If you agree that oil is the only resource not being replaced by mass as its a liquid being turned to gas, wouldnt this theory answer a few questions better than the global warming perspective?
If the earth is growing smaller wouldnt it explain a lot of things about extreme weather patterns, as there is simply less mass for the sun to heat up than when the earth was slightly bigger or could it be a slight destortion of the earths shape as oil is extracted from the same areas over years,
affecting the rotation of the earth affecting the axis it spins on in relation to the sun.Could the result of the rising waters actually be the earth getting smaller from the extraction of oil?
Petroleum is stored in porous, permeable formations deep below the surface. Even when the petroleum is not replaced by some other fluid, the formations, though porous, are rigid, and their dimensions are not changed significantly when oil is removed.
Coal is a different matter. Eighty years ago, coal companies removed all the coal except for intermittent pillars and then sold the pillars to the people whose houses were located on the surface above them. No, they can't do that any longer.Could the result of the rising waters actually be the earth getting smaller from the extraction of oil?
There have been enough measurements of glaciers and ice caps to determine that the reduction in these is the primary cause of rising waters.
No
Remember that many oil extraction companies pump slurries (including water) back into the hole. So water should be ';shrinking'; too.
More importantly, the hole would have to collapse and we'd be able to measure that seismically. It is a very rare event.
Finally, plants turn the gases back into solid (leaves and such), so not all the gas is ';lost';.
No comments:
Post a Comment