically 10 or less.

 ROFLMAO
Roger Coppcock is the personification of
Bad Fossil Fool Arguments

 BTW there is no such thing as fossil fuel.
Read on and learn:

 Crude oil forms as a natural
inorganic process which occurs between the
mantle and the crust, somewhere between 5 and
20 miles deep.

The mechanism is as follows:
 Methane (CH4) is a common molecule found
in quantity throughout our solar system 
huge concentrations exist at great depth in the
Earth.

 At the mantle-crust interface, roughly 20,000
feet beneath the surface, rapidly rising streams
of compressed methane-based gasses hit
pockets of high temperature causing the
condensation of heavier hydrocarbons.

 The product of this condensation is commonly
known as crude oil.

 Some compressed methane-based gasses migrate
into pockets and reservoirs we extract as "natural
gas."

 In the geologically "cooler," more tectonically
table regions around the globe, the crude oil
pools into reservoirs.

 In the "hotter," more volcanic and tectonically
active areas, the oil and natural gas continue
to condense and eventually to oxidize,
producing carbon dioxide and steam, which
exits from active volcanoes.

 Periodically, depending on variations of
geology and Earth movement, oil seeps to the
surface in quantity, creating the vast oil-sand
deposits of Canada and Venezuela, or the
continual seeps found beneath the Gulf of
Mexico and Uzbekistan.

 Periodically, depending on variations of
geology, the vast, deep pools of oil break free
and replenish existing known reserves of oil.

 There are a number of observations across the
oil-producing regions of the globe that support
this theory, and the list of proponents begins with
Mendelev (who created the periodic table of
elements) and includes Dr. Thomas Gold (founding
director of Cornell University Center for
Radiophysics and Space Research) and Dr. J.F.
Kenney of Gas Resources Corp, Houston, Texas.

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!
=========================================
It's called abiotic and warmers don't like the theory because

....there is absolutely no evidence for it.

James wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message
...
On Apr 13, 11:20 am, "James" wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message

...
On Apr 13, 6:57 am, "James" wrote:

snip

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!
=========================================
It's called abiotic

"Idiotic" is the word you should have used.

and warmers don't like the theory because it means
the oil making process is not organic and thus not finite.

Even if such a process were taking place, that conclusion would not
follow. Available oil would still be finite. The Earth would not be a
giant magic pudding.

Fran

Please google "abiotic oil" Miss knowitall. You'll find the pros and
the
cons to the theory.

BTDT ... it's nonsense AND even if it weren't it would not be a factor
in what to do about crude oil.

Fran

It's no more nonsense than the theory of organic oil

A lie.

and what to do
about crude oil was never mentioned.

A lie.

"Fran" wrote in message
...
On Apr 13, 1:34 pm, "James" wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message

...
On Apr 13, 11:20 am, "James" wrote:





"Fran" wrote in message

...
On Apr 13, 6:57 am, "James" wrote:

snip

For confirmation of Dr Gold's and Dr Kenney's
research Google about 57,400 pages for tupi oil.
No fossils there!!!
=========================================
It's called abiotic

"Idiotic" is the word you should have used.

and warmers don't like the theory because it means
the oil making process is not organic and thus not finite.

Even if such a process were taking place, that conclusion would not
follow. Available oil would still be finite. The Earth would not be
a
giant magic pudding.

Fran

Please google "abiotic oil" Miss knowitall. You'll find the pros and
the
cons to the theory.

BTDT ... it's nonsense AND even if it weren't it would not be a factor
in what to do about crude oil.

Fran

It's no more nonsense than the theory of organic oil

So what are you claiming?

Is it

a) Crude oil is inorganic in origin?
b) Crude oil origins are both inorganic and organic?
c) All claims about crude oil's origins are nonsense -- it's
unexplained?


and what to do
about crude oil was never mentioned. That's a different subject of
which
I am sure you have an opinion

Don't you see that in order to make use of commercial quantities of
crude oil you must have certain access to predictable quantities at a
predictable price and quality?

Firstly, and most obviously, oil is unlikely in practice to "run out".
What is likely to happen is that it will become progressively less
feasible to recover it either because it will be too expensive or not
of adequate quality or because the supply will be too volatile or
because the energy input to recover it will be nearly as much as the
energy being made available to end users.

Once that becomes a serious possibility within the timeline of someone
making investment decisions -- what kinds of vehicles to build for
example, whether there turns out to be more recoverable oil some place
will be moot.

Secondly, the Earth's resources are finite. Whether the oil is of
biotic or abiotic origin there is a definite quantity of feedstock, so
the supply is not inexhaustible. We don't know what that is and if we
can't assume a figure we had better rely on what we know now that the
dwidnling supplies being recovered in most of the world's wells are an
indication of the trend line.

Fran
================================================== =
Your questions would have been answered if you had delved into the
google I mentioned, but you didn't because you said you had BTDT.
Organic oil and inorganic oil are both theories of oil origin that are
being used today. There are sub-theories on each, one of which states
that abiotic oil is constantly being created. Thus my statement of "not
finite". That is unless you want to take to the extremes of eons.

You apparently didn't learn anything about overhauling engines before
making claims that it's doable under a shade tree on a Sunday afternoon.