Is Crued Oil a Fosil Fuel or is it abiotic

Status
Not open for further replies.
I see a list of references, but zero links and most importantly zero calculations previously brought up. Zero summary, zero equations.
 
No competing with a belief based system, be it carbon dating, atmospheric samples trapped in ice cores from prehistoric times, or any other tool available.

I have wondered if heavy combustion of fossil fuels will throw off carbon dating of our bodies along with other relics our fossil fuel age for many years into the future.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Nyogtha
Link to calculations mentioned?


The equations are in the papers and I am not doing anyone's homework for them.
smile.gif
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Nyogtha

...I have wondered if heavy combustion of fossil fuels will throw off carbon dating of our bodies along with other relics our fossil fuel age for many years into the future.


If the C14/C12 ratio is assumed to be constant, and if the assumed cosmic ray flux is assumed to be constant, why should it?
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Nyogtha
Link to calculations mentioned?


The equations are in the papers and I am not doing anyone's homework for them.
smile.gif


A fascinating response from someone who has asked the same of others. Typing calculations or even posting a pic takes so little efgort. I do not subscribe to your belief vased system, and you choose not to post what you yourself chose to mention - calculations.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Nyogtha

...I have wondered if heavy combustion of fossil fuels will throw off carbon dating of our bodies along with other relics our fossil fuel age for many years into the future.


If the C14/C12 ratio is assumed to be constant, and if the assumed cosmic ray flux is assumed to be constant, why should it?



Post up your basis for C14 half-life, why you assume cosmic ray flux constant in the face of evidence of atmospheric composition change with time from ice cores, for review as homework.
 
Originally Posted By: Nyogtha
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Nyogtha
Link to calculations mentioned?


The equations are in the papers and I am not doing anyone's homework for them.
smile.gif


A fascinating response from someone who has asked the same of others. Typing calculations or even posting a pic takes so little efgort. I do not subscribe to your belief vased system, and you choose not to post what you yourself chose to mention - calculations.


We're talking science here, Bro Nyo, not your belief system so I recommend you keep other forbotten topics out of the post.


So you don't believe the scientific papers and their calculations? Your loss.
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule


If the C14/C12 ratio is assumed to be constant, and if the assumed cosmic ray flux is assumed to be constant, why should it?



Should have read:
Quote:
If the C14/C12 ratio is assumed to be constant, and if the assumed cosmic ray flux is assumed to be constant, why shouldn't it?


My point is (was) if the cosmic ray flux HAS NOT been constant then the C14/C12 ratios would be skewed.
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Iowegian
Coal fossils and seapage that eliminates the possibility of a finite quantity of oil.

Yes this rock called earth has a finite quantity of anything but I am talking about the oil reserves specifically.

Is it possible that, as another poster put it, oil is both biotic and abiotic?



Owing to the high amount of carbon atoms in coal and other fossil fuels, and the limited amount of ocean biotics, and calculated amount of vegetation on an older earth, I think all fossil fuels have been enriched with deep earth methanes.


You brought your own belief system into this thread with your post Mr. Kule, bold red emphasis mine, reinforced by choice of not posting equations / calculations you chose to mention.

With nothing more than the previously highly media publicized "hole in the ozone layer", any assumption cosmic ray flux in our atmosphere to be constant is most curious.

For me, it stands to reason that dumping a considerably measurable amount of C12 into the atmosphere changes the ratio of C12/ C14 for plants to ingest via photosynthesis, especially since C14 has to be converted to CO2 before it could be put into the food chain, while CO2 from combusted fossil fuel is immediately available for phoyosynthetic uptake, and at the lowest layer of the atmosphere when most is emitted (I'll exclude aircraft emissions from lowest level). I don't see how that can't skew the traditional C12 / C14 ratio ingested by living matter used in carbon dating for use on current life.
 
Last edited:
Nyogtha,
it's a good point, and one that I'd mentally skirted around a number of times until your post.

If the stuff has been in the ground for much longer than we've been around, and the C14 is therefore "depleted"...then we change the atmospheric composition by around half, primarily with depleted carbon, then surely what's laid down today looks older than the same tree grown 200 years ago.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Nyogtha,
it's a good point, and one that I'd mentally skirted around a number of times until your post.

If the stuff has been in the ground for much longer than we've been around, and the C14 is therefore "depleted"...then we change the atmospheric composition by around half, primarily with depleted carbon, then surely what's laid down today looks older than the same tree grown 200 years ago.
I learned that in biology 101 way back then.
 
Crude oil is the ocean bottom silt, dead sea critters, plankton, etc. Which due to plate tectonics is subducted under plates and subjected to heat, pressure over time, geologic time. Coal is land vegetation subjected to the same process, but over millions of yrs , not billions.
27.gif
 
As far as deep earth methane "enrichment" THEORIES, if the matter at the Mohorovicic Discontinuity was so porous as to allow this to occur, why is vulcanism so active along plate boundaries? Wouldn't magma itself ooze along those same porous oathways, relieving such eruption pressures, or alternately, blocking off those pathways?

Just because something's published does not make it fact. There are historical bases of calculations that a man couldn't breathe at speeds of 60 MPH or greater as a great example. NASA wasted a lot of time and money on a mission in the not too distant past due to calculations they believed to be accurate but the real world proved to be erroneous.I put forward L. Ron Hubbard as an empirical example from recent history as a highly published individual. I do not subscribe to that belief system either.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: phogstenjr
The abiotic theory of the origin of oil
that oil and natural gas are abiotic products (generated from inorganic matter within the earth's mantle), not 'fossil fuels' that are biologically created by the debris of dead dinosaurs and ancient forests!

What do you believe?



I believe everyone has an agenda when doing a study. On something as old as oil and coal, you'll always find people agreeing and disagreeing, due to their own personal believe and conflict of interests, like all things in life.

The main question is: does it matter it is one way or another? If you cannot "make" more oil at the price you can afford, it is as good as it not being there. It doesn't benefit me one cent if earth can create it every 2M years or if it was just a bunch of CO2 trapped in the crust and replenished every 2M years. Either way it still takes 2M years.

It also doesn't matter to me whether the same amount of CO2 I generate from the same oil well, was from dead biomass from 2M years ago, or from trapped CO2 "baked" by lava 2M years ago.


I don't care. You may, but I don't.
 
A dead mouse with a tray under it planted in the earth will not produce any oil into the tray. Dead sea life the same thing. Why? all is eaten by something, in the end bacteria. Crude is not dead animals. It is manufactured by the high pressures and heat and deep H2o, and other minerals, yeah remember the term "Mineral Oil" that is what it is. Not some religious term called fossil fuel.
 
Originally Posted by Exhaustgases
A dead mouse with a tray under it planted in the earth will not produce any oil into the tray. Dead sea life the same thing. Why? all is eaten by something, in the end bacteria. Crude is not dead animals. It is manufactured by the high pressures and heat and deep H2o, and other minerals, yeah remember the term "Mineral Oil" that is what it is. Not some religious term called fossil fuel.


Why then can you see remnants of the plants that became coal if it all should have been eaten by the bacteria ?

Coal is a "mineral" but it's clearly of biological origin.
 
Originally Posted by Shannow
Originally Posted by Exhaustgases
A dead mouse with a tray under it planted in the earth will not produce any oil into the tray. Dead sea life the same thing. Why? all is eaten by something, in the end bacteria. Crude is not dead animals. It is manufactured by the high pressures and heat and deep H2o, and other minerals, yeah remember the term "Mineral Oil" that is what it is. Not some religious term called fossil fuel.


Why then can you see remnants of the plants that became coal if it all should have been eaten by the bacteria ?

Coal is a "mineral" but it's clearly of biological origin.

We need to look at why there are belts of Coal . If the dead plants etc were exposed to 02 the aerobic bacteria would have eaten it .if there was minimal 02 the Anaerobic bacteria would have eaten it. If it was covered and there was no air the Aerobic would start until it died they the Anaerobic would work until it died then I can't say what happens after that but until I find out exactly I'll call in a miracle of the Earth.
 
Some coal may or may not be something that was living. Oil is found at depths where nothing can leak there, due to the layers of hard rock, clay etc. Clay alone will stop and hold most anything, except very hot nuclear material from say fukushima. Oil is constantly being produced by heat and pressure and H2o and minerals in the slurry.
 
Originally Posted by Exhaustgases
Some coal may or may not be something that was living. Oil is found at depths where nothing can leak there, due to the layers of hard rock, clay etc. Clay alone will stop and hold most anything, except very hot nuclear material from say fukushima. Oil is constantly being produced by heat and pressure and H2o and minerals in the slurry.


See, these discussions always end up including some "imaginary friend", who made things just right...but always skirting around the fringes of the actual science and geology, with may, might, believe, methane augmented to try to make it seem like there's conjecture about certain things...because really, the imaginary friend did it...and not that long ago.

There's certainly abiotic oil...chemical processes and equilibrium demand it...but to claim it's ALL abiotic is imaginary friend time.

Coal...we can trace it's provenance through it's make-up and organic structure through the grades, and know that what's anthracite was once akin to lignite, and why the same coal seam that they mine here, 2400 feet above sea level extends another few hundred miles inland, a few hundred miles seaboard, and disappears under the oceam some 3,000 feet lower than here.

All covered in ...sedimentary rock, from when it was a giant flood plain...multiple seams, separated in time, and moved about by geological process.
 
Originally Posted by CT8
We need to look at why there are belts of Coal . If the dead plants etc were exposed to 02 the aerobic bacteria would have eaten it .if there was minimal 02 the Anaerobic bacteria would have eaten it. If it was covered and there was no air the Aerobic would start until it died they the Anaerobic would work until it died then I can't say what happens after that but until I find out exactly I'll call in a miracle of the Earth.


How was butter preserved for 2,000 years in a peat bog ?
https://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/15/europe/ireland-bog-butter/index.html

And a man found from 7k years ago in a bog (long inundated)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bog_body

Oh...wait, that might explain why your simplistic aerobic/anaerobic concept is plain wrong...

Quote
A bog body is a human cadaver that has been naturally mummified in a peat bog. Such bodies, sometimes known as bog people, are both geographically and chronologically widespread, having been dated to between 8000 BCE and the Second World War.[1] The unifying factor of the bog bodies is that they have been found in peat and are partially preserved; however, the actual levels of preservation vary widely from perfectly preserved to mere skeletons.[2]
Unlike most ancient human remains, bog bodies often retain their skin and internal organs due to the unusual conditions of the surrounding area. These conditions include highly acidic water, low temperature, and a lack of oxygen which combine to preserve but severely tan their skin. While the skin is well-preserved, the bones are generally not, due to the acid in the peat having dissolved the calcium phosphate of bone.


Why did your grandma's pickles last for so long ???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top