Dead Dino Update: Massive find in shallow Gulf Waters

[kwc57]

First, the Presidency is Palin's for the asking; second, opening ANWR will reduce the prices by announcing future massive increases in supply; third, you labor under the delusion that oil is the one commodity impervious to the laws of supply and demand.

Robust America capitalism and entrepreneurship will compete down the price of energy and will be responsible for 15% of the 50% increase in GDP by the end of Palin's second term.

Dude, you need some serious anti-psychotic drugs if you honestly think Palin has a shot at the Whitehouse. Feel free to bookmark this post and say you told me so in 2012.....just don't expect me to hold my breath.

You labor under the delusion that oil companies are concerned about the needs of the US economy and security. They are not. They are concerned about profit which can be kept high thru manipulation of production.

You're boring me, Socrates.

If there's big money to be made, and there is, new companies will come in to make it.

You mean confusing you.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Abiotic Oil

SPACE.com -- Giant Lake Confirmed on Saturn's Moon Titan

How'd the velicoraptors get to Titan?

The Space Program has made silly the very idea of "Fossil fuels"

Wait a second. You think "methane" and "petroleum" are the SAME THING?????????

Petroleum in a Nutshell

And you think "conservatives" are going to build nuclear power plants???????

Methane is a "Fossil Fuel"!!!!!!!

 

[JiggsCasey]

Methane is a "Fossil Fuel"!!!!!!!

The mere trace of faint methane particle in a substance is far from evidence that oil seeps up from the mantle of the earth in endless quantities. I know it feels good to tell yourself that there's plenty, but there isn't. There is alcohol in intersteller clouds but it doesn't prove the 'beer is from space' theory!

As for Saturn, you put a couple of billion tons of hydrogen and carbon together under enourmous pressure you will form lots of stuff.

I find it ironic that it was a rogue group of Soviet scientists who championed the "abiotic" theory of oil during the cold war to counter western science (and the west's expansion in the ME), and yet it's "drill-baby-drill" con men who adhere to communist propaganda to promote their agenda.

Abiotic oil theory has been countered and dismantled many times over. About the only pundit left who still clings to "abiotic oil" theory is documented racist Jerome Corsi. Thomas Gold did a 1998 book "The Deep Hot Biosphere," that became utterly embarrassing for him under peer review.

(I can't post links yet, but it's on energybulletin.net)

"The “Abiotic Oil” Controversy

even if oil were formed in the mantle, as more than one commenter pointed out, abiotic theorists have suggested no plausible means by which it could rise to the depths at which we find it without passing through intermediary regions in which the temperature would be too high and pressure too low for liquid hydrocarbons to survive).​

Regardless, abiotic-vs.-biotic theory of debate is pointless. Whatever the origin, the fact of the matter is that the rate of global discoveries has been in decline since the 1960s, while demand has exploded. This has NOTHING to do with bottlenecks on drilling permissions.

What's laughable in threads like these is that the original poster, an obvious Sarah Palin enthusiast, squawks about this "massive find" panacea, but conveniently never mentions the total proven reserves, nor does he acknowledge the world's (or just the U.S.'s) daily rate of consumption.

If he actually did that, and applied basic math, he would not be able to further lie to himself that this is more than a drop in the proverbial bucket.

 

[MaggieMae]

You ignore the influence of speculation on world prices, world prices which hinge to a large proportion on the US in all its influences. The mere reality of our coming to our senses and doing something of substance in energy rather than tilting at windmills would remove much of the effects of speculation from world market prices. You usually have to be a liberal to not take incentives into account.

Announcing a new nuclear (approval easing) energy policy would have a corresponding influence, so that is not to be discounted incentive wise.

It's nice to see a conservative admit that the U.S. needs to take the lead in developing alternative energy sources. Thus far, it's only the "liberals" who have been saying that, for all the reasons you mention.

I think about any conservative admits that. Too bad so many liberals assign conservatives as being one dimensional. I would never go back into the building business, unless I had a superior idea of how to build a home that featured certain solar passive, and energy efficiencies that would attract that type buyer. Competition dictates those kinds of competitive advantages, and a competitor has to stand out.

We need it all to see where the free marketplace takes us. It cannot be dictated efficiently. Bulding codes, might seem to be the answer, and they are and will be passed, but I like better private initiative and profit as the incentive. It works every time, and we have enough regulations, inspections, and legal parameters to constrain it.

So far, US investment in alternatives are all talk and little action, while France, Japan and Germany move forward.

The “Energy Plus” Building Produces All Its Own Power

Juwi completes 40MW Waldpolenz plant - Photovoltaics International

New Building Lights Itself at Night : TreeHugger

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Methane is a "Fossil Fuel"!!!!!!!

The mere trace of faint methane particle in a substance is far from evidence that oil seeps up from the mantle of the earth in endless quantities. I know it feels good to tell yourself that there's plenty, but there isn't. There is alcohol in intersteller clouds but it doesn't prove the 'beer is from space' theory!

As for Saturn, you put a couple of billion tons of hydrogen and carbon together under enourmous pressure you will form lots of stuff.

I find it ironic that it was a rogue group of Soviet scientists who championed the "abiotic" theory of oil during the cold war to counter western science (and the west's expansion in the ME), and yet it's "drill-baby-drill" con men who adhere to communist propaganda to promote their agenda.

Abiotic oil theory has been countered and dismantled many times over. About the only pundit left who still clings to "abiotic oil" theory is documented racist Jerome Corsi. Thomas Gold did a 1998 book "The Deep Hot Biosphere," that became utterly embarrassing for him under peer review.

(I can't post links yet, but it's on energybulletin.net)

"The “Abiotic Oil” Controversy

even if oil were formed in the mantle, as more than one commenter pointed out, abiotic theorists have suggested no plausible means by which it could rise to the depths at which we find it without passing through intermediary regions in which the temperature would be too high and pressure too low for liquid hydrocarbons to survive).​

Regardless, abiotic-vs.-biotic theory of debate is pointless. Whatever the origin, the fact of the matter is that the rate of global discoveries has been in decline since the 1960s, while demand has exploded. This has NOTHING to do with bottlenecks on drilling permissions.

What's laughable in threads like these is that the original poster, an obvious Sarah Palin enthusiast, squawks about this "massive find" panacea, but conveniently never mentions the total proven reserves, nor does he acknowledge the world's (or just the U.S.'s) daily rate of consumption.

If he actually did that, and applied basic math, he would not be able to further lie to himself that this is more than a drop in the proverbial bucket.

Sure it is, sure it is.

The space program shows the the solar system reeks of what you morons call "fossil fuels" but it's only poor little Earth that lack the heat pressure and raw materials to produce it abiotically.

Saturn's Moon Titan reeks of "fossil fuels" has whole Lakes of it on the surface, but that can only mean that dinosaurs traveled to space to die on Titan and become "fossil fuels"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

In any event, the ethane lake was on Saturn's Moon, not on Saturn, Saturn probably has a core of diamond and solid "fossil fuels

 

[JiggsCasey]

Sure it is, sure it is.

The space program shows the the solar system reeks of what you morons call "fossil fuels" but it's only poor little Earth that lack the heat pressure and raw materials to produce it abiotically.

Saturn's Moon Titan reeks of "fossil fuels" has whole Lakes of it on the surface, but that can only mean that dinosaurs traveled to space to die on Titan and become "fossil fuels"

I think covering your ears, stomping in place and yelling "blah blah blah!!!" over and over again would have been more effective than this empty response above.

You officially have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to oil, global oil trade, and global oil demand -- not that there was any doubt.

It is interesting, limited poster, that you'll attach yourself entirely to science when it suits your premise, but reject it out of hand when it doesn't (climate change).

I'll let you punt to hollow personal attacks like "you're a socialist" and worse. It's what people like you do. Doesn't change the fact that your argument just got taken behind the woodshed.

Good luck with your long-debunked Soviet science regarding oil, though.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Sure it is, sure it is.

The space program shows the the solar system reeks of what you morons call "fossil fuels" but it's only poor little Earth that lack the heat pressure and raw materials to produce it abiotically.

Saturn's Moon Titan reeks of "fossil fuels" has whole Lakes of it on the surface, but that can only mean that dinosaurs traveled to space to die on Titan and become "fossil fuels"

I think covering your ears, stomping in place and yelling "blah blah blah!!!" over and over again would have been more effective than this empty response above.

You officially have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to oil, global oil trade, and global oil demand -- not that there was any doubt.

It is interesting, limited poster, that you'll attach yourself entirely to science when it suits your premise, but reject it out of hand when it doesn't (climate change).

I'll let you punt to hollow personal attacks like "you're a socialist" and worse. It's what people like you do. Doesn't change the fact that your argument just got taken behind the woodshed.

Good luck with your long-debunked Soviet science regarding oil, though.

Yeah, tell Titan it cant possibly have lakes of "Fossil fuels" because it lacks the dinosaurs to die and turn to "Fossil fuels" through a process that defies logic, common sense and scientific testing.

If all you need is corpses, heat and pressure, why cant anyone make fossil fuels in massive quantities?

 

[rdean]

Sure it is, sure it is.

The space program shows the the solar system reeks of what you morons call "fossil fuels" but it's only poor little Earth that lack the heat pressure and raw materials to produce it abiotically.

Saturn's Moon Titan reeks of "fossil fuels" has whole Lakes of it on the surface, but that can only mean that dinosaurs traveled to space to die on Titan and become "fossil fuels"

I think covering your ears, stomping in place and yelling "blah blah blah!!!" over and over again would have been more effective than this empty response above.

You officially have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to oil, global oil trade, and global oil demand -- not that there was any doubt.

It is interesting, limited poster, that you'll attach yourself entirely to science when it suits your premise, but reject it out of hand when it doesn't (climate change).

I'll let you punt to hollow personal attacks like "you're a socialist" and worse. It's what people like you do. Doesn't change the fact that your argument just got taken behind the woodshed.

Good luck with your long-debunked Soviet science regarding oil, though.

Yeah, tell Titan it cant possibly have lakes of "Fossil fuels" because it lacks the dinosaurs to die and turn to "Fossil fuels" through a process that defies logic, common sense and scientific testing.

If all you need is corpses, heat and pressure, why cant anyone make fossil fuels in massive quantities?

Please tell us "sweet crude" actually has "sugar" in it. Next, tell us you personally "tasted" it so you "know".

Gawd, Republicans are dumb.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I think covering your ears, stomping in place and yelling "blah blah blah!!!" over and over again would have been more effective than this empty response above.

You officially have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to oil, global oil trade, and global oil demand -- not that there was any doubt.

It is interesting, limited poster, that you'll attach yourself entirely to science when it suits your premise, but reject it out of hand when it doesn't (climate change).

I'll let you punt to hollow personal attacks like "you're a socialist" and worse. It's what people like you do. Doesn't change the fact that your argument just got taken behind the woodshed.

Good luck with your long-debunked Soviet science regarding oil, though.

Yeah, tell Titan it cant possibly have lakes of "Fossil fuels" because it lacks the dinosaurs to die and turn to "Fossil fuels" through a process that defies logic, common sense and scientific testing.

If all you need is corpses, heat and pressure, why cant anyone make fossil fuels in massive quantities?

Please tell us "sweet crude" actually has "sugar" in it. Next, tell us you personally "tasted" it so you "know".

Gawd, Republicans are dumb.

You still haven't figured out that methane is a "fossil fuel" amiright?

Deflect all you want, doofoid, I know you're full of crap AND ignorant, but don't worry, I won't tell any of the other poster what an idiot you are

 

[rdean]

Yeah, tell Titan it cant possibly have lakes of "Fossil fuels" because it lacks the dinosaurs to die and turn to "Fossil fuels" through a process that defies logic, common sense and scientific testing.

If all you need is corpses, heat and pressure, why cant anyone make fossil fuels in massive quantities?

Please tell us "sweet crude" actually has "sugar" in it. Next, tell us you personally "tasted" it so you "know".

Gawd, Republicans are dumb.

You still haven't figured out that methane is a "fossil fuel" amiright?

Deflect all you want, doofoid, I know you're full of crap AND ignorant, but don't worry, I won't tell any of the other poster what an idiot you are

Wow, amazing, truly amazing. You have this thing called the Internet. All you have to do is a search on "The Origin of Methane" and you can find out the different ways methane is produced. A couple of examples:

"If you put CO2 and hydrogen together, thermodynamics dictates that it has to go to methane," says Horita.

The reaction speed is dependent on pressure, temperature, and the presence of catalysts.

Researchers have found other ways to make methane, using different catalysts and minerals. In May 2004, Dionysis Foustoukos and William Seyfried Jr. of the University of Minnesota made methane, ethane and propane at 390 degrees C and 400 times the atmospheric pressure at Earth's surface, using a chromium-bearing mineral as catalyst.

In September 2004, Henry Scott of Indiana University at South Bend published a study which found that, by subjecting iron oxide, calcite, and water to the intense heat and pressure of Earth's mantle, methane formed.

http://www.redorbit.com/news/space/185170/origins_of_methane_on_earth/index.html

----------------------------

Do you believe that "earth" is the only planet in the universe?

I'm sure you believe that "Noah's Ark" is a true story. If you believe it and deny it, you lie to Gawd.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Deflect all you want, doofoid, I know you're full of crap AND ignorant, but don't worry, I won't tell any of the other poster what an idiot you are

My God, are you ever horrible at this. You offer a laughable extrapolation, you are shown that it means nothing, and then you just keep squawking the empty premise over and over again, pretending you never saw the counter argument. Standard con man strategy.

What they are saying is that they found Methane on Titan. Methane comes from a variety of sources, only one of which is living organisms.

Methane also comes from comets.

Methane also is expelled by volcanos.
sfgate.com.../chronicle/archive/2004/04/02/MNG4I5VJSC1.DTL

In fact, we've long known that methane was present on other planets (Neptune has a lot of atmospheric methane)

But, there's no crude oil on those planets/comets. So your convenient conclusion that methane is related to oil is wrong. Do you ever get tired of being proven wrong?

Every time I see one of your posts, you're either exaggerating, misrepresenting, straw manning, or out and out lying.

Turn off Fox News, read some books, and educate yourself before pontificating on random message boards behind the safety of your anonymous computer monitor.

 

[rdean]

Deflect all you want, doofoid, I know you're full of crap AND ignorant, but don't worry, I won't tell any of the other poster what an idiot you are

My God, are you ever horrible at this. You offer a laughable extrapolation, have it pointed out that it means nothing, and then you just keep squawking the empty premise over and over again, pretending you never saw the counter argument. Standard con man strategy.

What they are saying is that they found Methane on Titan. Methane comes from a variety of sources, only one of which is living organisms.

Methane also comes from comets.

Methane also is expelled by volcanos.
sfgate.com.../chronicle/archive/2004/04/02/MNG4I5VJSC1.DTL

In fact, we've long known that methane was present on other planets (Neptune has a lot of atmospheric methane)

But, there's no crude oil on those planets/comets. So your convenient conclusion that methane is related to oil is wrong. Do you ever get tired of being proven wrong?

Every time I see one of your posts, you're either exaggerating, misrepresenting, straw manning, or out and out lying.

Turn off Fox News, read some books, and educate yourself before pontificating on random message boards behind the safety of your anonymous computer monitor.

He's on a "crusade".

 

[FireFly]

It is fascinating to me how Democrats are so eager to scream man made global warming is coming because we burn to much fossil fuel. Then they also scream Peak Oil limited supply & restrict drilling to cause a limited supply crisis that they can profit from on the backs of the working class citizens.

They claim big government is the only thing that can save us from our selves. Nothing but a bunch of fear mongering. Democrats are caught in an obvious lie, because man can't cause global warming if he is running out of fossil fuel. This is nothing but a big Enron carbon swap tax & profit scheme for the elite oligarchy to enrich themselves by enslaving us. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFK-UTGH1Zw"]Enron[/ame]

 

[JiggsCasey]

It is fascinating to me how Democrats are so eager to scream man made global warming is coming because we burn to much fossil fuel. Then they also scream Peak Oil limited supply & restrict drilling to cause a limited supply crisis that they can profit from on the backs of the working class citizens.

They claim big government is the only thing that can save us from our selves. Nothing but a bunch of fear mongering. Democrats are caught in an obvious lie, because man can't cause global warming if he is running out of fossil fuel. This is nothing but a big Enron carbon swap tax & profit scheme for the elite oligarchy to enrich themselves by enslaving us.

This is one giant straw man argument. Who are you referring to in this thread?

Here's a few doses of reality before you speak further and essentially attempt to argue with your own curious belief system:

- while I believe Peak Oil trumps Climate Change, I am no Democrat... and non-conservatives don't have to believe both by default.
- I don't know many Democrats who have a clue about Peak Oil, let alone advocate that it's happening.
- you're trying to pretend that Peak Oil advocates are the same as enviros who are allegedly blocking drilling ambitions. They are two very different groups of people.
- anyone in the Peak Oil/Sustainability movement is precisely NOT in favor of big government, just better, more-honest government.
- We only reached peak this decade. So it's rather ridiculous to pretend that global climate must be impossible due to oil depletion. Regardless, reduction in fossil fuel burning will be a certainty, whether or not man signs off on it willfully.
- Enron was nose-deep in privatize-everything, GOP initiative, not Democrat initiative.

Other than that, your post was spot on.

 

[FireFly]

- We only reached peak this decade. So it's rather ridiculous to pretend that global climate must be impossible due to oil depletion. Regardless, reduction in fossil fuel burning will be a certainty, whether or not man signs off on it willfully.

You lack serious proof in your statement. Oil supply exceeded demand all the way up to 87.2 mbpd. Then the market crashed & consumption dropped so supply started dropping 2 months later.

Most of our elected officials anex more property for US National parks & ban drilling in them. They banned off shore drilling & hold up drilling leases.

The earth can provide all the oil we need. Politics & bankers control oil, & oil controls us citizens.

 

[MaggieMae]

It is fascinating to me how Democrats are so eager to scream man made global warming is coming because we burn to much fossil fuel. Then they also scream Peak Oil limited supply & restrict drilling to cause a limited supply crisis that they can profit from on the backs of the working class citizens.

They claim big government is the only thing that can save us from our selves. Nothing but a bunch of fear mongering. Democrats are caught in an obvious lie, because man can't cause global warming if he is running out of fossil fuel. This is nothing but a big Enron carbon swap tax & profit scheme for the elite oligarchy to enrich themselves by enslaving us.

This is one giant straw man argument. Who are you referring to in this thread?

Here's a few doses of reality before you speak further and essentially attempt to argue with your own curious belief system:

- while I believe Peak Oil trumps Climate Change, I am no Democrat... and non-conservatives don't have to believe both by default.
- I don't know many Democrats who have a clue about Peak Oil, let alone advocate that it's happening.
- you're trying to pretend that Peak Oil advocates are the same as enviros who are allegedly blocking drilling ambitions. They are two very different groups of people.
- anyone in the Peak Oil/Sustainability movement is precisely NOT in favor of big government, just better, more-honest government.
- We only reached peak this decade. So it's rather ridiculous to pretend that global climate must be impossible due to oil depletion. Regardless, reduction in fossil fuel burning will be a certainty, whether or not man signs off on it willfully.
- Enron was nose-deep in privatize-everything, GOP initiative, not Democrat initiative.

Other than that, your post was spot on.

Except for the sig line, that is. Not so "bright" after all.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It is fascinating to me how Democrats are so eager to scream man made global warming is coming because we burn to much fossil fuel. Then they also scream Peak Oil limited supply & restrict drilling to cause a limited supply crisis that they can profit from on the backs of the working class citizens.

They claim big government is the only thing that can save us from our selves. Nothing but a bunch of fear mongering. Democrats are caught in an obvious lie, because man can't cause global warming if he is running out of fossil fuel. This is nothing but a big Enron carbon swap tax & profit scheme for the elite oligarchy to enrich themselves by enslaving us.

This is one giant straw man argument. Who are you referring to in this thread?

Here's a few doses of reality before you speak further and essentially attempt to argue with your own curious belief system:

- while I believe Peak Oil trumps Climate Change, I am no Democrat... and non-conservatives don't have to believe both by default.
- I don't know many Democrats who have a clue about Peak Oil, let alone advocate that it's happening.
- you're trying to pretend that Peak Oil advocates are the same as enviros who are allegedly blocking drilling ambitions. They are two very different groups of people.
- anyone in the Peak Oil/Sustainability movement is precisely NOT in favor of big government, just better, more-honest government.
- We only reached peak this decade. So it's rather ridiculous to pretend that global climate must be impossible due to oil depletion. Regardless, reduction in fossil fuel burning will be a certainty, whether or not man signs off on it willfully.
- Enron was nose-deep in privatize-everything, GOP initiative, not Democrat initiative.

Other than that, your post was spot on.

Google: Robert Rubin Enron

Peak Oil !! EEeeek!!!

Fossil Fuels!! Eeek!!

Hungly Mungly CO2 Glacier Eating Spaghetti Monster!! Eeek!!

 

[KissMy]

It is fascinating to me how Democrats are so eager to scream man made global warming is coming because we burn to much fossil fuel. Then they also scream Peak Oil limited supply & restrict drilling to cause a limited supply crisis that they can profit from on the backs of the working class citizens.

They claim big government is the only thing that can save us from our selves. Nothing but a bunch of fear mongering. Democrats are caught in an obvious lie, because man can't cause global warming if he is running out of fossil fuel. This is nothing but a big Enron carbon swap tax & profit scheme for the elite oligarchy to enrich themselves by enslaving us.

This is one giant straw man argument. Who are you referring to in this thread?

Here's a few doses of reality before you speak further and essentially attempt to argue with your own curious belief system:

- while I believe Peak Oil trumps Climate Change, I am no Democrat... and non-conservatives don't have to believe both by default.
- I don't know many Democrats who have a clue about Peak Oil, let alone advocate that it's happening.
- you're trying to pretend that Peak Oil advocates are the same as enviros who are allegedly blocking drilling ambitions. They are two very different groups of people.
- anyone in the Peak Oil/Sustainability movement is precisely NOT in favor of big government, just better, more-honest government.
- We only reached peak this decade. So it's rather ridiculous to pretend that global climate must be impossible due to oil depletion. Regardless, reduction in fossil fuel burning will be a certainty, whether or not man signs off on it willfully.
- Enron was nose-deep in privatize-everything, GOP initiative, not Democrat initiative.

Other than that, your post was spot on.

Google: Robert Rubin Enron

Peak Oil !! EEeeek!!!

Fossil Fuels!! Eeek!!

Hungly Mungly CO2 Glacier Eating Spaghetti Monster!! Eeek!!

Next these Libtard Dumocrats will tell us that is was not their beloved Bill Clinton who created the Enron Loophole allowing them to profit by driving up energy prices & perpetuate a massive fraud on the American People.

President Bill Clinton signed into law H.R. 4577: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001. Consolidated in this bill was Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000

The Enron Loophole was part of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000

Enron gave $420,000 to Bill Clinton's party over three years & It donated over $100,000 to his inauguration festivities.

 

[JiggsCasey]

You lack serious proof in your statement. Oil supply exceeded demand all the way up to 87.2 mbpd. Then the market crashed & consumption dropped so supply started dropping 2 months later.

Your link is the vague homepage. Please be more specific about the page for which you're referring. Supply of what kind? Globally? Domestic?

Regardless, I believe global 'peak' preceded the market crash. Which makes your assumption of my opinion not only wrong, but moot.

Most of our elected officials anex more property for US National parks & ban drilling in them. They banned off shore drilling & hold up drilling leases.

delightful hyperbole, but this misses the mark of reality badly. ... You don't just drill and hope. You must prove the reserves and the parameters of any field. It costs a lot of money to drill and build the infrastructure required. You don't just pick up your straw and move to the next county like it's nothing. ...

But blaming everything on liberal lawmakers isn't much different then blaming gays or communists for everything.

Believe me, if there was an exploitative field of any significant size in the U.S., it would be drilled, and the enviros wouldn't stand a chance. ANWR is a kiddie pool, so is the underwater Gulf "find." ... We need an Olympic-sized find. ... That's why ANWR isn't worth the political fight.

The earth can provide all the oil we need.

Maybe for a planet of 1 billion people. But not 7. Still, I'm no eugenics advocate by ANY means.

Politics & bankers control oil, & oil controls us citizens.

You got that last part right, anyway. The first part, not so much.