Yes, I have been to El Zonte and San Blas three times this year and it is extremely safe. If you already know Spanish you will do great! Although there are a few English speakers in El Zonte.

The most dangerous things in El Zonte are the waves and sometimes the local bacteria in the water or raw vegetables.

I get my food and water from Super Selectos in La Libertad.

Moneydelics, Ryan and Jessica, Mike Peterson, Nikki and James all have YouTube channels talking about the area if you want to learn more.

I respect the skepticism, but the study of petroleum generation is decades old and there is little reason to expect misinformation here. Additionally, I have not seen any concrete reasons to doubt the biogenic theory to explain all petroleum deposits on earth. Reservoir recharge and long migration pathways are both easily explained by the theory and chemical fingerprint data from oil and source rock deposits support the theory. If you have any specific examples of vast oil deposits that contradict the theory I would be glad to look into it.

It’s not being “motivated to disbelieve the most widely supported” explanation, more than it’s attempting to address some contradictions that the most widely held theory has a handful of potentially serious contradictions that only seem very loosely addressed. Essentially argued unimportant due to the other evidence in favor of it.

While the abiogenic theory has contradictions as well, but presents an extremely compelling explanation. I don’t “adhere” to either, but think the abiogenic theory is very interesting and I think the simple “the default must be true” mentality makes it much easier for the vast majority to ignore the contradictions in the status quo, while believing any inability to fully explain every piece in an alternative theory suggests what we already think must, by default, be the truth.

I obviously only have limited knowledge of this and it’s mostly a passing interest of mine. But I think both are compelling explanations and neither has conclusively convinced me.

I’m less inclined to simply believe what I’m told because those things have turned out to be wrong a *ton* of times in my past. If the economics, civics, nutrition, and medical “truths” I was taught (plus every war we’ve been through was built on staggering piles of bullshit), then why should I blindly believe the other “norms” they are so certain of? Seems to have a pretty garbage track record so far in my life, and not that some of these theories were just a little wrong either, it’s often terribly wrong with disastrous consequences…

So I choose to leave it open. Seems like a very reasonable decision from my perspective. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Any good guides out there on best practices, dos/don’ts for multi-sig set ups?

You mean that kerogen isn’t formed via other mechanisms?

There is quite a bit of life that dies and gets buried every day. And this has been true non-stop for billions of years. It's not like the process ceased when the dinos went extinct, right?

If kerogen is associated with plant life, what proves for you that this association only goes one way?

With respect, while I don’t think the 80 byte OP_RETURN thing should actually be filtered because it’s a lot point by now, there IS a critically important difference between filtering and censoring in this context:

• One is a question of WHAT is allowed in the bitcoin chain, which is a universal policy. Every node does this and this is similar to arguments with RBF and the like. In a sense, this is the only thing bitcoin does, is filter with extreme prejudice, WHAT goes into the chain.

— there is an argument to be had on whether the byte issue is good/bad, but it’s not censoring privacy transactions or coinjoins. It’s a filter that *happens* to catch one kind.

• The other is a question of WHO gets into the blockchain. F2Pool here had the audacity to claim that a certain address, with a certain balance, is owned by some “evil” people because some govt body, without trial or due process, has declared their evil acts and demanded punishment & eviction from market activities.

Regardless of whether this particular kind of filtering should be considered good, or that it potentially sets a bad precedent, they are not the same thing in terms of the danger and subjectivity of the decisions.

Deciding WHAT goes into the chain is a process of defining the bitcoin system, deciding WHO can get into the chain is censorship and violating the basic tenant of neutrality.

The phrase isn’t “Bitcoin is for everything,” it’s “Bitcoin is for everyone. nostr:note14hm0a4xz7v5dmsmslj6h694vmnlytc59k4mv2s254clm3zdcpzmsujjv3x

Given the numerous falsehoods woven into our greater society for the mere purpose of mind control, I tend to be skeptical of the general narratives propagated to the masses.

The term "fossil fuel" is a PsyOp; and I believe it's not as scarce as it's professed to be.

That's just my two Sats though.

Can you explain, conclusively, why it is that oil that comes from plant life and whatever other conditions that cause it to be in that form, is necessarily *created* by life, and not simply left over? Such that those same conditions couldn’t create it from hydrocarbons that aren’t a result of organic matter decay?

You mention some well known points that are relevant, but then the conclusion doesn’t follow. That “oil would not have formed prior to the existence of certain kinds of life” is not supported by the fact that organic matter can turn into oil if the conditions are right.

Again, my analogy. This would be like saying water was created by life because it seeps out of organic matter. The claim that it’s *created* solely by this means, and then explicitly adding certain conditions of pressure and temperature, simply is a guess. All of those other things can be true, while hydrocarbons could still create oil under similar conditions of pressure and temperature without life having been involved at all.

Actually disagree here too. I think there is a concerted effort to ignore and deny the fact that it isn’t a “fossil” fuel. To the contrary it’s something naturally created by the planet that rises to the surface. There are many “depleted” wells that fill back up if you just leave them. There are VAST deposits that haven’t been anywhere near dead plant or animal life. There are deposits way below the surface layer where all of life is supposed to have occurred, AND, just for fun, there are hydrocarbons (oil and natural gas) on other planets… so either they had life, OR it’s not created by organic matter.

I think there is a far more logical explanation. The combination of oil and water is why life *emerged,* it’s not a byproduct.

In the same way we don’t claim water is left over fluid from decaying organic matter, why on earth would we think hydrocarbons are?

This topic isn’t a specialty of mine or anything, but I’ve dug into it just enough that I’m pretty damn convinced the traditional narrative is either total horseshit, or at the very least, works extremely hard to ignore a number of very inconvenient facts.

What if “fossil” fuels have absolutely nothing to do with decaying organic matter? What if the planet creates it by a normal geological process?

How would that single fact change your mental model of the world? 🤔 nostr:note1706ejgwqyzmmsp5wu0vznzx2yl8adnhlyns4mm4ydwdyrce5mpns8np78a

I've almost come to the conclusion that most are either paid shills or bots. Nothing original ever seems to be posted on nostr.