Tuesday, February 17, 2009

The Wisdom of Plato

"A marvellous forgetfulness of the former destruction would appear to have come over them." -- Plato, Laws: Book III, 360 B.C.

"There did really happen, and will again happen, like many other events of which ancient tradition has preserved the record, the portent which is traditionally said to have occurred in the quarrel of Atreus and Thyestes. ... how the sun and the stars once rose in the west, and set in the east, and that the god reversed their motion, and gave them that which they now have as a testimony to the right of Atreus. " -- Plato, The Statesman, 360 B.C.

But Plato was only the Scholarch of the Greek Academy so what did he know?


Anaconda said...


The scientific evidence for Abiotic Oil theory was overwhelming and no sceptic challenges the evidence. Recently, Cliff "Peak" Wirth did a couple of "drive by" comments, but couldn't be bothered to engage in discussion.

Others have engaged in a couple of posts, but soon lost heart.

As I wrote above, the evidence is overwhelming.

The oil industry, itself, prefers not to talk about origins.

The Oil Is Mastery website took the "fossil" theory apart. It doesn't hold up under close inspection.

Expanding Earth theory was the next to come down the line. The evidence doesn't reach up and grab you by the throat the way Abiotic Oil theory does, but there is substantial evidence and most independent scientific observers come away from analyzing the evidence with severe doubts about Subduction theory.

What stands out: 40,000 miles of expansion ridges in the oceans, and less than 15,000 miles of questionable "subduction zones".

It doesn't add up.

Not to mention the "subduction zones" show no real evidence of being "subduction zones" at all.

Rather, the "zones" are more consistent with being rifts where the Earth is splitting apart, not sliding underneath.

Then I hit upon Plasma Cosmology on my internet searches and brought it to OilIsMastery's attention.

Again, the evidence is substantial and "modern" astronomers tend to respond like a vampire to a cross when confronted by it (Although, not all astronomers by any means.)

A corollary to Plasma Cosmology is the Velikovsky point of view. Many subscribe to his view, others rage against it.

Say what you will about Velikovsky, but it seems nobody likes the smartest guy in the room.

Velikovsky is provocative mostly because he makes such a strong case seemingly out of thin air.

Who ever heard of all these world myths?

Now, the Mt. Everest of scientific questions is put on the agenda here at the Oil Is Mastery website.

On an ease of proof scale, 1 - 10 scale, 1 being easiest and 10 being hardest to prove scientifically, I'd put Abiotic Oil at about a 4 on the scale; Expanding Earth same at about a 4; and Plasma Cosmology, also at about a 4; Velikovsky at about a 6; but demonstrating that Man's history of civilization goes back beyond 5,000 years to say 15,000 or to whenever...is the hardest proof of all, I'd say about a 10.

But heck, bring it on and see where the evidence leads.

If this website is about anything, it is about having an open-mind and following the evidence wherever it leads.

This website is not about saying what can't be, but about what can be.

Yes, somethings do get "pushed out of the way" when new ideas take precedence.

But you know what they say: "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs."

Anaconda said...


I knew about Abiotic Oil theory, but I now know the theory backwards and forwards and the physical evidence in support of the theory.

I didn't know about Expanding Earth theory and the failures of Subduction theory.

I didn't know about Plasma Cosmology and the failures of the "gravity only model."

I hadn't heard of Velikovsky.

Have I expanded my knowledge?

You bet.