Big Dog's Boom Boom Room Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: dvdw© who wrote (173658)	10/27/2012 2:41:05 AM
From: JimisJim	13 Recommendations Read Replies (1) of 206181

The only way that squares with the fact that all oil ever produced/recovered has had biologic markers is if there was a lot of biologic carbon around when the "event" took place. I'm not going to claim I know for sure or can prove what form that biologic carbon was in when/if nucleation in fact created the oil, but that's what the observable evidence suggests. Are you suggesting that nucleation is continually creating more oil? Or rather that a huge nucleation event created way more oil than we can measure, but it is buried so deep (you mentioned 5-7 miles down?) that so far all we've found is the product of nucleation of surface carbon that was biologic in origin, e.g., algae, trees, whatever? Or that a vast ocean of methane was "nucleated" into oil and the biologic markers were simply bacteria feeding on the oil as it percolates up? Is it impossible for you to express your theory by simply stating it? Biologic origins of oil may not be correct, but it fits the preponderance of evidence so far. So why not just give us your thoughts in simple declarative sentences and we'll discuss the merits of both theories?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next