Debunking fuel conservation myths...

[PhotoDu.de]

Originally Posted by jambo101

Its more than some guys opinion its a scientific theory just like the theory that 90 million+ barrels of oil the world uses every day comes from decayed organic matter. Of course the theory of self sustaining oil reserves is widely debunked, can you imagine how much money big oil business would lose if the Abiotic theory were true?

Another link
http://mondovista.com/abioticoilx.html

Mondovista.com? That's an even less credible link than the last one that was posted.

[PhotoDu.de]

Originally Posted by nmgolfer

But you cannot make it drink...

Curious people research things for themselves. There is a ton of material on the web about the true origins of petroleum on planet earth and is ain't dead dinosaurs. Carbon is one of the four most abundant elements in the Universe. Carbon dioxide is NOT a polutant... in fact it is a requirement of life on planet Earth. Carbon dioxide lags global warming not leads it. These are just a few of the thing the the curious critical thinkers learn and the lemming will never ever know.

You must as yourself: Cui Bono... who benefits. Who benefits from convincing the simple minded lemmings that petroleum is derived from dead dinosaurs. Who benefits from controlling carbon and in turn life itself on planet earth? Who benefits when a ridiculous idea that a naturally occurring trace molecule of the air we breath CO2 is a pollutant? I'll give you a hint... it sure as heck is not the lemmings. Wake up... there is a larger agenda afoot, as there has always been from time immemorial.

If you're truly curious, not just trolling I suggest you read some of the articles by Chris Landau, a geologist, who knows exactly how petroleum is made inside the earths crust. http://www.opednews.com/author/author47248.html The Russians have known since 1950's and are one of the largest producers with their deep wells because of it. People can remain ignorant "sheeple" and like lemmings drop to their deaths or they can try critical thinking for themselves

1) Ad hominem attacks don't help

2) CO2 is denser than the N2 and O2 that makes up most of the air. Denser object retain heat better than less dense objects. Air with more CO2 will be denser, retain more heat, and get warmer.

[PhotoDu.de]

Originally Posted by nmgolfer

Bingo... exactly. The entire "world order" is built around petrol-dollar control. Both world wars were made to happen because of it. A really excellent book on this not widely known true history of oil is: A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order by William Engdahl. Here in the states gas price is controlled by limiting refining.

http://www.amazon.com/Century-War-An.../dp/074532309X

Are you trying to make an argument for or against saving gas? If we use less gas and find other energy sources we'd end the petrol-dollar system we have.

[nmgolfer]

Originally Posted by PhotoDu.de

I think they would make more from an unlimited supply and people not conserving it.

Wrong... a good analogy are diamonds.... Readily abundant and sold cheep for industrial application but by cornering the market Cecil Rhodes and crew make far more money by curtailing and slowly metering supply to a classically (Edward Benays) propagandized consuming public via. their cronies. Again here gas price controls are instituted not so much by controlling production (these days there are lots of producers not just the seven sister) but by controlling refinery output.

[nmgolfer]

Originally Posted by PhotoDu.de

Are you trying to make an argument for or against saving gas? If we use less gas and find other energy sources we'd end the petrol-dollar system we have.

I'm saying

1)Petroleum is probably limitless but that at the very least we are not running out anytime soon

2)The powers that be will not let us get away from petroleum because the entire world order is built around it

3)I'm saying Global warming is not caused by man but by naturally occuring cycle but that will not stop the control freaks that have eugenics and totalitarian fascistic agendas from using it to tighten their vice grips on peoples lives.

I'd like nothing better than to never have to purchase gasoline again, to drive and electic vehicle with juice I maded on my property from the sun and the wind and or an internal combustion fueled by hydrogen produced from water sun and wind. All completely doable but no before taking our live back from those who seek to dominate us.

[PhotoDu.de]

nmgolfer, you really need to substantiate your claims.
Also, what do eugenics and totalitarianism have to do with getting people to put less greenhouse gases in the air?
Also gem diamonds are not plentiful while industrial ones are (and some can be produced synthetically). Gem diamond prices are also over inflated because DeBeers holds a monopoly in the market. Comparing diamonds to oil is not a fair analogy.

[Astroman]

Drill baby drill

[PhotoDu.de]

Spill baby spill

[Crims0n5]

Originally Posted by nmgolfer

I'm saying

3)I'm saying Global warming is not caused by man but by naturally occuring cycle but that will not stop the control freaks that have eugenics and totalitarian fascistic agendas from using it to tighten their vice grips on peoples lives.

We'll you are right when you say that man is not the "cause" of global warming. However, I haven't heard any credible source blaming man for global warming. It is a natural cycle that has been occurring. The real argument is whether our actions are bringing on Global Climate Change at rather accelerated rate.

[Crims0n5]

Originally Posted by nmgolfer

But you cannot make it drink...

Curious people research things for themselves. There is a ton of material on the web about the true origins of petroleum on planet earth and is ain't dead dinosaurs. Carbon is one of the four most abundant elements in the Universe. Carbon dioxide is NOT a polutant... in fact it is a requirement of life on planet Earth. Carbon dioxide lags global warming not leads it. These are just a few of the thing the the curious critical thinkers learn and the lemming will never ever know.

You must as yourself: Cui Bono... who benefits. Who benefits from convincing the simple minded lemmings that petroleum is derived from dead dinosaurs. Who benefits from controlling carbon and in turn life itself on planet earth? Who benefits when a ridiculous idea that a naturally occurring trace molecule of the air we breath CO2 is a pollutant? I'll give you a hint... it sure as heck is not the lemmings. Wake up... there is a larger agenda afoot, as there has always been from time immemorial.

If you're truly curious, not just trolling I suggest you read some of the articles by Chris Landau, a geologist, who knows exactly how petroleum is made inside the earths crust. http://www.opednews.com/author/author47248.html The Russians have known since 1950's and are one of the largest producers with their deep wells because of it. People can remain ignorant "sheeple" and like lemmings drop to their deaths or they can try critical thinking for themselves

You are right. In trace amounts CO2 is not a pollutant. However the concentration of CO2 and other green house gasses have been increasing over the years. After all, Arsenic doesn't become a poisonous until it reaches a certain concentration in the body.

If you are considering a larger agenda coming from those who are promoting the global climate change issues, we must also consider the possibility of an agenda being forced on us by those trying to disprove man's influence on global climate change.

[PhotoDu.de]

Originally Posted by Crims0n5

If you are considering a larger agenda coming from those who are promoting the global climate change issues, we must also consider the possibility of an agenda being forced on us by those trying to disprove man's influence on global climate change.

Never listen to talking heads (but feel free to listen to Talking Heads).

[nmgolfer]

Originally Posted by PhotoDu.de

nmgolfer, you really need to substantiate your claims.
Also, what do eugenics and totalitarianism have to do with getting people to put less greenhouse gases in the air?
Also gem diamonds are not plentiful while industrial ones are (and some can be produced synthetically). Gem diamond prices are also over inflated because DeBeers holds a monopoly in the market. Comparing diamonds to oil is not a fair analogy.

I don't have to substantiate anything. You're free to choose to remain ignorant. This is not a debate class. Eugenics and totalitarianism have everything to do with the phony ginned up anthropogenic "climate change" scam. Diamonds are a perfectly good analogy, both are commodities in abundant supply that are use to generate tremendous wealth for a select few mainly by market manipulation.

Do you know what the number one greenhouse gas is? Its water vapor. What will the control freaks come up with next? Banning cloud formation? Do you know what the source of cloud formation (water vapor) in the atmosphere is? Ill give you a hint ... its the same thing thats causing warming (that is if the climate warm-mongers data is even valid) Its the sun... ions from the sun in combination with micro particulates. You can substantiate that for yourself as well.

[nmgolfer]

Originally Posted by Crims0n5

We'll you are right when you say that man is not the "cause" of global warming. However, I haven't heard any credible source blaming man for global warming. It is a natural cycle that has been occurring. The real argument is whether our actions are bringing on Global Climate Change at rather accelerated rate.

Theres no question... man has no measurable influence on the climate. One volcanic eruption... you know like the one that recently occured in Iceland shutting down air traffic in Europe releases more CO2 into the atmosphere that everything cumulatively mankind has ever released. Did you know most volcanic activity is under the sea where it goes unmonitored and detected? Yep... theres your souce of CO2 but the warm-mongers will not discuss it... can't be blamed on Mankind's activities.

Arsenic in any concentration is a poison. It may not make one person sick (while another dies...) in low dosage but its still a poison. CO2 on the otherhand is not a poison or a pollutant. CO2 is released into the atmosphere when the Earths climate warms... it an EFFECT not a CAUSE. Its been in much higher concentrations with no ill effects for living creatures in the past too.

Heres the real problem... some in this country are so dumbed down they conflate carbon monoxide which they know can kill and comes out of an auto's exhaust pipe with carbon dioxide which is essential for photosynthesis hence life as we know it.

[nmgolfer]

Originally Posted by Crims0n5

We'll you are right when you say that man is not the "cause" of global warming. However, I haven't heard any credible source blaming man for global warming. It is a natural cycle that has been occurring. The real argument is whether our actions are bringing on Global Climate Change at rather accelerated rate.

Originally Posted by PK198105

ok oil is not limitless, you cant have something out of thin air. Oil is basically petrified/fermented/decomposed/liquefied/compressed/etc biological matter (i.e dinos, plants, etc) and it takes ages (thousands if not million of years) to produce, there is no magic tap that constantly pours out crude (no gulf jokes please), so yes we will eventually run out of it, quicker than it takes for it to replenish. The point is, no one knows for sure when will this happen and the people that say it will be within the next 50 years are the sly devils that own the wells creating a justification for filling their pockets with your cash. It's like asking a fox to guard the hen (no sh%^ they will say "sure sure I'll be honest about it and tell you the truth"). What is needed is an independent, honest and unbiased person or group to verify the claims on both sides.As for global warming even the scientists are divided because they simply cant predict, they can study models and make educated guesses but it's all it is an educated guess. So both sides of this argument are correct and wrong at the same time unless there is scientific (repeatable and measurable) and unbiased proof

No you're wrong... People believed the earth was flat once too. They were wrong. There is more than enough limestone for millions years of petroleum production by an for us by our mother earth. Maybe by then we'll have access to the better solutions.

Science will always be politicized. Heck Galileo was thown in a dungeon for saying the evidence suggest that the Sun is the center of the Universe. There was very little funding for climate research until the APW scam was seized apon... those scientists are not going report the truth.. they're going to "hide the decline" and punish dissent... they've got carreers to build mouths to feed and cars and homes to buy. They know if they don't produce the results their funder's want some one else will. But there are more than 30,000 honest scientists who are screaming at the top of their lungs that is all a bunch of Hogwash this global warming scam... Do they get to be heard? No of course not because that doesn't support the agenda. If you think dissent is not silenced in scientific research or any politics for that matter you're not one. Scientists cling tightly to the accepted dogmas and Politicians out CIA agents to circle the wagons around the propaganda machine.

[nmgolfer]

Originally Posted by PhotoDu.de

1) Ad hominem attacks don't help

2) CO2 is denser than the N2 and O2 that makes up most of the air. Denser object retain heat better than less dense objects. Air with more CO2 will be denser, retain more heat, and get warmer.

Consider this... if CO2 is heavier (which it is) it should sink to the ground ... which it does ergo no greenhouse effect! Its not helium afterall... how are you going to get it up there to cause all that warming?

[Crims0n5]

Originally Posted by nmgolfer

Consider this... if CO2 is heavier (which it is) it should sink to the ground ... which it does ergo no greenhouse effect! Its not helium afterall... how are you going to get it up there to cause all that warming?

Global warming is the increase in the average temperature of Earth's near-surface air and oceans since the mid-20th century and its projected continuation.

[jambo101]

Originally Posted by PhotoDu.de

Mondovista.com? That's an even less credible link than the last one that was posted.

The link was posted to clarify what the Abiotic oil theory is all about not to justify one way or the other its legitimacy as a theory.
Whats your conspiracy theory behind Mondovista.com? I've never heard of them and thought their description of the Abiotic theory was quite understandable.

[bkrownd]

Originally Posted by nmgolfer

If you think dissent is not silenced in scientific research or any politics for that matter you're not one. Scientists cling tightly to the accepted dogmas and Politicians out CIA agents to circle the wagons around the propaganda machine.

Pull that tin foil hat on tight!