You can add crude oil to the list of things some “scientists” would have you believe they have figured out. 

“Oil that is…, black gold…, Texas tea.”

When you get right down to it, there isn’t a heck of a lot that “scientists” really “know.”

There’s a lot they’d like you to think they know, but in the end it’s mostly educated guesses…, and uneducated guesses.

aoil 3

We see these educated and uneducated theories and guesses passed off as facts most of the time.

When reading textbooks or listening to the news, we never hear these “scientists” say, “We believe that …” or “It’s our theory that…”

I’m talking about global warming (now called “climate change” since the warming part is a hard sell), the creation of the universe, the evolution of life on Earth, and what’s inside the Earth.

aoil 5

Now don’t get me wrong…, I’m not anti-science…, I love science.  I just don’t like it when wishful thinking is passed off as science, and this wishful thinking is then used as propaganda to support liberal fairy tale narratives.

Regarding oil, one of the “fossil fuels,” “scientists” have spun a pretty wild tale, it seems.

aoil 2

In an article titled, “The Mysterious Origin and Supply of Oil,” by Ker Than, for the LiveScience website, Than says, “… some experts [are]  predicting that the end of oil is near, scientists still don’t know for sure where oil comes from, how long it took to make, or how much there is.”

Wait…, what?

What was that?

“Scientists still don’t know for sure where oil comes from, how long it took to make, or how much there is?”

Really?

But they feel safe “predicting that the end of oil is near.”

Again…, “Scientists still don’t know for sure where oil comes from, how long it took to make, or how much there is?”

Well, you could’ve fooled me!

I was under the impression that “scientists” knew all there was to know about oil in the Earth.

Hmmm.

aoil 1

Soooo, it’s called a “fossil fuel” even though “fossils” may have nothing to do with it?

See what I mean?

Ker Than continues by saying, “A so-called ‘fossil fuel,’ petroleum [oil] is believed by most scientists to be the transformed remains of long dead organisms. The majority of petroleum is thought to come from the fossils of plants and tiny marine organisms. Larger animals might contribute to the mix as well.”

“Nature has been transmuting dead life into black gold [or natural gas] for millions of years using little more than heat, pressure and time, scientists tell us.”

That sounds like a statement of fact without any caveats to me.

Again…, see what I mean?

aoil 4

“The idea that petroleum is formed from dead organic matter is known as the ‘biogenic theory’ of petroleum formation and was first proposed by a Russian scientist almost 250 years ago.”

“In the 1950’s, however, a few Russian scientists began questioning this traditional view and proposed instead that petroleum could form naturally deep inside the Earth [the abiogenic theory].”

They say, “Both processes for making petroleum likely require thousands of years,” although, here again, they really have no clue how long it takes, or if either of these theoretical processes are even responsible for the creation of oil at all.

According to an article on the ScienceDaily website, “Estimates of how much crude oil we have extracted from the planet vary wildly. Now, researchers have published a new estimate in the International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Technology that suggests we may have used more than we think.”

“Now, John Jones in the School of Engineering, at the University of Aberdeen, UK, says that we have used at least 135 billion barrels of oil since 1870, the period during which J.D. Rockefeller established The Standard Oil Company and began drilling in earnest.”

“However, in 2005, The Oil Depletion Analysis Centre (ODAC) [Is that really a thing?] in London provided a total figure of almost 1 trillion barrels of crude oil (944 billion barrels) since commercial drilling began.”

There are 42 gallons in a barrel, and I’m pretty good at math, so that would equate to around 42 trillion gallons.

That’s a lot of “fossils of plants and tiny marine organisms.”

And that’s only what we have used so far.

From the World Ocean Review website, “Gas and oil form in the sea over a period of millions of years [Oh, now it’s millions of years?], as the remains of animals and plants sink to the ocean floor. Combined with particles flushed from the land, they are buried and compressed into layers of sediment several kilometers thick on the ocean floor.”

Excuse me, but when does this stuff stop sinking to the ocean floor so it can become buried?  Isn’t this happening continually?  Just sayin’.

“Aided by the Earth’s pressure and temperature conditions, bacteria convert the biomass into precursor substances from which hydrocarbons are ultimately formed. These hydrocarbons can permeate certain layers of rock and sediment as they move up towards the surface, in a process called migration. In some cases they become trapped in impermeable layers of rock, which is where the actual deposits are ultimately formed. Depending on the ambient conditions, oil or natural gas develops. Today’s sources of fossil fuels are between 15 and 600 million years old.”

“Between 15 and 600 million years old,” huh? Well, that’s really narrowing it down!

“During this period the continental plates shifted, transforming oceans into landmasses, with the result that mineral deposits can be found both on land and at sea. Oil and gas are usually found where vast layers of sediment cover the ocean floor.”

So there you have it.  Perfectly explained as if it were proven fact…, which it is not.  This whole previous paragraph should have begun with the words, “Once upon a time” for all it is worth.

Again…, I’m not anti-science…, I love science.  I just don’t like it when these “scientists” pretend to know more than they do, then throw their science fiction stories out there as “the truth.”

If these scientists are so smart they should know better.

aoil 8

aoil 7

aoil 6

aoil 10

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Hey…, whatever happened to that huge hole in the ozone layer that was threatening life on Earth as we know it?

I haven’t heard much about it lately.

It must not be fitting in with the current “end of the world” “climate change” narrative.

Let’s see.

According to Chris Ciaccia of Fox News, ‘“Ozone hole is the smallest on record,’ NASA says.”

“Smallest on record?!”

Why haven’t we heard more about this?!

aozone 1

Another case of liberal propaganda by omission I would suspect.

NASA also says this is due to a “rare” event, however.

Ahhhhh, the predictable disclaimer whenever “good news” needs to be tempered in order to not harm the existing narrative!

“Unusual weather patterns in the upper atmosphere over Antarctica have caused a drastic reduction in ozone depletion, leaving the ozone with the smallest hole seen since its discovery in 1982, according to NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.”

aozone 2

First of all…, the ozone hole wasn’t even discovered until 1982!

That means we have a whopping 37 years of ozone hole history and thousands of years, or millions of years, or billions of years (depending on your belief of the age of the Earth) where we have no idea about the condition of an ozone hole, or if there even was one.

Let’s just go ahead and say that NASA has no scientific idea about what is normal and what isn’t, in regards to the ozone hole.

“Government agencies said that the hole had shrunk to 3.9 million square miles for the remainder of September and October, according to satellite data.  The peak in the hole was 6.3 million square miles, observed on Sept. 8. During normal weather conditions, the hole is usually around 8 million square miles during this time of year.”

‘“It’s great news for ozone in the Southern Hemisphere,’ said Paul Newman, chief scientist for Earth Sciences at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in a statement on NASA’s website. ‘But it’s important to recognize that what we’re seeing this year is due to warmer stratospheric temperatures. It’s not a sign that atmospheric ozone is suddenly on a fast track to recovery.’”

Time out.

I’m sorry Mr. Newman, but “it’s important to recognize” that you and your friends really have no idea what anything is “due” to, or what is causing what, or what’s “normal” and what isn’t.

“The ozone layer is approximately 7 to 25 miles above the Earth’s surface and acts as a ‘sunscreen’ for the planet, NASA added.  It keeps out harmful ultraviolet radiation from the Sun that has been linked to skin cancer, cataracts, immune system suppression and can also cause damage to plants.”aozone 8

“The hole over the Antarctic forms during the Southern Hemisphere’s late winter as the Sun’s rays start to cause ozone-depleting reactions. This involves chlorine and bromine from man-made objects being released into the stratosphere which then destroys the molecules in the ozone.”

‘“It’s a rare event that we’re still trying to understand,’ said Susan Strahan, an atmospheric scientist. ‘If the warming hadn’t happened, we’d likely be looking at a much more typical ozone hole.’”

aozone 6

Again, I’m sorry Ms. Strahan, but you really don’t have a clue about what “a typical ozone hole” is really, or what we’d be looking at based on anything happening.  The only thing you said that I believe is, “we’re still trying to understand.”

You just go ahead and keep on trying.

“The 1987 Montreal Protocol was enacted after scientists disturbingly found a hole in the ozone over Antarctica and Australia in 1985.  It was enacted by the United Nations Environment Program.  Former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said it was ‘perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date’ and it has been widely regarded as successful, with the ozone continuing to recover each year.”

Again…, and again, I’m sorry, but why did these scientists find the ozone hole “disturbing?”

They had no prior data to work with.

Perhaps the hole was alarmingly small compared to the prior 10,000 years?

They didn’t know.

They had no historical data to point to.

It was just another “The sky is falling!” environmental whacko alarm, intent on attacking America’s way of life, even though we are not anywhere near the biggest environmental offenders.

aozone 4

Just as with ocean pollution, China has been found to be the major culprit damaging the ozone layer with the continued use of illegal gases.

“In May 2018, a startling study revealed that there was an ‘unexpected and persistent increase’ of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in the atmosphere.  At the time, scientists could not pinpoint the exact location of the polluting and ozone-depleting gas, but subsequent media reports suggested that the clues lead to a rural industrial town in China.”

“Now, a new study confirms that the rise in CFCs, to the tune of 7,000 metric tons, is indeed coming from northeastern China based on atmospheric observations.”

“In a statement provided to Fox News, acting Head of UN Environment Joyce Msuya said: ‘Action is being taken by all parties at the international level and by China domestically.  Additional scientific research is being done to pinpoint the sources and possible illegal uses of the CFC-11.  Given the large amount of emissions, all parties appreciate the urgency to ensure the ongoing protection of the Ozone Layer.  This is a priority for the UN Environment Program.’”

Believe me, the only action being taken by China is figuring out how they can avoid being detected in the future.

These diplomats are either extremely gullible or extremely stupid.

Tell me again what the UN has ever really accomplished?

I guess it’s good that we have a forum (the UN) where communication at least exists between all countries…, but that’s about it.

One hundred ninety-seven countries, including the U.S. under former President Ronald Reagan and China, are signatories of the Montreal Protocol.

For many of these countries, and especially China, these agreements aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on, however.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

The Sierra Club says climate change deniers are more likely to be racists!  Well, there’s killing two birds with one stone!

According to Heather Smith for SIERRA, The national magazine of the Sierra Club, “People who don’t believe that climate change is real are more likely to be old, more likely to be Republican, and more likely to be white.”

So you’re saying the smartest group among us don’t necessarily believe in all of this climate change mumbo jumbo?

Makes sense to me so far.

“They [the old, white, conservatives] are also more likely to have racist beliefs, according to a recent study published in the journal ‘Environmental Politics.’”

cons 8

“Environmental Politics.”  Now there’s a liberal rag of a magazine if ever I heard of one!

I take it they’re just assuming the racist part because we’re talking about white conservatives here.

I doubt they asked people in the study if they were racists or not.

Ms. Smith goes on to say, “This correlation is a relatively recent phenomenon—one that occurred in the wake of Barack Obama’s election in 2008.”

cons 7

Oh, okay…, now I’m starting to get where this is going.

“The paper hypothesizes that, however moderate his actions, the mere existence of our first African American president dropping climate change into the State of the Union Address and joining the Paris climate accord correlates with a significant number of white Americans deciding that they were done believing in climate change.”

“This correlation has also been documented with regard to health-care reform—after the Obama administration made it a priority, a subset of white Americans who had supported the issue during the Clinton administration suddenly switched their position.”

This last claim is just a plain fabrication.  Not many people supported government run health care at all during the Clinton years.  That’s why they failed to implement it.  ObamaCare was actually signed into law.  I don’t think their argument stands up here.

Their racist claims regarding President Obama and climate change are way off base as well.

cons 6

cons 4

When are these liberals going to understand that conservatives didn’t care about the color of Obama’s skin…, it was HIS policies, and HIS racism that turned conservatives off.

“Political messaging with racist over- and undertones has been deployed relentlessly by some politicians because appealing to prejudice and paranoia really does motivate racist, paranoid people to show up and vote.”

Now there something we can all agree on!

Except they’re referring to Republicans and I’m thinking about the Democrats!

cons 5

These crazy “studies” are about as valuable as their polling numbers!

But accuracy was never their goal in the first place.

It was the liberal messaging that was the most important thing.  It was only a means to an end.  Some hogwash to back up a failed narrative.

WINNING!

cons 1

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

We’re all veterans of the liberals’ environmental “blame game.” But what’s the real deal regarding pollution on our planet?

It seems we are bombarded by liberals in our country, shaking their fingers at us, and perpetually making us feel guilty for our standard of living, and for “trashing” the world’s environment on a daily basis.

blame 4

We hear “The evil United States is to blame for the world’s air pollution, global warming and ‘climate change…,’ with all of our evil factories, evil cars, evil trucks, and evil farting cows!”

blame 9

blame 8

We hear “The evil United States is to blame for polluting our oceans, especially with our evil plastic bottles, our evil plastic this and our evil plastic that.”

We hear that we must adopt the democrats’ “Green New Deal” policies, which would set out economy back 200 years, in order to pay our environmental dues and save our planet.

blame 6

blame 7

What’s really going out there, however?

According to data from the World Health Organization, regarding air pollution and air quality per city:

INDIA has 13 of the top 20 worst cities.

CHINA has 23 of the top 50 worst cities.

CHINA has 44 of the top 75 worst cities.

CHINA overwhelmingly dominates the list in general.

But wait!  How many U.S. cities are in there and where do we rank on the list you are probably asking?

NOT EVEN ONE U.S. CITY APPEARS ON THE LIST OF THE 500 WORST CITIES!

Let me repeat that.

NOT EVEN ONE U.S. CITY APPEARS ON THE LIST OF THE 500 WORST CITIES!

How can that be, you might be asking?

How are the democrats allowed to get away with all of this misrepresentation and disinformation regarding the environment?

blame 5

The answer is the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” is a co-conspirator in this environmental charade.

blame 12

blame 13

Okay, okay, but what about saving our oceans?!

What about the polar bears and the whales?!

According to Earthday.org website, the United States ranks number 20 on the top twenty list of ocean polluters.

Yes…, we’re last on that list, and a distant last at that.

How can that be, you might be asking?

How are the democrats allowed to get away with all of this misrepresentation and disinformation regarding the environment?

The answer is the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” is a co-conspirator in this environmental charade.

All of the other countries on this ocean pollution list account for 2 times, 3 times, 4 times, 5 times, 6 times, 10 times, and 32 times the amount of ocean pollution the United States is guilty of!

And who’s at the top of this list?

Well if isn’t our old friend CHINA again!

blame 10

blame 11

So the next time you hear some liberal crying about the environment and demanding we flip our country upside down and turn it inside out to save the planet…, tell them to take their story walkin’…, over to China and India, for starters.

blame 15

And tell them they can take their “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” with them!

blame 3

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Is this the “final straw” regarding liberal hypocrisy?

I’m referring to the banning of plastic straws all across “the civilized world,” in favor of the more “environmentally” friendly paper straws.

straws 5

The only problem is…, drum roll please…, the plastic straws are actually the more environmentally friendly ones!!!

straws 1

straws 3

straws 4

Of course, in the liberal world…, the appearance of something being effective is considerably more important than the actual effectiveness of something.

Rob Picheta, of CNN Business, reports that, “McDonald’s has reportedly admitted that its new paper straws, rolled out last year to help ‘protect the environment,’ can’t be recycled — unlike the plastic versions they replaced.”

straws 10

“The fast food giant acknowledged on Monday that the new versions are too thick to be processed by its recyclers.  While the materials are recyclable, their current thickness makes it difficult for them to be processed by our waste solution providers, who also help us recycle our paper cups,” a McDonald’s spokesman told the UK’s Press Association news agency.”

Details, details!

Let’s not lose sight of the fact that we got those evil plastic straws banned…, regardless of the actual effect on the environment!

straws 8

“The issue was first revealed by The Sun newspaper, which published an internal McDonald’s memo (Was it written by Ronald McDonald himself?!), saying that the company’s paper straws ‘are not yet recyclable and should be disposed of in general waste until further notice.’”

“When the firm announced the introduction of paper straws in June 2018, it said the move was ‘part of wider efforts to protect the environment.’”

If the effort was much wider we’d have a real environmental crisis on our hands!

‘“The government’s ambitious plans, combined with strong customer opinion, has helped to accelerate the move away from plastic and I’m proud that we’ve been able to play our part in helping to achieve this societal change,’ Paul Pomroy, CEO of McDonald’s UK and Ireland, said in a press release at the time.”

straws 6

Ha!

Yes…, he’s sooo proud they’ve “helped to accelerate the move away from plastic and proud that they’ve been able to play their part in helping to achieve this societal change…,” even though their change is actually harming the environment more.

That’s liberalism for ‘ya.

straws 7

“But the new straws were unpopular even before the latest revelation.  Numerous social media users complained that they became soggy in drinks, and a petition calling on the firm to bring back their old straws has been signed more than 50,000 times.”

Our straws are soggy!

Bring back the evil, environment destroying, plastic straws!

The fate of planet Earth be damned!

straws 9

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑