"FOSSIL FUEL" - AN OXYMORON

ChemEngineer

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2019
6,100
5,943
1,940
Fossil Fuel is an Oxymoron


fosĀ·sil [ĖˆfƤs(ə)l]
NOUN
the remains or impression of a prehistoric organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock:
"sites rich in fossils" Ā· "a fossil fish"


Neither crude oil nor natural gas is ā€œin petrified form.ā€ One is a liquid and one is a gas.

The theory of trees, plants and animals dying eons ago and being compressed into crude oil and natural gas, which are all then being covered by miles of strata and/or water is pseudoscience. Bacteria and fungi were some of the first organisms on earth, and consume dead plant and animal matter beginning immediately after they die. Nowhere on earth is there now the slightest hint of large masses of plant or animal matter being compressed into ā€œfossil fuel.ā€

ā€œHow then did crude oil, natural gas, and coal get here and in such amazing abundance?ā€ I submit that we do not know any naturalistic process. The only thing that makes sense is that Natureā€™s God, the Brilliant Creator, put all of these things here for us. If there is no plausible ā€œscientific explanation,ā€ donā€™t fabricate one. Thatā€™s not science, itā€™s desperation.
 
Fossil Fuel is an Oxymoron


fosĀ·sil [ĖˆfƤs(ə)l]
NOUN
the remains or impression of a prehistoric organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock:
"sites rich in fossils" Ā· "a fossil fish"


Neither crude oil nor natural gas is ā€œin petrified form.ā€ One is a liquid and one is a gas.

The theory of trees, plants and animals dying eons ago and being compressed into crude oil and natural gas, which are all then being covered by miles of strata and/or water is pseudoscience. Bacteria and fungi were some of the first organisms on earth, and consume dead plant and animal matter beginning immediately after they die. Nowhere on earth is there now the slightest hint of large masses of plant or animal matter being compressed into ā€œfossil fuel.ā€

ā€œHow then did crude oil, natural gas, and coal get here and in such amazing abundance?ā€ I submit that we do not know any naturalistic process. The only thing that makes sense is that Natureā€™s God, the Brilliant Creator, put all of these things here for us. If there is no plausible ā€œscientific explanation,ā€ donā€™t fabricate one. Thatā€™s not science, itā€™s desperation.

Don't forget to thank the gods for earthquakes, tornadoes, floods and oh yeah, that blueprint for the cancer cell.
 
Fossil Fuel is an Oxymoron


fosĀ·sil [ĖˆfƤs(ə)l]
NOUN
the remains or impression of a prehistoric organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock:
"sites rich in fossils" Ā· "a fossil fish"


Neither crude oil nor natural gas is ā€œin petrified form.ā€ One is a liquid and one is a gas.

The theory of trees, plants and animals dying eons ago and being compressed into crude oil and natural gas, which are all then being covered by miles of strata and/or water is pseudoscience. Bacteria and fungi were some of the first organisms on earth, and consume dead plant and animal matter beginning immediately after they die. Nowhere on earth is there now the slightest hint of large masses of plant or animal matter being compressed into ā€œfossil fuel.ā€

ā€œHow then did crude oil, natural gas, and coal get here and in such amazing abundance?ā€ I submit that we do not know any naturalistic process. The only thing that makes sense is that Natureā€™s God, the Brilliant Creator, put all of these things here for us. If there is no plausible ā€œscientific explanation,ā€ donā€™t fabricate one. Thatā€™s not science, itā€™s desperation.

Really? You really came on here to show your ignorance?
 
Fossil Fuel is an Oxymoron


fosĀ·sil [ĖˆfƤs(ə)l]
NOUN
the remains or impression of a prehistoric organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock:
"sites rich in fossils" Ā· "a fossil fish"


Neither crude oil nor natural gas is ā€œin petrified form.ā€ One is a liquid and one is a gas.

The theory of trees, plants and animals dying eons ago and being compressed into crude oil and natural gas, which are all then being covered by miles of strata and/or water is pseudoscience. Bacteria and fungi were some of the first organisms on earth, and consume dead plant and animal matter beginning immediately after they die. Nowhere on earth is there now the slightest hint of large masses of plant or animal matter being compressed into ā€œfossil fuel.ā€

ā€œHow then did crude oil, natural gas, and coal get here and in such amazing abundance?ā€ I submit that we do not know any naturalistic process. The only thing that makes sense is that Natureā€™s God, the Brilliant Creator, put all of these things here for us. If there is no plausible ā€œscientific explanation,ā€ donā€™t fabricate one. Thatā€™s not science, itā€™s desperation.
It's a hot button issue, and at the same time we know that Saturn's moon Titan has more oil than the earth --no dinosaurs there.

Even if it were a problem that some/most oil on earth came from fossils, then we'd have to address the problem of other fossil resources like concrete are created by coral fossils. Nobody seems to be concerned w/ "fossile construction materials."
 
It's a hot button issue, and at the same time we know that Saturn's moon Titan has more oil than the earth --no dinosaurs there.

Even if it were a problem that some/most oil on earth came from fossils, then we'd have to address the problem of other fossil resources like concrete are created by coral fossils. Nobody seems to be concerned w/ "fossile construction materials."

The atheist geniuses will propose that the hydrocarbons on Titan simply rained down from the compressed phytoplanktons in Titan's sky. Time and again I have suggested that they demonstrate their superlative intellects by writing something original and scientific. They respond with ..... nothing, because they have nothing.

http://Irrational-Atheism.blogspot.com
 
The atheist geniuses will propose that the hydrocarbons on Titan simply rained down from the compressed phytoplanktons in Titan's sky. Time and again I have suggested that they demonstrate their superlative intellects by writing something original and scientific. They respond with ..... nothing, because they have nothing.

http://Irrational-Atheism.blogspot.com
Let's see how we resolve this dilemma.

1. The ranting of a religious extremist / Harun Yahya groupie,
or
2. The evidence based disciplines of science.

Decisions, decisions.
 
The atheist geniuses will propose that the hydrocarbons on Titan simply rained down from the compressed phytoplanktons in Titan's sky. Time and again I have suggested that they demonstrate their superlative intellects by writing something original and scientific. They respond with ..... nothing, because they have nothing.

http://Irrational-Atheism.blogspot.com
My experience is that the AGW people don't know or don't even want to talk about the oil we've found throughout the solar system. It's just like so many "inconvenient" realities they run into.

Soviet Socialism gave the atheists a bad rep, but my take is that it was the Commies that brought down the atheists and not the other way around. Like, there are good, smart, cooperative, and rational atheists, tho I'd say that people in general are good.
 
My experience is that the AGW people don't know or don't even want to talk about the oil we've found throughout the solar system. It's just like so many "inconvenient" realities they run into.

Soviet Socialism gave the atheists a bad rep, but my take is that it was the Commies that brought down the atheists and not the other way around. Like, there are good, smart, cooperative, and rational atheists, tho I'd say that people in general are good.
Methane is not really comparable to the crude oil we extract. But it is likely that carbon based life exists elsewhere in the Galaxy, so it is likely that complex hydrocarbons could also exit on other planets.
 
Methane is not really comparable to the crude oil we extract. But it is likely that carbon based life exists elsewhere in the Galaxy, so it is likely that complex hydrocarbons could also exit on other planets.
The Cassini numbers proved more than methane. The press releases mentioned ethane also and plus fact that it's in liquid form in huge deep oceans. The oceans tell us that somewhere in the soup are propane, octane --all the way down to asphalt and paraffin. While we got ample evidence of hydrocarbons there's no evidence of life, past or present
 
The Cassini numbers proved more than methane. The press releases mentioned ethane also and plus fact that it's in liquid form in huge deep oceans. The oceans tell us that somewhere in the soup are propane, octane --all the way down to asphalt and paraffin. While we got ample evidence of hydrocarbons there's no evidence of life, past or present
Methane and ethene are simple compounds and what is in the oceans or soup is speculation.
 
Bacteria and fungi were some of the first organisms on earth, and consume dead plant and animal matter beginning immediately after they die. Nowhere on earth is there now the slightest hint of large masses of plant or animal matter being compressed into ā€œfossil fuel.ā€

Trees evolved to produce lignin ... and it took microbes 60 million years to catch up and be able to consume lignin ... all that wood laying on the ground and covered with dirt for that long ... simple matter of conservation of matter, where's that carbon going to go? ...

"The large coal deposits of the Carboniferous may owe their existence primarily to two factors. The first of these is the appearance of wood tissue and bark-bearing trees. The evolution of the wood fiber lignin and the bark-sealing, waxy substance suberin variously opposed decay organisms so effectively that dead materials accumulated long enough to fossilise on a large scale."
-- Carboniferous - Wikipedia

This is where SOME fossil fuel comes from ...

"Fossil" and "fuel" are not opposites ... the term is paradoxical, not an oxymoron ...
 
"Fossil" and "fuel" are not opposites ... the term is paradoxical, not an oxymoron ...

"Opposites" is your word, not mine.

Oxymorons are obviously paradoxical. That's what makes them oxymorons.

paradoxical: seemingly absurd or self-contradictory:


oxymoron: a figure of speech, usually one or two words, in which seemingly contradictory terms appear side-by-side.
This contradiction is also known as a paradox.
 
"Opposites" is your word, not mine.

Oxymorons are obviously paradoxical. That's what makes them oxymorons.

paradoxical: seemingly absurd or self-contradictory:


oxymoron: a figure of speech, usually one or two words, in which seemingly contradictory terms appear side-by-side.
This contradiction is also known as a paradox.

[shrugs shoulders] ... an oxymoron is two words that are opposites that when put together (usually) forms a third phrase ... like jumbo shrimp ... `jumbo` and `shrimp` are opposites but together they mean something altogether different, in this case an aquatic animal ...

Awful good ...
Alone together ...
Screaming parenthetically ...

[giggle] ...

Business ethics ...
 
Methane and ethene are simple compounds and what is in the oceans or soup is speculation.
--and calling it "speculation" makes it sound bad w/o having to think. Like, I can say your statement about what's in the soup is "speculation" but that too would be silly.

Fact: it's not possible to have massive oceans of hydrocarbons together w/o having at least some of the molecules form longer bonds. The growth in the bonds is an inevitable consequence that goes far beyond "speculation".
 

Forum List

Back
Top