A 1957 book by Ayn Rand describes the plan to declare war on “fossil fuels”

 John Todd, also known by various aliases including John Todd Collins, Lance Collins and Christopher Kollyns, said he was a high-ranking member of a secret satanic conspiracy involving the Illuminati and witchcraft. He asserted he was born into a family of witches and was groomed from childhood to become a Grand Druid high priest within the Illuminati, a secret group he claimed was plotting a global takeover.

He served as a high priest in the “Council of Thirteen,” a group he said was subordinate to the Rothschild family, whom he alleged were demonic entities. Todd said his family lineage, the Collins bloodline, had been involved in witchcraft for generations.

In 1973, five years before Todd spoke at the Elkton Maryland Baptist Church, there was an oil crisis, which was caused by an embargo by Arab oil-producing nations in response to US support for Israel during the Yom Kippur War.

There had been a decades-long struggle between the governments of oil-producing nations and the large US oil conglomerates for control over the global oil market. Until the 1970s, OPEC, formed in 1960, had kept a relatively low profile, mainly negotiating with international oil companies for better terms for its member countries. OPEC saw the Yom Kippur War as a way to make its geopolitical power known and to strike a blow at the US oil giants.

Also in 1973, the world economy was in recession and the Bretton Woods international monetary system was formally ended. The Bretton Woods international monetary system was established in July 1944 at the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire....<<<Read More>>>...

The Great Oil Conspiracy: It has been known since the end of WWII that oil is not a fossil fuel; it is abiotic

 There are two basic theories for the origin of crude oil: biotic and abiotic.

The origin of petroleum or natural gas may seem like a strange debate to have but determining whether this fuel is a fossil fuel or not is important.

If these fuels are truly fossil fuels, then they are limited in supply and alternative energy resources would need to be created at some point.

If they are not fossil fuels and are created through some form of abiogenesis – a natural process from non-living matter – then the need to develop alternative fuels is diminished.

The biotic theory is that oil and gas drilled out of the earth come from the remains of plants and animals trapped underground millions of years ago. These “fossil fuels” took aeons to form and we are using them up far faster than they can be replenished.

This fossil fuel theory is, however, just that – a theory. There are many features of the fossil-origin theory which still apparently puzzle some scientists. So, what if the whole theory is wrong?

The abiotic theory is an opposing view that has substantial evidence to back it up. This theory goes back centuries and includes as its prominent champions Dimitri Mendeleev, best known for inventing the periodic table...<<<Read More>>>....

Oil is not a fossil fuel; it is the second most prevalent liquid on Earth

“[When] oil went from a lubricant to a fuel [ ] it made it valuable. Rockefeller happened to be the smartest man in the business at the time but he made most of his money, or much of it, off the transport of the petroleum as well as selling it.

“Putting a price on oil is like putting a price on a pail of water, no initial cost, that’s in the ground. And in those days, they were, some of it, almost what you’d call surface mining the oil, they didn’t go down deep. So, in order to get the price up, they hit on the idea that they would have to make it appear to be scarce.

“[Fortuitously] in 1892 there was a convention in Geneva of scientists to determine what organic substances are. Well, the definition of organic is a substance with hydrogen, oxygen and carbon. It’s usually a living substance … At this Geneva convention, Rockefeller took advantage of sending some scientists over who said: ‘Oil, petroleum is hydrogen, oxygen and carbon therefore it must be derived from [ ] the rotting of formerly living matter’.

“When the scientific convention was over, they defined oil as the residue from formerly living matter. Well, that makes it a ‘fossil fuel’.

“There has never been a fossil, a real fossil, found below sixteen thousand feet … We drill for oil at thirty thousand, thirty three thousand, twenty eight thousand, every day of the week. So, right there we rule it out that it isn’t fossil fuel. It’s called fossil fuel for the minds of the public to feel that it is an asset that is running out [and] being depleted.

“If you know the world’s oil supply, you know that it is not going to run out for an awfully long time. It is the second most prevalent liquid on Earth.”....<<<Read More>>>...

The Great Oil Conspiracy: The Conclusion

“It is time to end the cover-up and misinformation that has prevented the American public from knowing the truth about oil – that hydrocarbon fuels are abiotic in nature, produced by the earth naturally on a continuous basis, and that the quantity of abiotic hydrocarbons yet to be discovered suggests the world will never run out of oil or natural gas”—Jerome Corsi, The Great Oil Conspiracy

Air renews itself naturally, as does water. Why should oil or natural gas be different? The scenario of a modern industrial society, doomed to outlive the affordable hydrocarbon fuels that have made economic growth and prosperity possible, is consistent with a secular society desperate to replace God and Divine Providence with central planning imposed by a crushing state bureaucratic apparatus. In the 1950s, Sinclair Oil sold gasoline to motorists under a logo that featured a green dinosaur, while Shell Oil employed an executive who sought to prove the end of “fossil fuels” was at hand by adapting the graph of a normal distribution that is taught to every Statistics 101 college student. More than sixty years later, the world still has abundant hydrocarbon fuels, even though Sinclair Oil has dropped the dinosaur logo.

Major oil companies appear ready to drop fossil fuel illusions. A Shell Oil executive has expressed doubt on national television that peak production theory is correct. “The peak oil theory has really swamped the world,” John Hofmeister, then the president of Shell Oil’s US operations, said on CNBC’s Squawk Box show on March 20, 2008. “God Bless Matt Simmons. His assumptions are correct based on his hypotheses, but his hypotheses are too narrow.”134 This is a remarkable admission from the company that produced M. King Hubbert. There is no reason America should be dependent upon foreign sources for oil. There is no reason we should be paying exorbitant amounts for a gallon of gasoline at the pump. Allowed to do their job without unnecessary government intervention, independent producers in conjunction with major oil companies should be able to provide Americans with an abundant supply of inexpensive energy for decades to come, especially if Americans are finally told the truth that oil and natural gas are not now and never were fossil fuels....<<<Read More>>>...

Time to Stop Pretending Renewables Are Cheap

 In the cacophony of voices clamouring for a hasty ‘energy transition’ away from fossil fuels, there are several tropes that are regularly employed by devotees of the Church of Climate. Over the past few decades, these tropes have been weaponised to convince lay people to cede all power to climate bureaucrats to ‘save the planet’. 

One trope that permeates the mass media and writings by ‘climate experts’ like Michael Mann and Bill McKibben is ‘cheap’ solar and wind energy. This is despite the debunking of the magical thinking of the ‘new’ energy economy by those who understand and respect the laws of physics and economics.

Another trope that has gained traction among green ideologues is the ‘primary energy fallacy’. Social media commentary is peppered with references to this fallacy, frequently invoked to show that fossil fuels need not be replaced ‘one-to-one’ by ‘efficient’ renewable energy. This notion, peddled by advocates of wind and solar power such as Dr Jan Rosenow, Senior Research Associate at Oxford and Cambridge Universities, argues that traditional metrics of primary energy consumption — measuring the raw energy extracted from nature before conversion — systematically underestimate the contributions of renewables....<<<Read More>>>....

Decline of the North American decarbonization charade: Fossil fuels signal the end of green illusions

 This June, two seismic events upended the climate agenda’s facade in North America: Nippon Steel’s $14.9 billion acquisition of U.S. Steel—the largest industrial deal in decades—and Saskatchewan’s defiant plan to keep coal-fired plants operational beyond 2030. 

These actions signal not minor setbacks but a tectonic shift: the end of the era of climate orthodoxy. 

The “decarbonization fantasy,” built on ESG mandates and Net Zero pledges, is crumbling under the weight of economic pragmatism and the unassailable truth that fossil fuels remain the linchpin of global progress....<<<Read More>>>...

Food for Thought #636

 

Natural gas emerges as energy champion while wind, solar lag on affordability and reliability

 As the world grapples with the competing demands of affordability, reliability and environmental sustainability in energy policy, two new independent analyses confirm a striking reality: natural gas leads as the most cost-effective and dependable energy source, while wind and solar rank as the least efficient—despite receiving disproportionate subsidies and political favor. Published separately by Northwood University and The Heartland Institute, both studies reveal that natural gas outperforms all alternatives, with nuclear, hydro and coal following closely, while wind and solar lag significantly in economic and operational viability.

This revelation comes at a critical time, as global energy demands surge and policymakers face mounting pressure to balance climate goals with real-world feasibility. With President Trump’s recent executive order revitalizing coal production and natural gas expansion, these findings underscore a fundamental debate: Should nations double down on proven energy solutions or continue pouring taxpayer dollars into unreliable renewables?...<<<Read More>>>...

Alex Epstein’s “Fossil Future” explains why fossil fuels are necessary for humans to flourish

In his provocative book "Fossil Future: Why Global Human Flourishing Requires More Oil, Coal and Natural Gas – Not Less," Alex Epstein challenges the mainstream narrative that fossil fuels are a threat to humanity.

He argues that they are indispensable for global prosperity, providing low-cost, reliable energy that has lifted billions out of poverty and mitigated climate-related disasters. Epstein's argument rests on three key conclusions:

First, fossil fuels provide unmatched energy reliability. For billions of people lacking access to affordable energy, fossil fuels remain the most cost-effective and dependable source. Unlike intermittent renewables like solar and wind, fossil fuels deliver consistent power essential for industrialization and modern living.

Second, energy abundance drives human flourishing. Cheap, reliable energy powers machines that improve living standards—from medical advancements to agricultural productivity. Epstein highlights how fossil-fueled industrialization has reduced extreme poverty from 42 percent in 1980 to under 10 percent today.

Lastly, climate impacts are manageable. While fossil fuels have contributed to a 1 C rise in global temperatures over 170 years, Epstein contends that human ingenuity enabled by fossil-fueled technology has made societies more resilient. Climate-related disaster deaths have plummeted by 98 percent in the last century due to advancements like irrigation, sturdy infrastructure, and early warning systems....<<<Read More>>>...

Net Zero will Destroy You, Your Family and Everything You Love

 The drive towards Net Zero is fuelled by the climate change myth and is based on a delicately balanced raft of pseudoscientific evidence and fake news material which are used by professional propagandists and skilled conspirators to sustain the notion that fossil fuels are threatening our world and our very existence.

The myth they have created has been propagated with absurd enthusiasm by small but vocal teams of compliant and easily led enthusiasts, most of whom almost certainly believe that the lies they have been told are the truth and that if we do not make substantive changes to our way of life then we have no future. They’ve been taught that the seas will boil and rise up to engulf the land, life as we have known it will become impossible and the human race will be doomed.

As a result of this nonsensical belief (which is no better established in science than the equally absurd but far less dangerous and damaging theories that the Earth is flat, there are no germs and that gravity does not exist) governments around the world now argue that they have no choice but to take drastic action to save us from doom. Aided and abetted by gullible, easily led, virtue-signalling leaders of charities, lobby groups, bankers and investment groups, action is, therefore, being taken to halt the use of all fossil fuels and to change every aspect of the way we live.

The Supreme Court in the UK has ruled that a local council should have considered the climate impact of burning oil before allowing new wells. This will put all future oil and gas projects in doubt both in the UK and in the EU. A Swiss woman won a victory at the European Court of Human Rights to force Switzerland to do more to deal with the myth of climate change. This is all insanity.

The best joke of the century so far is that China is selling solar panels and electric vehicles to the West and burning coal to create the electricity to make them.

And as we in the West are encouraged by the lunatics to condemn fossil fuels no one is allowed to mention that 84% of global energy comes from fossil fuels. (That is just 2% less than in 1973, by the way.) Without oil and gas, we would have to survive on 16% of the energy we use now. Oh, and you can’t make fertiliser or fly planes with solar power or ugly, bird-crunching windmills.

It is absurd that it should be suggested that we abandon fossil fuels. To do so would mean being prepared to alter every aspect of our lives. Without fossil fuels, we will have very little food, no schools, no hospitals, very little transport (except what is provided by horses and bicycles), no computers, no television, no magazines or newspapers, no air conditioning, no mobile phones, little or no lighting, little or no heating and little or no cooking. Like it or not we will be dragged back (by 2030, if the fanatics have their way) to the 19th century. Solar panels and windmills will not stop this happening. I wonder how many of those who support the idea of Net Zero know what will happen....<<<Read More>>>...

Not all “fossil fuels” are from fossils, so where do they come from?

 Nearly everyone thinks that “fossil fuels” come from fossils or ancient organic material forests, jungles, plankton or dinosaurs held under the ground for millennia that transform into oil, gas and coal.

But, if hydrocarbons, or “fossil fuels,” are made from fossils, why are they found deep under the oceans and at the top of the Earth? Or why does one of Saturn’s moons have more natural oil and gas than on Earth?

So, if all hydrocarbons are not from fossils where do they come from? And what does it tell us about climate change policies being proposed and implemented?

These questions are central to proposals for the future of energy usage in the world. To provide some answers, Dr. Willie Soon joined Tucker Carlson to discuss fossil fuels in space, the false climate change narrative, global warming throughout history, forces that are ruining science and evidence that God exists.

Dr. Willie Soon is an American astrophysicist and geoscientist. He is a co-team leader at CERES Science and is a leading authority on the relationship between solar phenomena and global climate. For more than 32 years he has been studying the Sun-Earth relations in terms of not only meteorology and climate but also in terms of orbital dynamics of Sun-Earth-other planets interactions, magmatic (volcanoes) and tectonic (earthquakes) activities.

In a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, Dr. Soon explained that a lot of what we’ve been told about energy and climate is false. “I would [say] about 80 to 90% of the papers published in so-called ‘climate science’ today should not be published,” he said.

There are two basic theories for the origin of crude oil: biotic and abiotic.

The biotic theory is that oil and gas drilled out of the earth come from the remains of plants and animals trapped underground millions of years ago. These “fossil fuels” took aeons to form and we are using them up far faster than they can be replenished.

The abiotic theory is an opposing view that has substantial evidence to back it up. As we noted in a previous article, this theory goes back centuries and includes as one of its prominent champions Dimitri Mendeleev, best known for inventing the periodic table.

As with all theories, it is never as clear-cut as either one or the other. While Dr. Soon agrees that hydrocarbons are formed from fossils, he says that there is considerable evidence that this is not the only way that hydrocarbons can be produced.

As Dr. Soon noted, we do not yet know what percentage of the Earth’s hydrocarbons were formed from biological fossils and what percentage were formed from non-biological (abiogenic) processes.

This does not necessarily mean that our accessible hydrocarbon reserves are limitless. But on the other hand, the widespread debates over “limited resources” and “renewable energies” are often unscientific and unrealistic....<<<Read More>>>...