Search results

Two seperate instances of oil deveoping in different condition in different strata from different critters millions of years apart is more than coincidence. All a roll of the dice. There are other oil bearing gelogical structures of different ages all over the plains of Alberta and North...

They maybe close together but are two completely different geological formations 20 million of years apart with completely different fossil taxonomy. That's so.

Drumheller is a town. Palliser and a geologist named Dr. Hector recorded the first fossils in 1859.

They are 500km apart

60 Tonnes of blue whale from eating krill but the krill could never choke and die in huge numbers in turbid waters being crushed and slowly cooked in an anerobic environment. Prior to fossil fuels whaling was the leading source of oil for thousands of years.

lunar wane shaft!!!! LOL I had one of these but I torqued out the bindle rollers and the sledge pump seized.

You can get methane in minutes but petroleum takes heat and immense pressure and once again aneorbic conditions hence the name "fossil fuels" rather than paleo fuels.

Not biology beave. Fossils are made through an anaerobic chemical process.

The beauty of hypoxia. YouTube - SESSIONS FOR NURSES 32 - WHAT IF YOU WERE NEW TO ICU

What children? The "green" movement is a genocidal movement.

Good. They get what they deserve for not paying attention.

"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialised civilisations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?" Maurice Strong, Secretary-General of the UN Earth Summit, June 1992. Have we had a crash recently? Just wait until the real recession hits. Going by history...

Apparently we all have limited time if the wishes of those notables quoted (which you choose to ignore) have their way.

Read the previous two posts.

More greenocide quotes:

Green or Soylent Green? The hidden "green" agenda.

You had better listen closer to what the green agenda is really all about. "Sustainability" means a huge population reduction. not North America reducing consumption. Our economy is a consumption based economy so that means either the economy goes or the consumers go. Which do you prefer?

If there are too many people using too many resources which group of consumers should be eliminated to reduce consumption and off gassing?

Why do we tolerate a tax system that penalizes working? Would you be willing to pay a 25% GST type consumption tax if income tax were eliminated? At first thought it sounds harsh to pay but keep in mind producer and import taxes would plummet and so would retail goods thus having little...

Global warming is a purly bull**** eugenics movement to wipe out anyone who might be entitled to benefit from their national resources.