This state that fossil fuel is not from living remains and it is much abundant than oil manufacturers/producer says.It state OPEC conspire to make the petro prices high by controlling the supply. Evidence range from the lack of fossils near the deposits and the presence of oil in outer space. What are your thoughts?
I thought you said 'peak' theory, this is pretty lame, fossil fuels are the results of the breakdown of animals and plants remember the plants part because plants when broken down won't leave bony remains since well they're bloody plants and hence it can be said of course you won't find the types of fossils you're clearly thinking of.
Because with the pressure where the oil deposits were located, it would be weird if there any fossil remaining? We're talking about between 2,000 and 3,800 meters here. The deepest fossil drilled (not excavated) is 2256 meters below the seabed - where the oil deposits in the same spot were much more deeper. ...What? That oil is not from pressurized fossils, but made up of decayed organic material — the researchers believe these hydrocarbon molecules are created by the fragmentation of giant carbonaceous molecules called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, a waste-product of dying stars. Here's the complete article. Fossil fuel are decreasing. That is a fact. It's a simple logic; it was sourced from fossil, that were once living things (that were also limited).
Well honestly just like diamonds/gold/lobster/various other high priced things there is a lot more out there than you think but it's tightly controlled to maximize profit. That conspiracy theory is a bit too out there for me but OPEC 100% fixes their prices and intentionally limits supply to create artificial scarcity because if they didn't no one would care the slightest bit about the middle east because they don't really have anything else of great value and the rich people of places like saudi arabia would go poor lol. Also I don't necessarily believe the theory but it's at least entertaining to read because I've never heard that one.
Proponents state that oil deposit was found too deep to be once a ecosystem even with tectonic movement. Also the thing that created the outerspace deposit might be the same one that created the one at earth. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fossil-fuels-without-the-fossils/ https://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/Energy.html
*your Wow, Ad Hominem from the start. You are lack comprehension too since I am not the one that state that, the proponents did and they are too are scientists.Theories including this one are regularly analytically challenged and peer reviewed. This theory is also nothing new and made by other scientists.You know, people who have better understanding than us. https://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/Energy.html
Reading it further, the idea was all hindered by the limited quantity, which is not exactly fitting for commercial purpose. In the outer space, the staggering amount was possible thanks to its extreme condition; a condition that is so alien to us, whether naturally or artificially (for now). The statement of oil deposits that was too deep is still debatable, as tectonic movement is still something that we can't completely comprehend (IMHO). Here's a short article about the abiotic petroleum hypothesis. Also, here's an opinion from Richard Heinberg. So where that leads us to? Personally, I don't have any fucking idea. With all those facts with all those mumbo-jumbo terms, there are so much path we can take from here.
All natural deposited minerals have limits. Human have really much better in ending their dependence or developing it's usage cycle.
Actually the correct pronoun is "you're" not "your" since it's supposed to be "you are lacking" not "your lacking". Please don't wrongly correct other people's grammar just because you wish to one-up someone.