 |
 |
Thank you, Scot. I think you have stated the position of the list owner quite accurately. John John S Whalley, Geoscience Programme Manager List owner - geo-tectonics (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/geo-tectonics.html) Tel +44 23 9284 2247 Fax +44 23 9284 2244 School of Earth and Environmental Sciences University of Portsmouth Portsmouth, PO1 3QL, UK Email- [log in to unmask] >>> "Krueger, Scot" <[log in to unmask]> 05/03/2012 15:09 >>> Please stop responding to quack posts! Responding to quack posts is simply an encouragement for them to keep posting. Every time you tell them to go away you are simply providing ammunition for their feeling of being persecuted by the scientific community. The best recourse is to simply delete these posts without responding, You do the tectonics board a disservice by provoking further responses. In the case of Karan's posts, it is fairly obvious from his own posts that he has not taken the time to become educated on the various theories and lines of evidence surrounding the origin of petroleum. The most obvious example is the mere fact that he has chosen a tectonics forum to raise his objections. I have privately provided him with links to more appropriate sites for such a discussion - giving him the benefit of the doubt that he may have something worth saying to an appropriate audience - but he has chosen to persist in posting here. Unlike many readers of this forum I also have an interest in the origins of petroleum. I asked him in private to provide me with a sample of what new evidence or new theories he has to present. His response was a claim that I would likely not accept his ideas, citing that it is evidence that God has presented to him, and pointing to a Bible Review web site where I can go to see his posts. He admits that he is not well studied in the scientific debate, being merely a middle aged businessman, but is convinced he has discovered the "truth". It is clear he has no interest in testing his "truth" against the existing data that has been amassed over the last few decades in the biogenic-abiogenic scientific debate. I think most readers of this forum are capable of recognizing this argument for what it is - a matter of faith, not science - and simply let it go as the occasional cost of maintaining an open forum. Unless we invoke a forum leader to screen posts (which I would not advocate, for reasons of scientific openness) we will need to accept that quacks will occasionally stumble on this forum and rant until they get bored and go elsewhere. Responding to such posts as if they were legitimate scientific inquiries merely prolongs the annoyance by provoking further reponses. Let's all stop and he will eventually get tired of ranting and go away. If reading such posts gets you riled up enough that you might respond, then simply delete them without reading them. I do not advocate stifling dissenting voices in scientific debate. If Karan has legitimate scientific aims, he will find a more appropriate forum. If not, the less we respond to his rantings, the sooner he will get bored and leave this forum to find another audience who will give him the attention he so desperately seeks. Scot From: Tectonics & structural geology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jann Beresford Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 11:33 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Plate Tectonic and Earth formation hi Karan i'm sorry to say this but you are really being quite boring with this deep origin stuff ...this email is a repeat of something you have said before ..... and i will be deleting anything further you write without opening it Jann Beresford Senior Geologist/Geotechnical Geologist Project Leader GeoQuest Zambia +260971696101 -----Original Message----- From: karan bansal <[log in to unmask]> To: GEO-TECTONICS <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 10:31 Subject: Plate Tectonic and Earth formation Dear members, Hydrocarbon formation can give us very important information about forces responsible for the motion of plates and earth formation also.so we should observe it minutely . there are sufficient evidence by the Russians that petroleum has deep origin but unfortunately they have manipulated it with abiogenic origin . they have ignored the strong evidence of its biogenic origin . while we have strong chemical evidence of its link with living organism(we have observe spores,porphyrins......etc ) and can not be ignored. 2. we are getting oil near the sediments. there is no need to manipulate it with abiogenic origin while we have of its deep origin also and they have been ignored by the scientific community.instead of manipulating it with abiogenic origin while deep origin also they have to observe the basic reason that why it has biogenic origin while having it has deep origin also. this can be both and can give us a very very important information about the earth formation and at the end forces responsible for the motion of plates. regs KARAN