OIL IS NOT FROM DEAD DINOS (fossil fuel is a hoax)
39 2017-07-26 by wildfireonvenus
"The Peak Oil school rests its theory on conventional Western geology textbooks, most by American or British geologists, which claim oil is a ‘fossil fuel,’ a biological residue or detritus of either fossilized dinosaur remains or perhaps algae, hence a product in finite supply. Biological origin is central to Peak Oil theory, used to explain why oil is only found in certain parts of the world where it was geologically trapped millions of years ago. That would mean that, say, dead dinosaur remains became compressed and over tens of millions of years fossilized and trapped in underground reservoirs perhaps 4-6,000 feet below the surface of the earth. In rare cases, so goes the theory, huge amounts of biological matter should have been trapped in rock formations in the shallower ocean offshore as in the Gulf of Mexico or North Sea or Gulf of Guinea."
https://www.orgoniseafrica.com/no-peak-oil-abiotic-oil
Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty spills the beans about how oil was deliberately, incorrectly classified as a fossil fuel, when in fact it is Abiotic. As such, it is a replenishable, naturally occurring source. Peak oil is a myth, or more accurately, a lie. Just like almost everything else the establishment ever told you.
http://www.cryptonews.biz/the-dirty-truth-about-oil-the-fossil-fuel-hoax/
77 comments
1 swampsparrow 2017-07-26
regardless of origin, I don't know if we'll ever see "peak oil" due to the increasing efficiency and heightened demand for renewable sources of energy. By the time the peak oil was predicted (2030s) we may well be largely off of it.
Oil is going the way of the dinosaur
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
except dinosaurs never existed to begin with
1 swampsparrow 2017-07-26
is the earth only 5000 years old and were dinosaur bones placed around by satan?
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
so easy to mock instead of doing research. how precious.
1 efisch96 2017-07-26
Just as easy to make a claim without presenting evidence... Just sayin
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
the evidence is out there and enough at this point that it's only a matter hitting up your favorite search engine
1 ze-autobahn 2017-07-26
"evidence" "search engine" lolololol
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
there's always cnn for you lolololol
1 ze-autobahn 2017-07-26
Nice strawman, nice attempt to diminish the stupidity of your comment suggesting that evidence of something that is physical could be found on your favorite search engine. Nobody here mentioned CNN let alone stated that evidence of anything could be found on CNN.
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
people who like to argue always talking strawmans. you're literally pretending like you can't find information on the internet. lol.
1 TheRadChad 2017-07-26
Hey man never looked into it but heard Eddie Bravo talk about it, Inbox me a short link? Is it really about religion to discredit god? Or is it something else?
Thanks man
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
just search, it's not hard to find this stuff. how am i supposed to know why? i didn't start the lie. all you can do is speculate.
1 ze-autobahn 2017-07-26
Information and evidence are two totally different things. Had you said information than your statement would have been valid but you didn't, you said EVIDENCE hence lololol
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
you're arguing over definitions now, looks like you just wanna play with yourself
1 ze-autobahn 2017-07-26
Yes, why would the definition of a keyword that could make a statement valid or invalid have any significance /s
You must be really good at bible study lol
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
argue, argue. i see you've thrown a strawman in. thought you didn't like those? oh well.
1 diehardgiraffe 2017-07-26
The evidence is out there for the Earth being ~4.3 billion years old, just hit up a search engine.
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
age of earth has nothing to do with dinosaur hoax. look at pterodactyl fossils if you wanna see some real comedy.
1 diehardgiraffe 2017-07-26
They look like pterodactyl fossils to me. Is it beyond your grasp that things that existed before you in a vastly different climate/ecosystem look different than things today?
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
is it "beyond your grasp" to realize when you've been duped? take a closer look. maybe pick up Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain.
1 diehardgiraffe 2017-07-26
I'm looking pretty close. Please, enlighten me on the mystical proof I should be seeing.
Bonus points if you actually have evidence other than "you're just a mindless sheep."
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
If you can't see it you can't see it. I can't magically make you see it. Check out that book. It's got exercises in it proven to teach people how to see.
1 diehardgiraffe 2017-07-26
Awww, no bonus points for you. If you can't show any actual evidence other than mystical subjective "proof," I'll pass.
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
Learn how to see. You don't have to get that book specifically, but obviously you need to learn somehow.
1 diehardgiraffe 2017-07-26
Yes, because subjective mystical evidence is good for fact building.
The placebo effect mixed with a sense of superiority is a hell of a drug. If there were something to "see" there would be objective evidence. Not some Reddit mystic saying that things are like that because they are.
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
don't knock it till you've tried it. it's a good book, but i know how people feel about reading these days.
1 diehardgiraffe 2017-07-26
I don't mind reading, but I'm not going to accept a claim as bold as every fossil being fabricated without some serious evidence, which you should be able to provide without telling me that I'm just not able to see it. If it were objectively true, there would be objective proof you could show me. Not subjective experiences that prove nothing.
If the fabrication is obvious, you should be able to point out the points of fabrication. That's how faked paintings/signatures/pictures etc. are discovered. Those are able to be Objectively proven fake. You have no way to objectively prove your claim. Present that and I will continue this debate.
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
i'm pointing you towards a book that is designed to help people draw, but it also helps you to literally see through the lies. once you really start seeing what's in front of you instead of what your brain thinks is in front of you, nobody can fool you. not nasa, not the government, nobody. you wanna look at all the ridiculous, clearly made recently "fossils" and think it's true because somebody told you it's true, go ahead.
1 diehardgiraffe 2017-07-26
Okay, but all you can offer is subjective experience. If you could point out objective points of fabrication we'd have something to talk about. I don't have an issue with government agencies lying to people. I do have a problem with massive claims with no evidence other than "you can't see it." If it were a fabrication, you would be able to objectively show the points of fabrication.
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
you don't have an issue with government agencies lying to people? okay.
1 diehardgiraffe 2017-07-26
I don't have an issue with that being true, that they lie. Sorry, that was poorly phrased.
1 opiniongenerator5000 2017-07-26
Research? You mean like fossil record research?
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
look up pterodactyl fossils if you wanna be in on the joke.
1 opiniongenerator5000 2017-07-26
i will but is there anything specific about them i should look up? please say what it is specifically
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
every "fossil" is different, but the suspiciously 2D ones are the best to start looking critically at.
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
...have you ever been to a fossil museum?
1 Needmyvape 2017-07-26
What issues are you seeing?
1 codaclouds 2017-07-26
depends on the fossil. they're all different. the most obvious fakeries are the "2D" ones.
1 Needmyvape 2017-07-26
Im unsure what you mean by 2d ones.
Also do you believe in any fossils such as ammonites?
1 Needmyvape 2017-07-26
Oh
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
we passed peak oil a long time ago dude.
1 EricCarver 2017-07-26
so what material does it generate from? What degrades into oil?
1 RecoveringGrace 2017-07-26
His first link does a pretty good job of describing the theory.
1 wildfireonvenus 2017-07-26
Abiotic Oil - carbon present in the magma beneath the crust reacts with hydrogen to form methane as well as a raft of other mainly alkane hydrocarbons. The reactions are more complicated than this, with several intermediate stages. Particular mineral rocks such as granite and other silicon based rocks act as catalysts, which speed up the reaction without actually becoming involved or consumed in the process. -
1 nisaaru 2017-07-26
Even if it's abiotic it doesn't mean it is reproduced and retrievable in the quantity and quality it's used.
1 BakingTheCookiesRigh 2017-07-26
But science and an infinite resource because 'abiotic'!
1 Keetex 2017-07-26
Interesting subject and theory. Thanks for posting it.
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
It's bullshit. don't fill your head with misinformation.
1 SirFluck 2017-07-26
If you can demonstrate this or get someone to do it you should ASAP. It's better than posting here cause you're doing something.
1 SessionsBlowsGoats 2017-07-26
Blind Faith in scientists. Nice religion you've got going on there.
1 wildfireonvenus 2017-07-26
Abiotic Oil - carbon present in the magma beneath the crust reacts with hydrogen to form methane as well as a raft of other mainly alkane hydrocarbons. The reactions are more complicated than this, with several intermediate stages. Particular mineral rocks such as granite and other silicon based rocks act as catalysts, which speed up the reaction without actually becoming involved or consumed in the process. -
1 ridestraight 2017-07-26
This is one of the craziest movies I've ever seen about Black Gold or early pioneers seeking Oil. It runs 3 hours and I saw it quite awhile back...there's a point in the film where a productive well went dry and it devastates the man - only later the damned thing starts producing again. Crazy movie!
Not sure this is a HQ vers. (also have no time signature to give to my point of even posting!) it runs like three hours - so you decide:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixvi1etU--Q
I'm somewhere between both from life experience in and around the Gas and Oil business to all the BS that the Smithsonian has hidden from us aka Dinosaur Fossil = fuel?
1 martiansuccessor 2017-07-26
There could be something to this, or it could be that they were pumping it too hard, formation pressure went down, and they couldn't produce anymore at the time. Then, once formation pressure went back up, it began producing again. Not trying to start an argument as to oil's origin (I'm not really leaning one way or the other in that regard without more proof), but I do have some experience in the oil business and have definitely seen some idiots pump wells too hard or kill formation pressure through improper injection planning.
1 ridestraight 2017-07-26
Yeah, I'm sure you're correct about the formation pressure and the extraction technique but it goes with the story line to the conclusion...
As for the resources of Earth - it surely falls on us to be good stewards or conservationists.
1 martiansuccessor 2017-07-26
Oh yeah. Regardless of petroleum's origins, we need to get as far away from burning it as we can, as fast as we can. Unfortunately, it's just not going to happen until the market naturally supports a shift (i.e. more affordable alternate energy sources). However, I imagine we'll be using it for plastics for a far longer span, so it's not like the industry will just disappear overnight.
1 ridestraight 2017-07-26
Wouldn't it have been something if Tesla had been supported? Think where we could be today...onward future generations to push back against TPTB that conceal truth!
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
That's literally the fucking point of this thread, why are you trying to conform to the rest of the conspiracy theorists?
1 martiansuccessor 2017-07-26
Oh, I didn't know I wasn't extreme enough for you. Forgive me for thinking for myself.
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
Yeah, you're really thinking for yourself there.
1 martiansuccessor 2017-07-26
Ok buddy. If you're in this bad of a place in your life, I guess you need the win. This is a totally asinine conversation I'm gonna go ahead and stop spending time on. Maybe look into some introspection to give you a better understanding of bias.
1 HempCO719 2017-07-26
What Id like to know is, if these animals/plant life got stuck under that many square feet of dirt/rock/clay, what could move that much material? A meteor that could move that much tonnage, wouldve destroyed the planet. How could anything else survive, let alone evolve, under these conditions?
1 Army_of_Fuarkness 2017-07-26
World-wide flood.
1 bozobozo 2017-07-26
Jesus
1 bigglesworth45 2017-07-26
Time
1 HempCO719 2017-07-26
Dirt just relocates over time? Not that exponentially...
1 bigglesworth45 2017-07-26
.01 MM of erosion a year x 1,000,000 years = 10,000 mm = 10 meters. 65 million years since the Jurassic Era = 650 meters. You can't think human time, we are literally a blink in the eye of time.
1 HempCO719 2017-07-26
True but erosion =/= dirt. Doesnt account for distance, water, temperature, humidity for the particulates travel around the world. Its easy to put numbers up there but nature isnt that cut and dry.
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
mud, usually.
1 tokinjedi 2017-07-26
This is news to you all? This has been known for close to a decade now. Go over to r/science once in a while.
1 wildfireonvenus 2017-07-26
It has been discussed more on r/conspiracy vs r/science where it is pretty much unheard of. In fact, it has barely been discussed in all of reddit. Your not impressing anyone. Majority of people have never heard of Abiotic Oil, why? because it goes against the "green" agenda scheme which is used to force regulations on people and allows the governments to have power and control over the people. Besides that it has been known for at least 60 years not a decade.
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
Does it matter where it's from if it's damaging the atmosphere and causing climate change?
Or do you deny that, too?
1 capitan_canaidia 2017-07-26
sauce on r/science plz?
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
www.bullshit.com
1 Mental-Cramp 2017-07-26
Abiotic does not imply an infinite supply. If you bleed out before your body can replenish the blood, you stiil die.
What happens when plates go to shift but the lubricant is missing? I think I'd prefer to keep my friction lubed.
1 wildfireonvenus 2017-07-26
Oil is a resource we can use. It doesn't keep our bodies alive. That's just using a dramatic spin to prove a point. The earth's oil isn't going to all dry out at the same time, if a well dries out and goes into its replenishment cycle there are millions of other wells still producing.
1 Mental-Cramp 2017-07-26
LoL dramatic? Like the earthquakes that follow closely behind bleeding out the lubrications between tectonic plates?
The water they pump in is less viscous than oil... thats why you don't use water as a lubricant in engines. Friction.
1 sinedup4thiscomment 2017-07-26
I've always been skeptical about fossil fuels and peak oil because of our military's dependence upon fossil fuels. We wouldn't be getting so close to running out of oil if running out of oil means running out of war. War is the most important thing in the world to TPTB.
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
the military is using nuclear energy to power it's ships. I'm sure they're less dependent on oil than you'd think.
1 sinedup4thiscomment 2017-07-26
You could be right. Do we have nuclear drones and fighter jets though? ICBMS? We need fossil fuels for the most important aspects of our military.
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
We have the technology... but we don't do it because it's cheaper to rely on fossil fuels, and the military will likely buy their fuel in advance and store it underground.
1 sinedup4thiscomment 2017-07-26
They already have. Fuel goes by fast, though.
1 TXROADWARRIOR 2017-07-26
my geochemistry book is just itching to write up how off your conclusion is. oil is biotic. here's how it goes: biogenetic methane is produced by the breakdown of buried organics during a thing called diagenesis. next catagenesis converts the biogenetic methane to kerogen which breaks down into bitumen... the simplest of carbon chains found in oil. there are also carbon isotope markers we can use to classify age, and maturity of an oil sample and approximately what it's composed of. you know what octane grade is? that's how well we understand the process. but peak oil is dead.. so we can agree on that
1 JUSTIN_HERGINA 2017-07-26
The man himself telling the story
https://youtu.be/XXnUD2-joAc
1 Sendmyabar 2017-07-26
Velikovsky theorizes that oil was dumped here by a comet.
1 crielan 2017-07-26
Like all at once or over a period of time and billions if them? Because if it's the former I don't think the Earth would've survived that impact. Or did it somehow reproduce and multiply here?
Also why wasn't any found on the moon? It's relatively close and has had millions of impacts.
Just curious by the way. Not trying to come off as aggressive.
1 Sendmyabar 2017-07-26
More the material is in the tail of the comet which as it passes close the Earth, causing a whole bunch of catastrophic effects, the tail is what the Earth actually passes through. The materials held in the comets tail enter the atmosphere.
Oil wasn't found on the moon because: - No one has looked for it - No one has been there ;) - It has seeped into the inner part of the moon (the moon is hallow BTW)
Pick your favourite :).
1 crielan 2017-07-26
Thanks for the info. I now have some more theories to read into
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
what other conspiracy theories do you subscribe to?
Is donald trump a lizard or is he just being controlled by the lizards?
1 Brodusgus 2017-07-26
It's people. Just like soylent green.
1 CivilianConsumer 2017-07-26
Yup it's a fairy tale. Not even a good one. Massive deception instead of saying the truth...we don't really know and maybe never will. Scientists fail us as often as they help, actually my study shows they are 78% fail
1 murphy212 2017-07-26
I attended a university class in the heart of Siberia a few years ago, a lecture called "On the economy of oil and gas", dispensed by a professor formerly researcher at Gazprom and formerly geologist for the Soviet State.
I asked her: where does oil come from, is it really of biological origin?
In a very nonchalant (but kind) way she answered there are two theories, the fossil and abiotic theories, none of the 2 is either proven or dominant, that her colleagues are split half/half, and that she herself leans towards the abiotic hypothesis.
I was amazed at such a balanced, open-minded response. I thought to myself this would be unlikely in the West where fossil fuel theory is like a religion.
1 Censoredreddit2k16- 2017-07-26
Didn't Rockefeller pay a scientist off the year of the Geneva Convention? Fuckin science bro. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTVCxkijPsE
1 Albator_H 2017-07-26
From the latest that I've read on the subject. Oil was created from the period before we had fungus that could digest wood. Which meant that forest were not "bio degradable" for a couple of multiple millions of years trunk of fallen tree would just sit there until buried by other bio mass.
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
Nah you're thinking about coal.
1 ze-autobahn 2017-07-26
"evidence" "search engine" lolololol
1 Army_of_Fuarkness 2017-07-26
World-wide flood.
1 diehardgiraffe 2017-07-26
The evidence is out there for the Earth being ~4.3 billion years old, just hit up a search engine.
1 bigglesworth45 2017-07-26
Time
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
mud, usually.
1 Z0di 2017-07-26
Yeah, you're really thinking for yourself there.