Your papers please. We would read your linked refutations to the working theory of abiotic origins for hydro-carbons. :lol:
Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
- Status
Your papers please. We would read your linked refutations to the working theory of abiotic origins for hydro-carbons. :lol:
Not at all, just one link to the well established biotic theory of oil origins will do. Surely you have a favourite on hand. 125 years should have produced a few I should imagine.
I'll cough up as soon as you name one just one source of oil that is inorganic.
The oil comet is a real knee slapper.
Any others? Any oil sources fron non porous igneous rock that have absolutely no ethylene content in the oil? When the Ukrainins spit up the chemistry of the oil they extracted then you'll have something to go on.
Well sir if your information to the contrary is not freely available then I don't see how it is possible to conduct a civilized discussion of the merits of either. I'm forced to conclude that you have no relevant material whatever that you trust cannot be destructively countered or you are a common garden troll. So slap away at your knees. Have a nice evening.
My information is freely available and you already should have learned it grade school. What more could I add?
You on the other hand hold the key to proving this by simply making a reference to just one example of oil from non-organic sources from nonporous igneous strata.
Can you do that?
Humans.
Nope. Humans should just be a little more concerned with what we live on rather treating it like a garbage receptacle.
Pretty much. Oil isn't a mineral, it's straight carbon compound based on organic material.
Oil comet? lmao. Carbon compound based on organics from somewhere else in the galaxy.
Where's the theory Petros? I didn't learn anything in grade school. You could add a link if you trusted your crazy idea of oil from dead clams. It's impossible to pick one example all the oil is abiotic, every drop of it.
3. The “odd-even” abundance claims, - involving the small imbalance of the relative abundances of linear hydrocarbon molecules containing an odd number of carbon atoms, compared to homologous ones containing an even number.
The claims concerning the imbalance of linear molecules containing odd and even numbers, respectively, of carbon atoms is another of the genre of “the constituents of natural petroleum ‘have the same properties as’ the constituents of biological systems, in such-or-so a way, and therefore petroleum must have evolved from biological matter.” No intelligent teenage student at, for examples, a Russian, German, Dutch, or Swiss gymnasium, would accept such reasoning. Nonetheless, such claims are commonly put forth in English-language textbooks purporting to deal with petroleum geology. Such claims are herewith shown to be without merit and insupportable.
Dismissal of the Claims of a Biological Connection for Natural Petroleum.
You have been dismissed by science.
The claims concerning the imbalance of linear molecules containing odd and even numbers, respectively, of carbon atoms is another of the genre of “the constituents of natural petroleum ‘have the same properties as’ the constituents of biological systems, in such-or-so a way, and therefore petroleum must have evolved from biological matter.” No intelligent teenage student at, for examples, a Russian, German, Dutch, or Swiss gymnasium, would accept such reasoning. Nonetheless, such claims are commonly put forth in English-language textbooks purporting to deal with petroleum geology. Such claims are herewith shown to be without merit and insupportable.
Dismissal of the Claims of a Biological Connection for Natural Petroleum.
You have been dismissed by science.
That's your answer to Gore/Suzuki living a life-style that is the exact opposite of what they demand of everyone else?... They can do more?
Think really hard about what you stated and then get back to me.
British High Court ruling on Gore's pack-o-lies he called Inconvenient Truth wherein they ruled that many of the statements in the documentary were untrue or unfounded.
Look it up.
By extension, the debacle that the CRU is embroiled in and teh fact that the UN/IPCC is retracting a number of what were "factual, peer-reviewed, realities"
Other than conspiracy theory debasing oil companies for not "allowing" the tech, can you tell me the reason why solar/wind aren't mainstream?
I'll give you a hint, it has to do with the public at large and their interest in paying more for an alternative that is unproven, inconsistent and more expensive.
You're muddying the issue on the state of California... If the public "demands" green alternatives, and the public are a powerful lobby, how on Earth was GM capable of altering the legislation.... Before you answer the, remember that California incorporates all kinds of secondary issues on any given state ballot that will allow them to vote directly on an issue.
If that's what Californians want, that's what they will get. Conversely, if they don't want it, they trash it.
... So, still want to blame GM for the retraction of the legislation?
You were the one that stated that particulate is the nuclei of rain/precipitation.... Now you've stated that most of the reflection is due to clouds... can you see the relationship between more particulate in the atmosphere and the greater capacity for clouds?
Will you outlaw volcanic eruptions; forest fires, drought, sand storms or any other natural event that emits far more "pollution" into the air that the burning of fossil fuels?
This is what I was driving at regarding the relative contributions from anthropogenic vs. natural sources.
"Foot in the door" my a$$.... All of those renewables are heavily subsidized by government and they still can't make it economically attractive.
So is solar, wind and tidal.... For that matter, so is the land upon which your house is situated... Does that mean that everyone should have access to your home and assets because they were derived from a "common resource"?
You're assuming that AGW is a factual mechanism.... To date, there is no compelling evidence to suggest such.
As far as fire supression and the Pine Betle are concerned, allowing those fires to take their natural course would have had a dramatic effect on their migration and populations.
It's when that wood burns that all of that carbon will be added into the system in a very short period of time at highly concentrated levels.
Yeah... We've heard much about the fraudulent models that have been forwarded by eco-groups that have later admitted that they engineered the programs to generate a "preferred result".
Easy - they haven't been developed as much as the oil & gas industry has.
Unproven about what? Inconsistent in what?
GM and the other companies also have a pretty powerful lobby. Combine that lobby with the oil company lobby ... well. Gov't does like to pay attention to big money.
GM and the other companies also have a pretty powerful lobby. Combine that lobby with the oil company lobby ... well. Gov't does like to pay attention to big money.
So it's just a coincidence that the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased dramatically in the past 150 years? nuts
So if you have a 3-beam balance and you have a jar of CO² on one end weighing x grams, you know the weight of the jar, and then you squeeze a couple mg more CO² into the jar without compensating with the weights, it will still be in balance? nuts
Except in Germany, where it is a quite viable industry and growing nicely. But then they persevered and kept at it.
If you have a product and open a store, but down the road is another store that's been there for a while and has a strong client base selling the same product as you, you expect to have a booming business right away? nuts
You equate common things like wind and sun with contractually agreed things like real estate? lol Funny No-one owns sunshine or wind. Countries own the land. lmao
There is however a preponderance of circumstantial evidence.
Just like when we burn 33 billion bbls of fossil fuel per year.
Climate Change Fraud - Climategate Investigation A Monumental Whitewash
Review: Climate e-mails petty, not fraudulent - Climate Change- msnbc.com
I know, you deniers hate that the Great Scandal God hasn't helped you out with this massive, gargantuan conspiracy.
Better keep the status quo and not change anything for the better, because we all know the unknown is scary and has boogiemen and monsters that'll get us.
Last edited:
Why?... I mean, its such a great thing that everybody demands, right?
Wind doesn't bow 24/7/365... Solar isn't to great at night or when it's raining/snowing, is it?
So, how was it even possible that California passed their green legislation in the first place?
I suppose that it's the same coincidence that the Earth experienced all of those ice ages...nuts
Re: the 3-beam scale.. Who says it's perpetually in balance.. How would that scale look before,during and after a period of glaciation?
And their industry still relies on protective legislation and subsidies.
You're making my argument for me.
It's a common resource, ain't it.. That's what cobalt_kid was all up in arms about. In terms of the contract/real estate angle - how does that work with hydro projects.
Good one... Like there's no massive assumptions or circumstantial evidence in the eco camp.
That's hugely funny.
No conspiracy, just a plain-ole-run-of-the-mill fraud.
Yup!
Well, people are starting to wake up to the fact that we can't continue treating our home like shyte, yes. But Development takes time. Hence the word "development" rather than "accomplishment".
Germany is a pretty rainy country (more so than Canuckville. DE = about 3.5 hours of sunshine per day, CA = about 6) yet it seems to be doing fine with solar energy so far. Canuckville has a windy belt in southern AB and a couple other places. One develops what works for the area.
The gov't decided on the green side. How else? That doesn't mean the only pressure was to go green, though.
Who said that?
You don't seem to grasp the concept of geological or climactic time. The rate is quite a bit faster in this "coincidence" or did you forget already what Ton already pointed out?
Not nearly as much as when it started. No, I am not. Your words imply that alternative energy industries should be booming as much as the oil industry soon as it is implemented. That's unrealistic at best. And I am not supporting your view. Bad spin on your part.
Sunshine and wind are common; real estate isn't. Either the gov't owns land or individuals, companies, etc. own it.
The gov't leases land to power companies unless it is the power company owner.
I'm glad you like it.
You exaggerate like Potter. Slight fudging is more like it.
Brilliant. So much for progress. Why bother researching and developing anything then? (rhetorical)
very poor references for that article AnnaG
and no reference to the famous Theory of Biotic Oil that you all must be familiar with but which I cannot find, anywhere. You do realize that synthetic hydro-carbons where made during WW2 without "organics"? But never has oil been made from dead lizards and lawn clippings in any lab, and they have tried lots.
- Status