Hello James,

American textbooks teaching oil is from decayed dinosaurs is little different to teaching belief virgin birth. Funny how science is so similar to a faith-based religion with its dogma. Online (with live links) at

Might put a bug up the butt of the usual suspect :)

Pasted in, below -

Ron West

"The history of the great events of this world are scarcely more than a history of crime" -Voltaire

What is the secret the Soviet Union had sorted decades ago but the western educated troglodytes at the CIA & Defense Intelligence Agency hadn’t taken seriously until the Bush Jr administration’s second term? Oil is NOT a ‘fossil fuel’ but a self-generating resource with infinite ability to replenish (over time.)

If indeed this were the case, what would the geopolitical repercussions be? As William Engdahl had noted in 2007:

“If Russia had the scientific know-how and Western geology not, Russia possessed a strategic trump card of staggering geopolitical import. It was not surprising that Washington would go about erecting a “wall of steel”—a network of military bases and ballistic anti-missile shields around Russia, to cut her pipeline and port links to western Europe, China and the rest of Eurasia. Halford Mackinder’s worst nightmare–a cooperative convergence of mutual interests of the major states of Eurasia, born of necessity and need for oil to fuel economic growth–was emerging. Ironically, it was the blatant US grab for the vast oil riches of Iraq and, potentially, of Iran, that catalyzed closer cooperation between traditional Eurasian foes, China and Russia, and a growing realization in western Europe that their options too were narrowing.”

That first sentence of the preceding is exactly right, because you can’t, with a snap of the fingers, retool an entire Western oil industry based on long-mistaken assumptions, if Russia were indeed decades ahead in understanding and developing extraction technology based on superior grasp of fact. Insofar as the rest of Engdahl’s paragraph, we see the continuing pursuit of this geopolitical phenomenon before our eyes. The only recent difference would be the post-Obama switch away from Brzezinski’s more aggressive vision of directly confronting Russia, over to Kissinger’s divide and conquer subterfuge of engaging Russia while confronting China. Make no mistake, the Russians well know how the old snake Kissinger’s back-stabbing game is played; Putin won’t be caught with his pants down (unlike the drunk Russia of the 1990s Yeltsin era.)

In the meanwhile, western oil & armaments industry and its’ geopolitical driven minions, that is the CIA and Pentagon primarily, would be pleased if the general public remained clueless in regards to a likely scenario where Russia won’t run out of oil while the Western oil companies are at a loss; trapped in a decades long game of scientific and technological catch-up. This is precisely example of why this blog has a specific category for ‘morons.’

Here’s the good information our ‘scientific community’ was too inbred via ivory tower syndrome to absorb; resulting in the industry, Pentagon and intelligence community too brain-dead to grasp until decades opportunity had been lost; all because no one in Western academia questioned the unfounded assumption oil was decayed dinosaurs:

FOSSIL-FUEL THEORY DEBUNKED: OIL, GAS DEPOSITS CALLED PRIMORDIAL by Toldedo Blade (from 1997, about the time western science first began to listen)

SEATTLE – The public’s most widely known piece of geological knowledge–how petroleum and natual-gas deposts formed on Earth—is false, a noted scientist says. Surprisingly, his campaign to rewrite school textbooks and encyclopedias is getting grudging support from some geologists, who acknowledge that petroleum’s origins may be dramatically different than what people believe.

Millions of Americans learned in grade school that oil deposits originated in the age of dinosaurs, when vegetation in lush forests was buried and subjected to high heat and pressure. Those extreme conditions supposedly transformed the hydrocarbons in vegetation into the hydrocarbons of petroleum.

“That’s nonsense,” snapped Thomas Gold, a scientist at Cornell University. “There’s not a shred of evidence from chemistry, geology, or any other science to support it. It has no place in textbooks and school classrooms.”

In appearances at the annual meeting of The American Association for the Advancement of Science in Seattle here that ended Thursday, Gold repeatedly challenged geologists to reconsider and reject the conventional theory.

Gold also presented evidence that oil and gas deposits on Earth are primordial. That means they came with the planet. They were part of the original raw material that formed the sun and planets, and deposited deep below Earth’s surface when the planet formed 4.5 billion years ago.

Some of the oil gradually oozes upward from these original deposits 100 to 200 miles below the surface and collects where oil drillers can reach it.

In one presentation, Gold described shafts that he and associates drilled in an ancient meteorite impact crater in Sweden. They drilled into a kind of rock that was not sedimentary, not associated with the sediments believed to produce oil deposits.

At a depth of about 4 miles, they encountered a hydrocarbon oil similar to light petroleum that Gold believes was primordial oil. He noted a variety of evidence to support the belief. Gold estimated that this single site contained “more petroleum than all of Saudi Arabia.” With current technology, however, pumping it out would be impossible, he added. Gold contended that many other planets and planetary bodies in the solar system have similar deep deposits of hydrocarbons, which are the stuff of oil and natural gas. Gold argues that a primordial origin for petroleum is the only way to explain its chemical composition.

Petroleum originating from plant matter decayed by bacteria, similar to bacteria that decay backyard garden-compost piles, would resemble a microbial product. Instead, petroleum is chemically similar to a pure hydrocarbon that has been contaminated with microbial material. That contamination, he argues, occurred as petroleum seeped upward through rock now known to contain enormous amounts of bacterial life. In moving upward, petroleum also collected helium, explaining why oil wells are such a rich source of helium.

“This is the only possible explanation,” Gold said. “The association of helium with petroleum has not been accounted for in any other way.”

How do geologists respond?

They’re beginning to listen, according to Michael Carr, who appeared on a panel where Gold presented his theory. Carr is a scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Reston, Va. “Dr. Gold has some very, very good evidence, especially that involving helium,” Carr said. “He certainly is challenging the geological community. There is a debate within the geological community.” Carr said geologists plan to reconsider the conventional theory about petroleum formation at a major meeting later in the year.

Further reading at:

Science Frontiers article (1999)

Wired article (2000)

New Eastern Outlook (2017)

Ronald Thomas West’s note: Natural resource based sustained economic development is precisely the principle of cancer, and is pointing to our planet’s demise as we know life in the present arrangement. The preceding facts concerning oil do not reflect a healthy future in any case but merely are noted in the present circumstance or geopolitical positioning of what will, even in best case scenario, be a failed model for survival. Too much is taken and too little given back. The analogy would be if natural resources were the business bank account and sustained development the business model, there is an ongoing net loss of capital –