53 Comments
Feb 20Liked by Radio Far Side

First of all, let’s get rid of the term “fossil fuels”.

Naturally-occurring hydrocarbons are “abiotic”.

Hydrocarbon products are constantly being created deep within the earth by yet-unknown processes well below the layers that contain fossils. Keep in mind that hydrocarbons migrate upward and pass through “fossil layers” picking up remnants of “fossil” material; hence, the present-day scientists’ stupid mistaken assumption that hydrocarbons are derived from “fossils”.

Oil interests are drilling wells at 5,000 feet, 10,000 feet, and 15,000 feet and deeper, and coming up with oil deposits well below the layers and levels where “fossils” were known to exist.

As Russia gained much expertise in deep-well drilling and coming up with oil deposits far deeper than that of the level of "fossils", abiotic oil at extreme depths was actually a Russian “state secret" for a long time.

“Peak oil” and "fossil fuels” are discredited dishonest concepts that environmentalists and others are latching on to, in order to display their hatred of oil being a renewable resource as well as to push prices up.

Follow the money.

Naturally-occurring hydrocarbons have done more to advance civilization than any other influence. It is the discovery, creation and utilization of ENERGY that propels civilizations upward and onward.

We have more oil underneath our feet than the rest of the world. In fact, we became energy independent under Trump. That trend was reversed with the Biden regime.

For a good treatise on abiotic oil, please google L. Fletcher Prouty. He is a scientist who gives a good explanation of “abiotic oil”.

Expand full comment
Feb 19Liked by Radio Far Side

You might like John Wheeler and Richard Feynman's work on this topic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%E2%80%93Feynman_absorber_theory

Expand full comment
Feb 20Liked by Radio Far Side

Sinclair still uses the dinosaur as its mascot, having large statues of the green "Dino" in company parking lots.

Expand full comment
Feb 20Liked by Radio Far Side

I should have written this- well done! If I could make a few points, the term “fossil fuel” is a term of propaganda, and a more correct and factual term is “natural fuels”. Also, while I agree that Einstein and co led us down a bad path, is there a good write up on the phenomena of nuclear energy within the electric universe canon?

Expand full comment
Feb 18Liked by Radio Far Side

As a guy I follow coined it, The Cult of Quantum, has been a disaster that led to a wasted century.

Another case of the "experts" causing disaster.

We have to get back to Maxwell. Besides Kudryanvtsev, wasn't a fellow named Gold advocating abiotic oil?

Expand full comment
Mar 3Liked by Radio Far Side

Great article! Yes, return to Maxwell, Faraday, and Tesla. They were the giants of practical science. Will the government ever release the lab notes they stole from Tesla's laboratory?

Tesla would laugh at the cars named after him.

Expand full comment
Feb 21Liked by Radio Far Side

I have been suspicious of the existence of "fossil fuels" since learning about the Stanley Miller experiment in the late 1950s and simultaneously taking organic chemistry courses in the early 1990s. If organic matter could be produced by physical forces acting on inorganic substances, why do the hydrocarbon structures have to pass through a life and decompose cycle first ? What would William of Ockham say?

Expand full comment
Feb 21Liked by Radio Far Side

Thank you Bernard for this explanation about Abiotics, especially the Link to the science and math. My husband is looking forward to reading it. I kept telling him there is no shortage of oil etc. and that it's not a 'fossil" at all,......but He's been skeptical. He always says people say things but they don't back them up with the Data. He's been an IT Professional for 40 years,....now retired. So he needs the "numbers". Thanks again.

Expand full comment
Feb 20Liked by Radio Far Side

I love it when I read 2 identical paragraphs in an article. And it surprises me how often this happens. I start to think, did the author even reread what he wrote? Did he just bunch together paragraphs from previous writings? Maybe the site that picked up the article messed up somehow? Did AI put together this piece? I'm sure there are other possibilities. Maybe just a bad day on someone's part. So, I came here to the comments after the experience, will I go back to reading? I think I will in this case but I often don't when I come across this. Maybe I'm just a little off today.

Expand full comment