LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Like I said why would oil suppliers want people to give any credence to Abiogenic oil? The less supply people think we have the more money they make.Originally Posted by Margot
Like I said why would oil suppliers want people to give any credence to Abiogenic oil? The less supply people think we have the more money they make.
Last edited by Windigo; Apr 25 2012 at 04:49 PM.
Mens Sana in Corpore Sano
Guru
Lots of fields .. even historically wet fields, continue to produce by keeping the pressure up thru the use of gas or water injection. You know about Ain Dar of course.
And there are fields like Manifa, that increased flow rate after 40 years of being ignored ..
Oil isn't found in an underground puddle after all.
Guru
The theory of Abiorgenic Oil Field Formation has been all but disproved, wacko Corsi to the contrary. The key bit of data is the ubiquitous presence of diamonoids in every oil field every found, which a carbon-based micro-formations similar to diamonds that have been conclusively proved to have come from biologically-based carbon sources. An Abiogenic oil field would have no diamonoids.
Political compass:
Economic Left/Right: -3.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.21
They control the supply.
However, they definitely have an invested interest in convincing people that enough oil will always be available even as global demand skyrockets and prices follow quickly behind.
“Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employers and employees. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the General Fund to reduce the deficit, that would go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or lowering the deficit.” –Ronald Reagan
PF's Liberal Progressive Underground
Tell me something I dont know.
I personally don't subscribe to the theory but I dont dismiss theory or call them fringe simply because I dont believe in them. I'm not a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing liberal. Liberals pervert good science which is about the unknown and working to know it to absolutes because the evil dirtbags like to use science to advance their own agenda. Even the falsification of science is good for science. Wrong science advance science. But that falsification has to be more than wiki relying on one clearly vary biased paper.
The moment I hear some liberal jackass us the word debunked I pretty much tune them out as a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing idiot.
Mens Sana in Corpore Sano
So why have we not found oil where the abiogenic theory said there would be oil?
The internet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhoea -- massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind- boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it.
Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not adding it to a fruit salad
Guru
What in the world does liberal or conservative have to do with oil exploration and extraction or ROI?
Yeah but isn't it fun to learn how whacked out and unscientific theories can get?
The internet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhoea -- massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind- boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it.
Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not adding it to a fruit salad
So which has more of an effect? Current supply or future supply. I would argue that current supply has the greater effect because it is a pretty good indicator of future supply/surplus.
I think it's funny how you don't even know how to spell capitalism...Its funny how you leftists with your belief that capatalism is such bull(*)(*)(*)(*) suddenly become pure market capatalists the moment it suits your arguments.
No they dont. The fear that we will run out of oil raises the futures market. Markets always reflect fears real or imagined. You know animal spirits. For supposed Keynesians its always clear that you never read a word he wrote.
“Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employers and employees. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the General Fund to reduce the deficit, that would go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or lowering the deficit.” –Ronald Reagan
PF's Liberal Progressive Underground
Sr. Correspondent
Margot, this infers you are a chemical engineer and we know better. When I'm asked this, generally I say "I'm a third grade drop out, that drove a truck and now retired".Are you in the oil business? As in are you a chemical or petroleum engineer?
Sometimes those who are "experts" are grocery baggers ...
Think lady, people, governments invest in anything they feel will make them money. I've invested in Alternative Energy Companies for years, did earn a profit, got out when "First Solar" hit 100.00/share. SA is also investing in GE's water desalting program, but the planets not going to run out of fresh water....or is it.Why do you suppose Saudi Arabia has been investing in hy-solar applications since 1980?
Moderators; Think your science forum would have been a better place to drop this thread.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks