Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 5:56 am

I have observe that current fossil fuel theory starts from 10 not from 1 . it is very much scientific from 10 to 100 but from 1 to 10 it is EMPTY . from 1 to 10 current abiotic theory is very much scientific . so putting both together we can easily conclude that ABIOTIC HYDROCARBONS HAS BEEN EXPELLED FROM SEDIMENTARY SOURCE ROCKS AND TRAP IN THE RESERVOIR ROCKS TO FORM MAJORITY COMMERCIAL OILS . current fossil fuel theory is a big mistake only .

Unread post by **starbiter** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 6:14 am

sureshbansal342 wrote:I have observe that current fossil fuel theory starts from 10 not from 1 . it is very much scientific from 10 to 100 but from 1 to 10 it is EMPTY . from 1 to 10 current abiotic theory is very much scientific . so putting both together we can easily conclude that ABIOTIC HYDROCARBONS HAS BEEN EXPELLED FROM SEDIMENTARY SOURCE ROCKS AND TRAP IN THE RESERVOIR ROCKS TO FORM MAJORITY COMMERCIAL OILS . current fossil fuel theory is a big mistake only .

I noticed You don't mention catastrophic comet oil as an option.

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 10:36 pm

starbiter wrote:
sureshbansal342 wrote:I have observe that current fossil fuel theory starts from 10 not from 1 . it is very much scientific from 10 to 100 but from 1 to 10 it is EMPTY . from 1 to 10 current abiotic theory is very much scientific . so putting both together we can easily conclude that ABIOTIC HYDROCARBONS HAS BEEN EXPELLED FROM SEDIMENTARY SOURCE ROCKS AND TRAP IN THE RESERVOIR ROCKS TO FORM MAJORITY COMMERCIAL OILS . current fossil fuel theory is a big mistake only .
I noticed You don't mention catastrophic comet oil as an option.

please send me more suitable link for reference .

Unread post by **starbiter** » Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:38 am

sureshbansal342 wrote:
starbiter wrote:
sureshbansal342 wrote:I have observe that current fossil fuel theory starts from 10 not from 1 . it is very much scientific from 10 to 100 but from 1 to 10 it is EMPTY . from 1 to 10 current abiotic theory is very much scientific . so putting both together we can easily conclude that ABIOTIC HYDROCARBONS HAS BEEN EXPELLED FROM SEDIMENTARY SOURCE ROCKS AND TRAP IN THE RESERVOIR ROCKS TO FORM MAJORITY COMMERCIAL OILS . current fossil fuel theory is a big mistake only .
I noticed You don't mention catastrophic comet oil as an option.
please send me more suitable link for reference .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp68Fx_vKgA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xJ8AdqgZBM

Hope this helps. There are links provided.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIJw7e54jq8 Coal

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Tue Mar 24, 2015 5:43 am

starbiter wrote:
sureshbansal342 wrote:
starbiter wrote:
sureshbansal342 wrote:I have observe that current fossil fuel theory starts from 10 not from 1 . it is very much scientific from 10 to 100 but from 1 to 10 it is EMPTY . from 1 to 10 current abiotic theory is very much scientific . so putting both together we can easily conclude that ABIOTIC HYDROCARBONS HAS BEEN EXPELLED FROM SEDIMENTARY SOURCE ROCKS AND TRAP IN THE RESERVOIR ROCKS TO FORM MAJORITY COMMERCIAL OILS . current fossil fuel theory is a big mistake only .
I noticed You don't mention catastrophic comet oil as an option.
please send me more suitable link for reference .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp68Fx_vKgA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xJ8AdqgZBM

Hope this helps. There are links provided.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIJw7e54jq8 Coal

Thanks , only nI have to say we need new balanced hypothesis between the both that can respect the strong evidences of both biotic v/s abiotic .

Unread post by **starbiter** » Tue Mar 24, 2015 6:25 am

I think biotic oil is a non starter. How many dying creatures are turned to oil today? Nature is efficient.

Defeating fossil fuel theories is not something to gloat over. It's like beating a dim child at chess.

The position/location of the oil we find and use today implies it came from above and ran down rivers into lakes.

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Tue Mar 24, 2015 8:39 am

starbiter wrote:I think biotic oil is a non starter. How many dying creatures are turned to oil today? Nature is efficient.

Defeating fossil fuel theories is not something to gloat over. It's like beating a dim child at chess.

The position/location of the oil we find and use today implies it came from above and ran down rivers into lakes.

I think all followers of abiotic theory should unite at one. Stage. Anyone interested can send me a mail to unite all.

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Tue Mar 24, 2015 11:10 pm

starbiter wrote:I think biotic oil is a non starter. How many dying creatures are turned to oil today? Nature is efficient.

Defeating fossil fuel theories is not something to gloat over. It's like beating a dim child at chess.

The position/location of the oil we find and use today implies it came from above and ran down rivers into lakes.

If we want to defeat the fossil fuel theory .we should take following steps .
1. we should unite at one international stage .
2. we should learn how to respect some strong evidences by fossil fuel theory ,like expulsion of majority commercial oils from sedimentary source rocks . ( expulsion of hydrocarbons from sedimentary source rocks do not scientifically prove the biogenic origin of oils )
3. They are too much in numbers and pre mind set up is a big problem . they have grown up by reading the fossil fuel theory from school time , so we should have lot patience only .
4. In my opinion earlier followers of abiotic theory has done a big mistake not to respect the method suggested by fossil fuel theory to find new locations of oils and failed to be listened . there is no need to suggest another method to find commercial oils as existing method suggested by fossil fuel theory is correct but some more signatures can be added .
5. we should conduct some joint experiments in labs to permanent quiet them as i have some ideas and need team work and labs with appropriate samples .
6.some time ago there was a discussion at AAPG BLOG " DISCUSS ORIGIN OF PETROLEUM ..... IS IT ORGANIC OR INORGANIC " this discussion continued for three years and longest discussion in the history of AAPG and only i fight as followers of abiotic theory and no other supported me ,while i make requests to many peoples . this is not fair .

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Mon Apr 20, 2015 6:09 am

http://www.principia-scientific.org/the ... rbons.html

Unread post by **starbiter** » Mon Apr 20, 2015 6:25 am

sureshbansal342 wrote:http://www.principia-scientific.org/the ... rbons.html

So according to this there are two options, dinosaur/fossil oil, or deep Earth abiotic oil. Seems You haven't heard a word i'm saying about catastrophic comet oil. Sort of like a horse with blinders. What catastrophe?

Do You ever consider the EU paradigm, while posting on this EU forum?

michael steinbacher

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Sat Jun 06, 2015 5:32 am

catastrophic comet oil ?? please in details

Unread post by **starbiter** » Sat Jun 06, 2015 8:28 am

starbiter wrote:
sureshbansal342 wrote:http://www.principia-scientific.org/the ... rbons.html

So according to this there are two options, dinosaur/fossil oil, or deep Earth abiotic oil. Seems You haven't heard a word i'm saying about catastrophic comet oil. Sort of like a horse with blinders. What catastrophe?

Do You ever consider the EU paradigm, while posting on this EU forum?

michael steinbacher

http://www.eu-geology.com/?page_id=317

Also, please see the naphtha section of Worlds in Collision. It rained oil for days and nights, unless the survivors were big kidders.

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 11:02 pm

http://www.eu-geology.com/?page_id=317
This link is not working please

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 11:31 pm

No doubt current fossil fuel theory is the weakest point of modern science and major obstacle in further discoveries .

sureshbansal342 · Unread post by **sureshbansal342** » Mon Jun 08, 2015 1:22 am

Existence of fossil fuel theory is there because nobody has given serious intention in the formation of kerogen,bitumen and thus productive sedimentary source rocks . Earlier there was long discussion about true origin of hydrocarbons at AAPG blog and i asked them to prove the biogenic origin of kerogen and bitumen . they have not given any satisfactory reply . it seems to me current fossil fuel theory is standing in the air without legs . first portion of this theory is EMPTY . This was the longest discussion with 3290 comments .

Thunderbolts Forum (v2.0)

Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Who is online