Re: cyril's "bio-origins" coal with dino skeletons

I put that message in alt-politics.radical-left in response to your
message "why is the oil price so high ? 2/2". I think it is more
accurate to put it here.

> THE PARTICULAR CASE OF COAL
>The question of the origins of coal has important bearings on
>the question of the origins of oil too.
>etc...

Very interesting,

I was precisely debating about abiotic coal on a forum.

I had a different approach about that. But the approaches you mention
are completing mine.

My approach is that you don't find tones of reptiles or amphibians
bones, or fossilised animals in the coal mines, nor amber (which is
produced from conifers, which are supposed to be the most important
carboniferous trees in terms of mass), nor coal having shape of tree or
algae (which should be the case, since coal transformation is like
fossilisation transformation, trees should keep their shape, ad least a
good part of them).

It should be the case, since coal is supposed to be created from
carboniferous forests (-300 millions year) and Palaeogene era forests
(-60 millions years) (very curiously, accoding to the official theory,
there is no coal transformation between let say -250 and -60 millions
years). So, miners should find dinosaurs or reptiles bones all the
time. Coal mines should be an Eldorado for palaeontologists. But it is
not the case. You find some fossils, but it seems that they are found
only near the surface and not in very big quantities. So, it is clear
that coal is abiotic.

This is were the Gold's theory gives an explanation and is completing
mine. I thought that, maybe, there was some ground movement that buried
those animals. But the Gold's explanation is much more satisfying (I
had thought about it, but very quickly, and I had not linked this with
the fossils buried in coal). There are animals or plants fossils, but
only near the surface, and this is because at this time it was oil
becoming coal and hence, animals and plants sank in this oil but not
very deeply. This is a logic and satisfying explanation.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: cyrils "bio-origins" coal with dino skeletons
    ... >bones, or fossilised animals in the coal mines, nor amber (which is ... >there is no coal transformation between let say -250 and -60 millions ... You find some fossils, but it seems that they are found ... But the Gold's explanation is much more satisfying (I ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... 38 phyla of different groups of animals, but the total number of phyla ... Cambrian than it is now. ... BS again Multi-cellular animals did not evolve ... Both trace fossils and body fossils (the "small shelly fauna" ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... 38 phyla of different groups of animals, but the total number of phyla ... fossils, than exist now. ... Cambrian than it is now. ... BS again Multi-cellular animals did not evolve ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... 38 phyla of different groups of animals, but the total number of phyla ... fossils, than exist now. ... Cambrian than it is now. ... BS again Multi-cellular animals did not evolve ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... 38 phyla of different groups of animals, but the total number of phyla ... Cambrian than it is now. ... Both trace fossils and body fossils (the "small shelly fauna" ...
    (talk.origins)