Because earth is a living thing-could oil be considered it's blood-if so any harm by us replacing oil w/ sand?

i liked C taylor answer. Slim, you gotta tone it down. Your somewhat educational, but you also have a closed mind. A more creative mind would wonder about things like seismic activity and the grind of tectonic plates. Couldn't it be possibly to see the Earth as an organism? And couldn't this organism produce its own natural lubricant to minimize grinding of its internal structure? We humans have cartiledge and synovial fluids between all our bone joints. Lets say we replace the cartiledge and synovial fluid between the bone joints in your hand with sand. How would this make you feel? Would you still retain use of your hand?


You seem to be an educated man, albeit with a closed mind. Perhaps you could enlighten us on the correlation between areas of the world with high seismic activity and areas or the world such as the Middle East or Texas? I am not trying to be a wise ***, i just want this question answered once and for all. Are we increasing the likelyhood of sudden tectonic plate shift by reducing the Earths upper mantles supply of petroleum oilBecause earth is a living thing-could oil be considered it's blood-if so any harm by us replacing oil w/ sand?
Not necessarily the case. If you're looking and the plants and life on earth then okay. But the earth is made mostly of rock. Blood cells are live, but oil is made of dead animals under high pressure!Because earth is a living thing-could oil be considered it's blood-if so any harm by us replacing oil w/ sand?
That's an interesting thought, but i don't think that it works that way
Well the way gasoline prices keep going up we may see a run on the local taverns to get alcohol for getting around lol
if earth was a living thing oil would not be its blood


it would be lava


blood has to be insde of you


plus lava renues the earth; oil harms it


hope this helps
first of all earth isnt a living thing thus oil couldnt be considered its blood, and yes there is harm replacing sand with oil, if more oil starts developing and there is sand there then the sand will absorb all the oil therefore making us have to pay more for oil.
The earth is a living organism, but not in the way we consider things to be alive. It is alive in that it responds to environmental changes, such as when it was young it had a poisonous atmosphere, however, over the eons, bacteria and plants added gases to change the climate, add nitrogen and other greenhouse gases and warm up the planet, slowly adding more oxygen, etc. Then this sets off a domino effect, response follows response almost as if it were a living organism.
the reason earth is referred to as a living organism is because like actual organisms, it has different systems which feed off one another. it has needs, and also has the capacity to correct any that arent met. for example, ice ages are the result of global warming.. earth gets too hot and has to cool itself down. (it doesnt actually work like that, but in a nut shell.. atmosphere warms up, glaciers melt, more of the planet is covered in water, planet doesnt absorb as much heat at surface, atmosphere temperature drops, ice age begins, more glaciers are created, process repeats itself) anyways, thats the way the whole planet works. including oil. just because we are running short on it right now, a few hundred or even thousand years from now oil will again be all over the surface of the earth, because the oil leftovers arent floating off into space. the exhaust from our cars for example is just going up into the atmosphere. it will eventually come back down to earth and make its way back into the ground. the only way we could actually change the earth perminantly is if we somehow blasted a giant proportion of the earths resources into space.. and it wasnt able to correct itself back to its original form because it didnt have the materials to do so. otherwise - earth will be okay, lets worry about us.
One word -- No.





I find it unfortunate the pot smoking Gaia worshippers seem to be so predominantly stupid.





Oil is a by product of plant decomposition, it is not blood.





It will not be replaced by sand, the amount of ';oil and oil products'; taken from the earth is a minimal part of the crust material, to the tune of about 1-1,000,000th of the crust material is contained. (1ppm) in terms idiots can understand.





Oil in material is general locked up in sands and often is mixed with Salt H20. So essentially voids from removal of oil does not occur.





The arrogance of ecowhacks is amazing to me. Each ecowhack ought to take a course or two in geology and petrology before they inflict people with their idiosy on a message board like this.
everything we do affects the earth and it's atmosphere in either a positive or negative way, it's better to fill it with sand then to leave an empty hole in the ground which could collapse or cave in and bring millions of dollars worth of structures down with it!
Oh no! Don't say that! I will never use oil again if you start talking like that.
You know, one day we may find that petroleum from deep in the earth has a very important role in the earth's internal dynamics, and removing it would cause some catastrophic event.


Definitely, burning fossil fuels is causing catastrophic global warming.
oil would not be considered its blood. Earth is a rock, with living things ON it.
Anthropomorphism: treating inanimate objects like animate objects.
Share!
Only a finite supply of sand so the replacement of oil with sand is rather illogical.





http://sorenson.blogspot.com
I would actually say that filling in Oil deposits with sand or some other sort of soil would actually make the ground around the well a lot safer. Oil forms in porous rocks that are very weak unless filled with a fluid -oil- If these sites are not properly fille din with sand then the gound will collapse. In fact the sand infill if properly designed could ever be safer than the origional oil deposit








As for burning all the stuff and putting it into our atmosphere that is another question
Your premise that the earth is a living thing, unfortunately, is wrong. Although the earth appears to be a living entity, it does not meet the definition of life.
earth isn't a living thing, it has just has us running around on its skin. so no, oil is not the blood of the earth, just the lifeblood of the bush administration (ooo, burn....)