Gold claimed C1 to C5 in 15 tonnes of oil. Even if it was something other than oil, c1 to c5 is good enough for me, and clearly good enough for conventional geologists,
During the drilling with a water based drilling fluid, good measurements were obtained of hydrogen, helium, methane, and the other hydrocarbon gases up to pentane.
So make up your mind, is there no significant hydrocarbon in the Siljan crater, or do you need your ancient sediment to explain the hydrocarbon there?
Not a refutation of abiotic oil theory. It says there's unexplained hydrocarbon in Siljan, but the biotic oil trained geologists don't explore abiotic theory, but dismiss it as speculation. Why? The experiment was to test abiotic theory, yet they don't explore
His analysis is here :
http://origeminorganicadopetroleo.blogs ... apers.html
Actually it doesn't matter to abiotic oil theory if oil is not present below 9000m. As it rises from the upper mantle, it condenses or drops out of solution at some depth, perhaps around 9000m
RockDoc wrote: It is well established that methane is generated in the mantle. We see it in volcanic outflows and in geysers that have a connection to the upper mantle.
A high priest of the biotic oil theory plainly and explicitly admits methane is produced in the mantle.
I didn't see that coming.
I suggest you please just stop. Your first task should be to learn some basic petroleum geology which also requires some understanding of organic chemistry and thermodynamics.
On the contrary you come across as a complete moron searching for conspiracy theories (oh the thousands of scientists working in the area of petroleum over the past 5 decades have all got it wrong and with my boxtop physics understanding I can see that) which is likely why Airlinepilot asked if you are a truther.
tita wrote:We struggle to keep pumping enough oil to feed the demand. Not that it was easier before, but it was certainly less complex. Technically, geopotically, economically, ecologically. And the complexity is increasing.
peakoilwhen wrote:truther wrt what? Don't go off topic, we have enough on the table to discuss
Yoshua wrote:The economy dominates and forces the oil producers to pump more.
Yoshua wrote: If high oil prices wont do the trick, then low oil prices will. No matter if that causes reservoir damage and destroys future production, the only thing that matters is now and what the economy demands. The economy is the freaking terminator.
peakoilwhen wrote:!!
A high priest of the biotic oil theory plainly and explicitly admits methane is produced in the mantle.
I didn't see that coming.
peakoilwhen wrote:Perhaps now all we need is the condition to strip off 2 hydrogen atoms, and let the carbons bond.
peakoilwhen wrote:This is the reaction that you are hyping up to be impossible. However, whatever is producing the methane in the mantle could well be producing larger hydrocarbons without the intermediate step of methane. That might cheer you up since I sense you are going to insist methane can't be converted into longer carbon chains.
peakoilwhen wrote:Now might be a good time to explain conventional theory on how kerogen, a carbon based substance which is deficient in hydrogen, gets hydrated into oil.
rockdoc123 wrote:A high priest of the biotic oil theory plainly and explicitly admits methane is produced in the mantle.
I didn't see that coming.
what part ofI suggest you please just stop. Your first task should be to learn some basic petroleum geology which also requires some understanding of organic chemistry and thermodynamics.
andOn the contrary you come across as a complete moron searching for conspiracy theories (oh the thousands of scientists working in the area of petroleum over the past 5 decades have all got it wrong and with my boxtop physics understanding I can see that) which is likely why Airlinepilot asked if you are a truther.
did you not understand?
I'm done.
If we leave it here, my group has learnt how to defeat you in just 2 words.
look f%^$nuts.....kerogen does not exist anywhere except in sedimentary rock. Kerogen is completely converted to hydrocarbons at specific temperature/time relationship which means below a certain depth in the sedimentary pile all of the existing kerogen has been converted. There is no kerogen deep in the crust and certainly not in the mantle. And there are many places in the world where kerogen has not been converted simply because it hasn't been exposed to enough heat and temperature.
honestly can you please just shut the f$%$ up and go away? It is clear you don't want to learn the science necessary to understand any of this so please don't waste our time any longer. I'm sure your board will enjoy your inane banter, in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.
...and I suspect copying posts from this board and posting on another board is in someway in contravention of the COC.
Perhaps a moderator can get rid of you and do us all a favor.
Synapsid wrote:peakoilwhen,
"Lava is burnt crude oil mixed with rock, it is rich in carbon."
Evidence?
and I suspect copying posts from this board and posting on another board is in someway in contravention of the COC.
Perhaps a moderator can get rid of you and do us all a favor.
I passed it right under your nose, but you missed it. You have to be more alert. It was that photo of dried lava that looked like heavy oil. Rock can't look like that unless it has a high carbon content or is composed of some unusual mineral.
Science works better by looking for refuting evidence.
rockdoc123 wrote:Basalt flows (which was the picture you showed) very common on Hawaii in their fresh state where they are black, are black because they contain manganese and pyroxene not because they have any organics which they do not. The exact same type of basalt flow is evident in the the Snake River plains at surface with the exception that they are weathered brownish red due to the high percentage of iron. And similar basalt flows on mars would be black after hundreds of millions of years because....wait for it....there is no oxygen and hence no oxidation of iron.
Whatever it takea to make you go away.
Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests