“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 members of persons over an extended period of time.” Fred Hoyle, astronomer, 1982

18th century ignorance as gospel

The term fossil fuel purportedly dates from the 18^th century, probably and rather ironically coined by the Russian Chemistry Professor Lomonosov around 1745.  In 1757 Lomonosov presented at the Imperial Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg and included the following pithy description about oil: “Rock oil originates as tiny bodies of animals buried in the sediments which, under the influence of increased temperature and pressure acting during an unimaginably long period of time, transform into rock oil.”  No experiments, observations or proofs were submitted by Lomonosov, but a religious cult was born.

For whatever reason, ‘fossils’ were ‘first’ being discovered in the 18^th century tincturing the glasses of academics and seers and ushering in unproven theories about long ages and processes.  Such discoveries could be interpreted differently depending on your worldview of course.  In the long age paradigm of the ‘Enlightenment’ and the ‘Age of Science’, petroleum was described as an organic substance derived from decomposed tissue which must have been crushed and liquified over extended periods of time.  None of this is valid nor has it ever been experimentally proven.  Yet today the ‘Science’ references this rather ignorant and unenlightening world view of an 18^th century philosophical theory about hydro-carbon energy, without recourse to observational or experimental proof.  Why?  And what does that say about ‘science’?

Peak Junk Science

Petroleum and gas from ‘fossils’ as a theoretical concept serve a modern purpose.  If hydro-carbon energy is limited, or ‘non-renewable’ in the cant of education and the media, then eventually the despised human race will need to move to alternative energy sources, managed by vested interests who accrete money, power or both, from ‘renewable’ implementations.  

(The fraudulent 1956 Hubbert Shell Oil Peak Oil fraud. Zero science, zero data validation, all of it long disproven, but still reused by the Peak Oil cult).

If, however, hydrocarbon fuel is manufactured and produced naturally, and will always be plentiful, the business and moral case for ‘alternative energy’ is drastically reduced.  To compensate for this inconvenient truth, the Scientism of energy and social control now dramatically declare that burning naturally produced hydrocarbons is ‘dirty’ and a pollution.  This is simply untrue.  Your wood stove provides an excellent experimental laboratory as to why burning carbon has no impact whatsoever on ‘pollution’, ‘climate’ or Gaia.  None.  Carbon does not pollute and is not toxic.

The attack on energy reality thus comes from 3 angles of Scientism and its false 18^th century inspired-religious dogma: 

1-hydrocarbons are subject to the fraudulent ‘peak’ production theories and will run out, with all such forecasts proven ineradicably wrong;

2-burning hydrocarbons is dirty and polluting and;

3-burning hydrocarbons will emit Co2 which deranges the lower atmosphere’s climate and causes warming. 

As a litany of religious gospel, the above does rank incredibly low on the critical thinking and reality scales.  Evidence indicates that oil and gas reserves are limitless, now exceeding 40 years into the future with more reserves discovered annually.  Carbon and Co2 are not toxins, they are amorphous and formless gases, and Co2 benefits the environment as plant food.  Co2 is 4 parts per million in the atmosphere and is both endothermic and exothermic with cooling as well as warming properties.  At least half of the 50 billion tonnes that humans emit each year globally will be recycled by nature.  There are 1 Trillion tonnes of Co2 in the lower and upper atmosphere, so our impact is negligible and in reality, there are so many complex feedback loops within climate which we don’t understand, that it makes a mockery of the climate doom goblins and their fake models. 

Russia and energy

Abiotic hydrocarbon energy production, as a natural process, occurring at the boundary of the Earth’s core and mantle was discovered by the Russians in the 1930s and 1940s.  An impetus for the now demonised Russian state, was energy self-sufficiency and not having to rely on imports from foreign powers, especially during a war.  In the 1930s Russian oil production was virtually non-existent.  Today Russia is the third largest producer of energy in the world.  Russia is an energy behemoth because Russian geologists look for oil where the West dares not.  

Russian energy production has doubled from 5-6 million barrels per day in 2000, to 10-12 million barrels per day in 2023, in complete defiance of falsified ‘peak oil theories;’ which are found only in Western discourse.  ‘Peak oil’ theory has existed since 1920 and every year there is yet more ‘forecasts’ that energy will peak and decline within the next decade.  For 100 years, this has proven to be a lie.  Online the researcher will find various ‘Western’ prognostications from ‘experts’, that Russian oil production will soon peak (pick a year) and then sharply decline, imperilling the Russian state. In reality Russian energy output has doubled in 20 years and there is no reason, bar a defeat in war, that it won’t double again in the next 20 years.  More here