Search results

more debunking and less name calling please <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eDvNS9iMjzA?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed...

so your saying you flunked 9th grade physics or haven't you reached it yet You believe that steel melts at 1500 F and I'm the crazy one why are you hung up on the moon landing, because out of the two topics it's the only one you can prove

one more time anybody willing to refute the information or is the intelligents level of this thread going to deteriorate to tv political punditry

more empirical evidence or name calling?, trying to discredit something by associating it with something else may work on political talk shows or your high school debate team but it will not stand up as substance anywhere else is that picture representing me or the 300 and some NYFD that...

also the idiot fireman didn't know that on that special day all the molten steel that was found was aloud to melt at 1500 deg F. (steel melts at 2700 deg F on any other day) hydrocarbons (jet fuel) has a max burn temp of 1500 deg F. and uncontrolled office fire of course can not get close to...

yes and the tin foil hatters, judicial watch with that old crazy conspiracy about white house going on cipro before the anthrax attack. And never did again before or after the anthrax attack. don't those idiots know that it was just a high probability coincidence. it was bound to happen...

name calling the last refuge of a failed argument since you didn't have time to watch the video i amuse you are not willing to have an intelligent conversation about it. I can tell the lack of substance in your post's that you have not researched this one bit. remember the white house...

if you can disprove all the engineers and physicists all start taking medication <embed id=VideoPlayback src=http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-8182697765360042032&hl=en&fs=true style=width:400px;height:326px allowFullScreen=true allowScriptAccess=always...

i guess your not aware that the cia funded the group that turned into the Al-Qaeda to fight the russians and the bush bin ladden connection to the Carlyle group

yes, the false left right paradigm is used as a distraction for the masses ( you know obama =socialist, bush=warmongering fascist) who don't take the time to follow voting records or legislation sponsorship. example John McCain's attack on liberty...

spot on, the no growth left crowed stumbles in there own arrogance as if their experts in every field known and unknown

New study appears to support theory of abiotic oil You may have heard of abiotic oil, the notion that oil is not the result of ancient biomass --hence the term fossil fuels -- but rather from compressed methane seeping up from the Earth's mantle. Most petroleum engineers spurn abiotic oil...

Has NASA struck oil on Titan? 09 July 2005 Magazine issue 2507. Subscribe and save FIRST they said there were seas of liquid hydrocarbons. Then they said there were none. Now, maybe there's a lake full of the gooey gunk. A company prospecting for oil? No, just NASA dithering over whether...

Petroleum under pressure Sep 14, 2004 Scientists in the US have witnessed the production of methane under the conditions that exist in the Earth's upper mantle for the first time. The experiments demonstrate that hydrocarbons could be formed inside the Earth via simple inorganic reactions --...

Though it's been in production for nearly 25 years, a huge natural gas field in Texas is now drawing the attention of major energy companies – but only after independent operations proved its worth. Fort Worth, Texas, is built on top the Barnett Shale natural gas field, a field so vast that...

you have provided no evidence to support your claims. no offence but i'll take scientist's research over your obfuscating Fossils From Animals And Plants Are Not Necessary For Crude Oil And Natural Gas, Swedish Researchers Find What would happen if it were proven that "fossil fuels"...

so because only some of the wells are refilling, that some how proves the fossil fuel theory ? Ya don't waste your time on research papers by geologists and scientists. I wouldn't want to confuse you with the facts Sounds like you spend a lot of time researching all aspects of the subject...

FACTS ARE FACTS Oil being discovered at 30,000 feet, far below the 18,000 feet where organic matter is no longer found. (wells as far as 40000 feet have hit oil ) Wells pumped dry later replenished. (look up the eugene island well in mexico)...

a weak try at creating positive news for the war. this deposit was well known for years http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1819 but i guess the idiots on et will eat up anything the establishment puts out we will more then likely discover it a few more time in the next few...

the left right paradigm is pushed hard by corporate media to distract the uneducated masses from who really has the power and controls both parties