http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/peak_oil/peak_oil_is_a_known_fraud.htm

The Jew lies to you. He tells you we better send our soldiers to die in Iraq or we'll run out of cheap oil and all heck will break loose. Thomas Gold's publications with ideas stolen from Russian scientific breakthroughs are the only light shed on the truth about oil's abiotic origins in the English language.
The challenge was taken up by a wide range of scientific disciplines, with hundreds of the top professionals in their fields contributing to the body of scientific research. By 1951, what has been called the Modern Russian-Ukrainian Theory of Deep, Abiotic Petroleum Origins was born. A healthy amount of scientific debate followed for the next couple of decades, during which time the theory, initially formulated by geologists, based on observational data, was validated through the rigorous quantitative work of chemists, physicists and thermodynamicists. For the last couple of decades, the theory has been accepted as established fact by virtually the entire scientific community of the (former) Soviet Union. It is backed up by literally thousands of published studies in prestigious, peer-reviewed scientific journals.

For over fifty years, Russian and Ukrainian scientists have added to this body of research and refined the Russian-Ukrainian theories. And for over fifty years, not a word of it has been published in the English language (except for a fairly recent, bastardized version published by astronomer Thomas Gold, who somehow forgot to credit the hundreds of scientists whose research he stole and then misrepresented).

This is not, by the way, just a theoretical model that the Russians and Ukrainians have established; the theories were put to practical use, resulting in the transformation of the Soviet Union - once regarded as having limited prospects, at best, for successful petroleum exploration - into a world-class petroleum producing, and exporting, nation.

J.F. Kenney spent some 15 years studying under some of the Russian and Ukrainian scientists who were key contributors to the modern petroleum theory. When Kenney speaks about petroleum origins, he is not speaking as some renegade scientist with a radical new theory; he is speaking to give voice to an entire community of scientists whose work has never been acknowledged in the West. Kenney writes passionately about that neglected body of research:
There's a reason why peak oil theory spreads like wildfire throughout the anti-war crowd. It is planted there to divert attention away from the aggression of the Jewish state of Israel that is the true reason for our troops being in Iraq.
Several readers have written to me, incidentally, with a variation of the following question: "How can you say that Peak Oil is being promoted to sell war when all of the websites promoting the notion of Peak Oil are stridently anti-war?"

But of course they are. That, you see, is precisely the point. What I was trying to say is that the notion of 'Peak Oil' is being specifically marketed to the anti-war crowd -- because, as we all know, the pro-war crowd doesn't need to be fed any additional justifications for going to war; any of the old lies will do just fine. And I never said that the necessity of war was being overtly sold. What I said, if I remember correctly, is that it is being sold with a wink and a nudge.

The point that I was trying to make is that it would be difficult to imagine a better way to implicitly sell the necessity of war, even while appearing to stake out a position against war, than through the promotion of the concept of 'Peak Oil.' After September 11, 2001, someone famously said that if Osama bin Laden didn't exist, the US would have had to invent him. I think the same could be said for 'Peak Oil.'
Moderators may want to transfer oil-related posts from "Myths of White Nationalism" to here since we try to stay on topic here in the Civil Forum.

I have stated this time and time again. That was something first conjured up by Nixon to drive gas prices up when in reality we have enough to do us 100 years without even exerting ourselves.

America is supposed to have something like a 10-year oil reserve. Not to mention all the oil in Texas and Alaska. Even WVA and KY has oil.

http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/peak_oil/peak_oil_is_a_known_fraud.htm

The Jew lies to you. He tells you we better send our soldiers to die in Iraq or we'll run out of cheap oil and all heck will break loose. Thomas Gold's publications with ideas stolen from Russian scientific breakthroughs are the only light shed on the truth about oil's abiotic origins in the English language.

There's a reason why peak oil theory spreads like wildfire throughout the anti-war crowd. It is planted there to divert attention away from the aggression of the Jewish state of Israel that is the true reason for our troops being in Iraq.
This it would not do. There's nothing about Peak Oil that diverts attention away from Israel. It provides an explanation for why the US went to war with Iraq just now. Israel control US politicians. Israel also will need oil to hold off the Arabs. Israel schemes 9-11 (with US government collaborators) to provide a pretext for middle eastern war, essentially trading the WTC towers for Iraq's oil. Israel will get a share of the stolen Iraqi oil.

Thomas Gold's theory of the non-biotic origin of oil is wrong. Volcanos don't vent methane primarily: volcanic exhaust is mostly CO2. That's because deep in the mantle (where all this "methane" is alleged to be), any actual methane would react with oxygen bearing minerals, with CO2 being the major product.

Jerry Abbott

This it would not do. There's nothing about Peak Oil that diverts attention away from Israel. It provides an explanation for why the US went to war with Iraq just now. Israel control US politicians. Israel also will need oil to hold off the Arabs. Israel schemes 9-11 (with US government collaborators) to provide a pretext for middle eastern war, essentially trading the WTC towers for Iraq's oil. Israel will get a share of the stolen Iraqi oil.

Thomas Gold's theory of the non-biotic origin of oil is wrong. Volcanos don't vent methane primarily: volcanic exhaust is mostly CO2. That's because deep in the mantle (where all this "methane" is alleged to be), any actual methane would react with oxygen bearing minerals, with CO2 being the major product.

Jerry Abbott
It's not Gold's theory. It's a Russian theory that has a lot more evidence backing it than the dinosaur goo theory. Gold's publications are all that's available in English, unfortunately. In Russia, they don't refer to scientific evidence that proves oil's abiotic origin as "Gold's theory."

The peak oil theory does divert attention from Israel. It's like saying "Israel may benefit, but we have to go to war in the Middle East or we won't have enough oil."

Joe Vialls recently wrote about it. When gas prices hit $5 a gallon, you'll be blaming it on "peak oil" instead of protesting the overconsumption oil companies are pushing to fatten their shareholder's dividends.

http://joevialls.altermedia.info/wecontrolamerica/peakoil.html
Professor Poleo makes it quite clear which direction the west needs to go in if it is to survive in the long term, and that is to follow Russia's example by sharply reducing domestic consumption. Back in 1990 America was using around 6 million barrels per day compared to Russia's 8.4 million, but how things have changed since then. Thirteen years later in 2003, American consumption was up to 9 million, while Russian consumption had been reduced to a mere 3.2 million. A few billion folk over there in America might like to walk around their houses and switch off any electrical appliances they don't actually need. Believe me, I can almost hear the oil surging through the pipelines in New York, and I live more than 12,000 miles away in Australia.
We need to follow Russia's example instead of buying into the peak oil scam.

So instead of spending profits for technical expertise, oil co. execs have been lining their (and shareholders) pockets. Is the new higher price of crude a reflection of their need to play catchup? Are we paying now for their failure to fund new technology? Are we concerned with the mideast's oil as a stop-gap, till we catch up?

So instead of spending profits for technical expertise, oil co. execs have been lining their (and shareholders) pockets. Is the new higher price of crude a reflection of their need to play catchup? Are we paying now for their failure to fund new technology? Are we concerned with the mideast's oil as a stop-gap, till we catch up?
I don't think catchup is possible anytime soon. The war is turning out to be complete failure.

It would be nice if the profits from higher crude prices went toward funding new technology, but I have my doubts.

It's not Gold's theory. It's a Russian theory that has a lot more evidence backing it than the dinosaur goo theory. Gold's publications are all that's available in English, unfortunately. In Russia, they don't refer to scientific evidence that proves oil's abiotic origin as "Gold's theory."
I don't care what they call it; the non-biotic theory of oil is wrong. Methane on Earth exists only as one of many fossil fuel compounds or as the result of industrial processes.

All primordial methane on Earth disappeared billions of years ago. In the atmosphere, it photodissociated and recombined in oxidized form, becoming carbon dioxide and water. Inside the mantle, it was thermally dissociated and became CO2 and water.

If there were lots of methane left inside the Earth, then methane would dominate ventilations of volcanic gas, which it does not. CO2 and water dominate volcanic gaseous vents.

In the atmospheres of some of the outer planets, there remains some primordial methane. That's because the solar flux is much less there than it is here.

The peak oil theory does divert attention from Israel. It's like saying "Israel may benefit, but we have to go to war in the Middle East or we won't have enough oil."
Even if the United States acquired the Middle East's oil effortlessly and at no cost, it would only stave off the collapse by maybe 50 years. That's less than one human lifespan. Most of this trouble with resource depletion was caused, less than a human lifespan ago, by policymakers who assumed that there never would be any resource depletion.

Joe Vialls recently wrote about it. When gas prices hit $5 a gallon, you'll be blaming it on "peak oil" instead of protesting the overconsumption oil companies are pushing to fatten their shareholder's dividends.

http://joevialls.altermedia.info/wecontrolamerica/peakoil.html

We need to follow Russia's example instead of buying into the peak oil scam.
I'm not certain who in Russia is pushing the nonsense. But even if the non-biotic theory of oil creation was correct, it would not matter from a practical point of view. However the oil was created, it is a fact that the existing terrestrial deposits of oil have been found and tapped. Drill as you might, you aren't going to find any more "middle easts" anywhere. Perhaps the oil will again evolve as a terrestrial energy reserve - either by the biotic or non-biotic mechanism - but it will be much too late in happening to matter to us.

Jerry Abbott

Jerry, you are way better educated than me, so I'd love for you to be able to convince me. All the methane is not dissolved in the atmosphere. Methane hydrate deposits occur in oceans around the world.
Also, you state that the methane in the mantle was thermally dissociated and rendered as water and C02. Then you state the exhuast from volcanoes is mostly water and CO2. Is it stored CO2 that is released, along with the water, or methane that has just been thermally dissociated? Doesn't that mean there is still some beneath the mantle?

Jerry, you are way better educated than me, so I'd love for you to be able to convince me. All the methane is not dissolved in the atmosphere. Methane hydrate deposits occur in oceans around the world.
Also, you state that the methane in the mantle was thermally dissociated and rendered as water and C02. Then you state the exhuast from volcanoes is mostly water and CO2. Is it stored CO2 that is released, along with the water, or methane that has just been thermally dissociated? Doesn't that mean there is still some beneath the mantle?
Immediately following the Big Bang, the only elements that were made was hydrogen and helium. In the early universe, there was no methane because there was no carbon.

Carbon was made inside massive stars near the end of their lives. When their hydrogen ran out, they started fusing together other elements to make yet heavier elements. These higher fusion stages required higher temperatures and pressures inside the star, which meant that the star had to be more massive to make the heaver elements.

Further, unless the star were at least six solar masses, it wouldn't explode as a supernova. That's the amount of mass needed to trigger the neutrino containment that results in the explosion. But there were stars heavier than six solar masses six billion years ago, and a six solar mass star only lives about 100 million years.

So by the time the sun formed, the interstellar medium had a certain amount of carbon in it. Carbon likes to bond with other atoms, and hydrogen was by far the most abundant other element around. So a lot of the carbon that was made inside stars ended up as methane CH4 in the interstellar medium.

Naturally, when the solar system formed, methane ended up as one of the constituants of planets. It was in the atmosphere of the Earth when it was very young. It remains in the atmospheres of the outer planets.

But Earth was close enough to the sun for radiation to break apart the small molecules, and before they could re-form, most of the carbon from the CH4 encountered at least one oxygen atom, which hijacked a seat or two around the carbon and prevented methane from reforming. Instead, the carbon is increasingly found in CO2 form rather than in CH4 form. This happened on Earth and on Mars. It happened on Venus, too, but that planet had a runaway greenhouse effect which made its atmosphere much thicker and the surface much hotter. Mercury formed too close to the sun to hang on to any atmosphere. The sun's heat boiled it all away.

The complex organic chemicals evolved in the oceans, where thermal currents could rotate the smaller molecules up for photochemical reactions, while the larger ones, with bigger electrostatic footprints (dipole electric fields) were more sticky and tended to win the competition for bottomspace in shallow water.

But anyway the CH4 that was in Earth's earliest atmosphere was converted into other things, mostly CO2. The same thing happened to the CH4 inside the Earth. There was once CH4 inside Earth's mantle. There no longer is. The CH4 that is sometimes outgassed is a fossil fuel, and it didn't come from mantle depths.

Methane hydrates are probably hydrated forms of fossil methane.

Jerry Abbott

Jerry did you see the national geographic issue recently about running out of oil? I looked it over but didnt read it all. I wonder if the matters you are writing about were espoused one way or another in that article.

Jerry did you see the national geographic issue recently about running out of oil? I looked it over but didnt read it all. I wonder if the matters you are writing about were espoused one way or another in that article.
I don't read National Geographic.

All the way back to the big bang to show there should be no methane left in the mantle. I know there are anaerobic bacteria. They give off methane. If cow flatulence can be considered as a significant source of methane, I would say microbes would be also. And that would be being produced right now. How did they get down to the mantle? Simple. Volcanoes.
As for carbon, how did the coal get underground? This topic, and your answers, have made me look at things I haven't thought about for ages. And creates more questions than it answers. What is the core of the Earth made of? Molten metal? How does that not cook off our atmosphere?
As I went through school, there were things they tried to teach us that I could not swallow. Dinosaurs moving slowly, being reptiles that need external warmth to move, was one. The teacher was wrong, and I was right. At 10. Columbus discovering America was another. Didn't make good sense. It was a crafted lie. Back to the topic at hand, I never believed the dead dino goo story about oil. How did it get below the water table? Huge inclusions caused by massive Earth upheavals seem the only logical route. I cannot believe even this theory explains the quantity of oil we have already used.
While I sincerely appreciate your attempts to help me see it your way, I remain unconvinced. Isn't there some quick calculation you can think of as a model to try to get a rough idea of what volume of oil has been extracted, and try to imagine the amount of biomatter that would have to have been subducted to create that volume?

Here's some more reading for anyone interested. http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Temp/Temp-TheMythOfPeakOil-ThomasA.htm Though it sounds in places like parts of my last post, I SWEAR I read it after posting.

I don't read National Geographic.

you might find this one issue worth reading. here is the intro to the article:

http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0406/feature5/

from that issue of National Geographic:

Below more than a mile of ocean and three more of mud and rock, the prize is waiting. At the surface a massive drilling vessel called the Discoverer Enterprise strains to reach it. It's the spring of 2003, and for more than two months now the Enterprise has been holding steady over a spot 120 miles (200 kilometers) southeast of New Orleans in the Gulf of Mexico. The ship is driving a well toward an estimated one billion barrels of oil below the seafloor—the biggest oil field discovered in United States territory in three decades.

The 835-foot (255-meter) Enterprise shudders every few minutes as its thrusters put out a burst of power to fight the strong current. The PA system crackles, warning of small amounts of gas bubbling from the deep Earth. And in the shadow of the 23-story-tall derrick, engineers and managers gather in worried knots. "We've got an unstable hole," laments Bill Kirton, who's overseeing the project for the oil giant BP.

The drill, suspended from the Enterprise's derrick through a swimming-pool-size gap in the hull, has penetrated 17,000 feet (5,000 meters) below the seafloor. Instead of boring straight down, it has swerved more than a mile sideways, around a massive plume of rock salt. But now, with 2,000 feet (600 meters) to go, progress is stalled. Water has begun seeping into the well from the surrounding rock, and the engineers are determined to stem its spread before drilling farther. Otherwise, the trickle of water could turn into an uncontrolled surge of crude. "There's a lot of oil down there wanting to come out," says Cecil Cheshier, a drilling supervisor, after struggling all night with the unruly hole. "You can cut corners and take chances—but that could cost you a lawsuit or cause a spill into the Gulf of Mexico, and then deepwater drilling gets shut down."

The troubled well is just one of 25 that BP plans to drill in the giant field, called Thunder Horse, which sprawls over 54 square miles (140 square kilometers) of seafloor. The entire project, including a floating platform half again as wide as a football field that will collect the oil from individual wells and pipe it to shore starting next year, will cost four billion dollars. But if the wells live up to expectations, each will eventually gush tens of thousands of barrels a day. "That's like a well in Saudi Arabia," says Cheshier. "We hardly get those in the U.S. anymore."

You wouldn't know it from the hulking SUVs and traffic-clogged freeways of the United States, but we're in the twilight of plentiful oil. There's no global shortage yet; far from it. The world can still produce so much crude that the current price of about $30 for a 42-gallon barrel would plummet if the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) did not limit production. This abundance of oil means, for now, that oil is cheap. In the United States, where gasoline taxes average 43 cents a gallon (instead of dollars, as in Europe and Japan), a gallon of gasoline can be cheaper than a bottle of water—making it too cheap for most people to bother conserving. While oil demand is up everywhere, the U.S. remains the king of consumers, slurping up a quarter of the world's oil—about three gallons a person every day—even though it has just 5 percent of the population.

Yet as the Enterprise drillers know, slaking the world's oil thirst is harder than it used to be. The old sources can't be counted on anymore. On land the lower 48 states of the U.S. are tapped out, producing less than half the oil they did at their peak in 1970. Production from the North Slope of Alaska and the North Sea of Europe, burgeoning oil regions 20 years ago, is in decline. Unrest in Venezuela and Nigeria threatens the flow of oil. The Middle East remains the mother lode of crude, but war and instability underscore the perils of depending on that region.

And so oil companies are searching for new supplies and braving high costs, both human and economic. Making gambles like Thunder Horse and venturing into West Africa and Russia, they are still finding oil in quantities to gladden a Hummer owner's heart. But in the end the quest for more cheap oil will prove a losing game: Not just because oil consumption imposes severe costs on the environment, health, and taxpayers, but also because the world's oil addiction is hastening a day of reckoning.

Humanity's way of life is on a collision course with geology—with the stark fact that the Earth holds a finite supply of oil. The flood of crude from fields around the world will ultimately top out, then dwindle. It could be 5 years from now or 30: No one knows for sure, and geologists and economists are embroiled in debate about just when the "oil peak" will be upon us. But few doubt that it is coming. "In our lifetime," says economist Robert K. Kaufmann of Boston University, who is 46, "we will have to deal with a peak in the supply of cheap oil."

"oil peak" instead of "peak oil". Cute.17+2=19,000 feet. National Geo fuels the panic. Why don't you read it, if I may ask? Because it's full of globalist crap, perhaps?

As the volume of available oil found in Russia sky-rockets -- the coming oil shortage you know -- they are planning great new pipelines to handle the output. Gas what? The mostly jew oil barons of that country are going to build a pipeline to an Arctic port so as to make it more cheaply available to their sworn "enemy", the Jew Ass Oi Vey. Russia ranks #2, after Saudi Arabia, in the world oil export business.

The "collapse" of the Soviet Union meant not much more than the bosses changing their costumes.

In his The Enemy of Europe, Francis Parker Yockey points an accusing finger at the United States of America. The friend of Europe was supposed to be the Soviet Union. This was based upon the foolish notion, also shared by Dr. William Pierce and "Wilmot Robertson", that the U.S.S.R. was relatively free of jews and their power of the purse.