[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

Search:


View post   

>> No.8157542 [View]

>>8157528
>It is a dishonest attempt at including something in a category it does not belong.

>Teacher says you got a math problem wrong
>Cashier doesn't smile
>Cop says

hahahaa, ok

>> No.8157537 [View]

>>8157512
>There's this thing called erosion. That black goo comes to the surface in all sorts of ways, and when crude oil seeps into an ecosystem, through entirely natural means, as it often does, it kills everything in it.

Yeah, this may be true. But, there is a reason why it happens naturally.
Like when you cut yourself. Blood is not supposed to be outside of you; But it flows out through the cut to serve its natural purpose and help it heal.
You can not tell me, or prove to my why petroleum flows out to the surface naturally. It can be to come in contact with the elements present on the athmosphere, or to distribute its chemicals to the area where the leak happens.
But one thing is clear. NONE of us can say, without a doubt, the exact purpose of such a thing.

>>8157524
>The theory merely states that life is dependent on life.
>That the biosphere is sustained by the life within it in cyclical fashion.

Hypotesis. Its called Gaia Hypotesis.
Anyway. You said it yourself, life is dependent on life. Only a living planet can harbor life of its own.

> the Earth will go on, whether the biosphere can sustain life or not.
OBVIOUSLY.

>> No.8157516 [View]

>>8157506
>Taking a dump in the middle of the court mid-game does not constitute winning
Should I start quoting all your posts containing insults and blatant disrespect? Because they perfectly qualify for that analogy.


>Also, your question is attempting to
my question is attempting to get an answer, which you have not provided.

I'll post it again for you,

What thing do you know that :
>uses its individual parts and foreign materials to form a synergistic self-regulating, complex system that helps to maintain and perpetuate the conditions for its life?

>> No.8157507 [View]

>>8157498
>I already pointed out to you that petroleum kills, in nature, without mankind being involved.
Where is petroleum naturally located? Which is petroleum's natural location?
UNDERGROUND.
In deep holes and caverns of the Earth.

What does petroleum kill in its natural place deep underground?
NOTHING.

Geez, It's like dealing with little kids.

>> No.8157495 [View]

>>8157468
I see you ignored the RELEVANT FACT, so i'll post it again for you.

Petroleum kills when misused by humans. Not while acting out its natural purpose.


>>8157476
> I'm convinced you care more about "winning" arguments instead of being actually right.
I AM right. I already won.

Now, please answer my question.
What thing do you know that :
uses its individual parts and foreign materials to form a synergistic self-regulating, complex system that helps to maintain and perpetuate the conditions for its life?

I can give you a hint if you're struggling. ;)

>> No.8157489 [DELETED]  [View]

I see you ignored the RELEVANT FACT, so i'll post it again for you.

Petroleum kills when misused by humans. Not while acting out its natural purpose.


>>8157476
> I'm convinced you care more about "winning" arguments instead of being actually right.
I AM right. I already won.

Now, please answer my question.
What thing do you know that :
uses its individual parts and foreign materials to form a synergistic self-regulating, complex system that helps to maintain and perpetuate the conditions for its life?

I can give you a hint if you're struggling. ;)

>> No.8157460 [View]

>>8157441
Petroleum kills when misused by humans. Not while acting out its natural purpose.

Try drinking a gallon of your own blood, see what happens.

>>8157443
Obviously, you are trolling. But you unknowingly got real close to understanding.

Please tell us what thing do you know that :
uses its individual parts and foreign materials to form a synergistic self-regulating, complex system that helps to maintain and perpetuate the conditions for its life?

>> No.8157450 [View]

>>8157431
>There's, thus, probably a whole lotta abiogenic petroleum out there. We know it happens
You are Admitting I'm right.

>we just don't think it happens
Science is not "what you think". Where are the facts to back your claims? Counterarguments need evidence to back them up, you scrub.

>How one leaps from a complex chemical chain that can, really, happen just about anywhere in the universe warm enough, to "THE BLOOD OF GIA" is a whole other thing though.

You will know if you read the information on the subject, which i provided links for. Instead of acting like a child and posting insults like a fat angry americunt.

>> No.8157426 [View]

>>8157415
>you need to provide the evidence.
i did provide peer reviewed studies by award winning scientists.

> In 2006, the Geological Society of London awarded Lovelock the Wollaston Medal in part for his work on the Gaia hypothesis

Try harder.

>The serious posts to you have raised their issues with the links you provided and you've heartily ignored them

See:
>>8156919
>well, give me an scientifically accepted online archive and I'll look up all my posted links there to corroborate.

Still waiting. Try even harder.

>> No.8157416 [View]

>>8157411
Great refutal.

>> No.8157403 [View]

>>8157396
if i am wrong, like you said; it shouldn't be hard for you to post some FACTS that completely and undoubtedly PROVE me wrong.

BUT. EVERYTHING you have posted so far is utter shit, insults and disrespect.

NOT A SINGLE LINK HAS BEEN POSTED BY ANY OF YOU TO REFUTE MY ARGUMENTS. NO DATA. NO SCIENTIFIC FACT HAS BEEN POSTED BY ANY ONE OF YOU.

>> No.8157392 [View]

>>8157388
>Your views and/or claims need to reflect the scientific facts

See:
>>8156747
>My claim is that petroleum [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum ] is the blood of Planet Earth. Meaning that the Earth is actually a Living being as stated by the Gaia Hypotesis. [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis ]
>In that thread someone posted about Abiogenic Petroleum in the thread. [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin ]
>Which is petroleum formed by inorganic means rather than by the decomposition of organisms.
>Abiogenic petroleum is the proof that the Gaia Hypotesis is true, and more than a mere hypotesis.
>But. Both ideas are being refuted despite all the evidence supporting them.

>> No.8157387 [View]

>>8157373
>linking unproven hypotheses together.
hahaha ok lets see how unproven they are.

>but later refinements resulted in ideas framed by the Gaia hypothesis being used in fields such as Earth system science, biogeochemistry, systems ecology, and the emerging subject of geophysiology
THAT'S REEEAALY UNPROVEN. RIGHT?

>Scientists in the former Soviet Union widely held that significant petroleum deposits could be attributed to abiogenic origin, though this view fell out of favor toward the end of the 20th century because they did not make useful predictions for the discovery of oil deposits.
COMPLETLY UNPROVEN. YEP. DEFINETLY.


ITS LIKE YOU IDIOTS HAVE ONLY HALF A BRAIN. HAHAHAHA

>> No.8157368 [View]

I don't get why you react so negatively to this information that could change the world and our society for the better, its like you like being raped by the powers that be.

>> No.8157352 [View]
File: 366 KB, 773x629, even captcha knows.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8157352

>>8157325
>that's not a good analogy
that's an opinion.

>why not pick water to be the blood?
what is basic biology?
what is the function of water in our cells as opposed to the function of blood?

in any case, there are also petroleum reserves at the bottom of the ocean. Chemicals from this reserves are obviously filtering through the seabed into the water, and are being used by microorganisms as food and so goes the food chain.

>>8157328
oh, look! more insults. lovely.

>> No.8157312 [View]
File: 136 KB, 895x525, IRRATIONAL.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8157312

>>8157300
>I need your sweet autism screen shot for memes.
oh, i have one for you, mate

>> No.8157310 [View]

>>8157260
>When you refer to "the Earth," what exactly are you referring to? Is it the mantle, core, etc. not including all of the organisms on its surface?
The whole of it. From the nucleus to the outer reaches of the atmosphere. And its electromagnetic fields.

>When you say that "the Earth is alive", what do you mean?
Read up on the Gaia Hypothesis, and you'll know what i mean.

>why then is petroleum significant?
that comes in for the conspiracy theory part of my original thread on /x/
I stated that "what if" petroleum is actually the planet's blood. Then somebody posted the link on Abiogenic Petroleum, which is further confirmation that petroleum can actually be the planet's blood. Because the planet naturally creating a liquid that contains high levels hydrocarbons; which are the primary building block of life on its surface; is evidence that ( quoting the article on the Gaia Hypotesis) "organisms interact with their inorganic surroundings on Earth to form a synergistic self-regulating, complex system that helps to maintain and perpetuate the conditions for life on the planet."

>Plants need sunlight and water as well;
Yes, obviously. Petroleum just supplies the soil plants grow on with carbons, which plants use as nutrients.
An analog to this is how us humans get oxigenated by our blood but also need food and water. its not that hard to comprehend.

>are the processes which deliver these nutrients to the plant part of some greater lifeform too?
see my previous quote.


>Moreover, petroleum does not flow,
You have no way of knowing this, nor proving it to me or anybody else. The whole planet is riddled with miles over miles of caverns.

>nor does it have any properties similar to blood (apart from being a liquid)
colors are similar. texture is similar. they both carry a lot of different chemicals useful to the organism that holds them. both are stored under the surface of the organism.

anything else?

>> No.8157271 [View]

>>8157262
the first two are obviously trolls.
the third one wasn't there. which means tampering with the thread.
and the fourth one i actually quoted.

now if you excuse me, i have to write my answers for >>8157260

>> No.8157256 [View]

>>8157229
>No one agrees with you.
im not asking anybody to agree with me.
>>8156707 (OP)
>I would like a scientific perspective on this because if i am going to prove a conspiracy theory, I need scientific facts to back my views and/or claims.


>You still think are fucking right though
Of course I fucking do believe I am right.
Your behaviour proves me right.
This is /sci/ yet all of you incessantly shitpost and insult me without even addressing my points and arguments. You are a joke.

>> No.8157219 [View]

>>8157198
>I haven't been attempting to be scientific.
Nobody has.

>I just hate name/trip fags
Why would you put more emphasis on the device used to avoid impersonation and disruption of the information posted, rather than the information itself?

>and want to piss you off so much that you leave.
Not gonna happen, sorry. all you are achieving is the complete opposite.
All you are doing is amusing me and feeding my ego because none can refute my arguments in a decent and evidence backed manner.

>> No.8157189 [View]

>>8157176
If anything, you are the one that belongs there.

None of you have posted any refutal backed by evidence. All you have done is insult and ridicule, exactly like you do when you go low key shitposting on /x/.

>I hereby appoint myself emperor of /sci/.

>> No.8157154 [View]

>>8157137
>>8157142
wow, your science is amazing

>> No.8157120 [View]

>>8157104
>Wikipedia is not a credible source.


Hey, faggot.
Do you know how to read or do you need some help?


And if you consider wikipedia is not evidence then see:
>>8156919
>well, give me an scientifically accepted online archive and I'll look up all my posted links there to corroborate.

>> No.8157088 [View]

>>8157056
I am not asking /sci/ to prove or disprove anything.
And if you had taken the liberty of actually reading my first two post you would know that.

>>8156707
>I would like a scientific perspective on this because if i am going to prove a conspiracy theory, I need scientific facts to back my views and/or claims.

>>8156747
>My claim is that petroleum [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum ] is the blood of Planet Earth. Meaning that the Earth is actually a Living being as stated by the Gaia Hypotesis. [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis ]

In other words; I asked for an examination of my claims and the evidence I posted to back it up.

And if you consider wikipedia is not evidence then see:
>>8156919
>well, give me an scientifically accepted online archive and I'll look up all my posted links there to corroborate.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]