In the earlier four-part series entitled There Is a Climate Crisis- It’s Just Not What You Think It Is I told a brief potted history of the Great Lie of Our Time: Climate change caused by mankind’s use of ‘fossil fuels’ which was putting extra carbon dioxide into the atmosphere which, in turn, is causing global temperatures to rise.
Anyone who has a little more than a passing interest in this topic can do his or her own research and come up with plenty of evidence that the ‘grand narrative’ about the Earth’s climate has more than a few holes in it. In fact, it leaks like a sieve. Counter views among eminent scientists are easy to find and many of them have very kindly uploaded them to platforms such as YouTube where they come with the obligatory United Nations-approved health warnings about “misinformation”. Part Four of There Is a Climate Crisis set out my most important sources. Getting them into the open on the mainstream media so that there can be a serious debate is another matter. They are generally well suppressed.
In recent years many protest groups such as Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil have sprung up. They are well-funded by the nonagenarian Meddler-in-Chief, George Soros, of whom Elon Musk recently said that he was a ‘smart guy’ but that he just hated humanity. Another funder of climate protest groups was revealed to be the ‘philanthropist’ Aileen Getty whose wealth derives from oil. It is well understood by those who have done the digging, principally Dr Jacob Nordangård, that the whole idea of climate change is a brainchild of the Rockefeller dynasty, especially Nelson and David Rockefeller, in order to create an imagined crisis which would require a global solution and thus provide an impetus towards their dream of a one-world government with them, or people like them (bankers) in charge. The United Nations and the World Economic Forum, both Rockefeller-sponsored creations, would be the basic structure. Rockefeller wealth, naturally, has oil as its origin.
Oil then, along with coal and natural gas, is a bogey man for the climate activists. Its usage must not just be curbed, it must be stopped. Besides, we’re going to run out of it anyway, so they say, because it is a finite resource. That’s another good reason for relying more and more on the so-called ‘renewable’ energy sources such as wind and solar which really should be labelled the ‘unreliables’.
The idea of ‘peak oil’ was the brainchild of geologist and geophysicist M King Hubbert who was also in at the birth of Technocracy. The Hubbert peak theory postulates that the amount of oil under the ground in any region is finite, therefore the rate of discovery which initially increases quickly must reach a maximum and decline. Eventually an oil field will no longer be economic. Applied world-wide to all known oil fields it generated the idea that at some time in the future total oil production will begin to decline as it is a finite resource which will become increasingly expensive. We would need to manage these resources with care until such time as we have alternative forms of energy, whether it comes from nuclear reactors, hydrogen power, the ‘unreliables’, or the free universal energy source that Nikola Tesla is said to have discovered.
Is this true? Some scientists and mineral engineers have a different view. And they even think that oil is not a ‘fossil’ fuel at all.
They hold that the proposition that oil and natural gas are the fossilised remains of living creatures is nonsense. There may be some organic content but in essence there is no way that the constituent chemicals that make up an animal or a microbe are going to decompose into oil. When an animal dies it will give off gases during decomposition, but its final state is not a little pool of oleaginous gloop. It is dust. The great majority of fossils found are not actually parts of animals but rather their silica remains imprinted on soft sediments after the animal has long gone and which rock structures have filled in over the ages so that they became petrified.
The traditional ‘fossil-fuel’ geo-chemists adhere to the belief that organic material lying in sedimentary rocks forms kerogen which is a sort of pre-oil rock. The popular story in the middle of the last century was that oil derives from the fossilised remains of dinosaurs. However, they had to back away from the dinosaur idea because there simply hadn’t been enough dinosaurs to produce oil in the quantities we have found so they alighted on first, plankton, and then, microbes and algae.
Against them are a number of geologists and geo-chemists who believe that oil and gas is formed deep within the Earth’s mantle. This idea is not new. It was first postulated in the 16th century by Georgius Agricola and later in the 1870s by Dmitri Mendeleev. Abiogenic hypotheses were revived in the latter part of the 20th century by Soviet scientists but gained little traction because their work was in Russian. The Austrian/British /American scientist Thomas Gold picked up and redefined the hypothesis between 1979 and 1998, publishing his work in English in which he acknowledged the work of the Russians.
Gold started by speaking to the eminent astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle who believed that oil is abiogenic (mineral) and cannot be biotic (from fossils). Hoyle’s attitude is best summed up by this quotation:
“The suggestion that petroleum might have arisen from some transformation of squashed fish or biological detritus is surely the silliest notion to have been entertained by substantial numbers of persons over an extended period of time.”
Gold contended that since petroleum and its component hydrocarbons were present across the entire universe, there was no reason to believe that on Earth they must be biological in origin. He proposed that fuels were trapped inside the core of the Earth in random molecular forms nearly 4.5 billion years ago. Over time, the extreme heat of the core "sweated" the rocks that contained these molecules, pushing them up through the porous layers of the Earth. As they move up toward the surface, the hydrocarbons fuelled the development of large microbial colonies, which served as the basis for life on Earth. The migrating fuels collect biological remnants before becoming trapped in deep underground reservoirs
Gold’s ideas were backed up when both NASA and the Russians announced in 2014 findings that discredited the ‘fossil fuel’ theory of oil and gas and yet it just will not die. Saturn’s moon Titan has seas of liquid methane. If hydrocarbons are derived from fossilised life how can there be hydrocarbons on other planets and moons within the solar system? In fact, hydrocarbons are found all over the universe. In 2012 it was reported that the Max Planck Institute in Germany has discovered that the Horse Head Nebula galaxy in the Orion constellation contains a vast field of hydrocarbons. Kerogen is found throughout the universe too.
Following WW1, the Germans had realised that they had no oil resources to speak of, but they did have huge coal deposits. They started to study oil to work out how it was created. Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch were two chemists at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Coal Research in Mulheim. They discovered how a substance with a carbon structure and a substance with a hydrogen structure, under suitable temperature and pressure conditions, could be made to produce a hydrocarbon chain. The Fischer-Tropsch Process which uses carbon monoxide and hydrogen from coal, natural gas or biomass could be used to produce synthetic oil suitable for use both as a fuel and as a lubricant.
If oil can be produced from coal (and it can be) and oil is abiotic, does that not lead to the conclusion that coal too is abiotic? The popular belief taught to us is that it is the remnants of vegetation from the Carboniferous period (358-298 million years ago) which over time had been compressed and heated between the rock strata to form coal. According to the abiotic theory, coal is metamorphic oil which is proven by the fact that oil can be made from it. So is shale; it too can be turned into oil. It has been forgotten these days that there once was a Scottish shale oil industry which held off the competition of imported oil products for nearly a century.
Gold’s ideas also challenge the peak oil theory on the matter of oil fields declining. The contention is that oil fields do not run dry. Oil being created in the Earth’s mantle will rise to replenish an oil field which may have the appearance of being exhausted. However, the rate at which replenishment may occur is unknown. We tend to measure time in relation to the human life span which is but an eye-blink in geological time. An oil field may not be replenished within a human lifetime; it may even take a thousand years or more. No-one knows. The interesting thing is that the Saudi Arabians do not know how much oil they have. What they do know is that it is not running out. The cracks and fissures in the Earth’s crust under their oil fields are so deep and extensive that it is not impossible that the oil is being replenished as fast as it is being extracted. Furthermore, the oil fields around the Caspian Sea may make the Saudi fields look like mere puddles.
The most obvious thing that climate and energy realists can do is to stop calling oil, gas and coal ‘fossil fuels’ and expose the lies and misinformation we have been sold. They are not only nothing to do with fossils, but they may well be practically limitless as Thomas Gold believed. With advances in exploration and extraction techniques more is being discovered than has so far been used so we need not fear running out. Meanwhile, we have just been saddled with the brilliant Ed Milliband who has declared that there will be no more exploration licences in the North Sea which means that the industry will be run down.
In the nuclear sector, the concept of a network of small modular reactors has been proposed by Rolls Royce among others but the UK government is dragging its heels in giving the idea the go-ahead, no doubt because of lobbying by the greens. In the meantime, the world (but not us) will have enough oil, coal and gas for as long as it wants them. They are truly gifts from God for the benefit of all mankind. A better name for them would be ‘Earth fuels’ or quite simply hydrocarbons.
If you’d like to hear this more extensively explained you can listen to this Tom Nelson Podcast with Dr Jerome Corsi. Dr Corsi’s book The Truth about Energy, Global Warming and Climate Change is available on Amazon and Kindle. In Chapter 9 he deals with Abiotic Oil. The book is the first of three he is writing about the sheer insanity of the times in which we live.
We would be foolish beyond description to turn our backs on North Sea oil and gas as the current regime in Westminster would have us do.
.
.