SPE CENSORSHIP AND FRAUDULENCE
November 2019
The Society of Petroleum Engineers has become a
fraudulent organization. Below are our posts from SPE discussion
groups correcting incompetent claims and practices that SPE moderators
censored, breaking most of our engineering ethics.
They are covering up their support and contributions to incompetent and
fraudulent technology, including many SPE Technical sections and courses,
with this censorship. They knowingly promote fraudulent and
non-existent technologies while censoring any comments noting or proving it.
They conspire with socialist governments and fraudulent academic and other
fraudulent scientific organizations to promote the CO2 emissions global
warming scam, with full knowledge and proof that it is a scam. See
https://www.coatsengineering.com/substantiation.htm, and
https://www.coatsengineering.com/Sustainability_and_CO2.htm, and
https://www.coatsengineering.com/ccus.htm (from when the scam was first
proven by us 3 years ago).
This page represents our compliance with all
engineering ethics including our primary responsibility to protect the
public from technical fraudulence and crime.
From
Gayl Tobias
To
Brian Coats
Sent
Fri, 25 Oct 2019 04:57 PM
Subject
Decline message from
connect.spe.org
Thank you for participating in
the Society of Petroleum Engineers website connect.spe.org and for being
part of our community.
Thank you for participating in the Society of
Petroleum Engineers website connect.spe.org and for being part of our
community.
Your content below was received and sent to
moderation for review. Upon review, we have determined that the content
violates SPE
Connect Guidelines, and has
therefore been removed from the site. The SPE Connect Guidelines
establishes participation rules and guidelines to ensure the best possible
experience for all members. If you have any questions, please contact the
Member Services Department
at
SPEConnect@spe.org
We appreciate your
participation and cooperation in ensuring a positive community experience
for all members.
Regards,
The SPE Connect Moderation Team
Subject:RE: How Does the Use of Artificial
Intelligence and Machine Learning Differ for Conventional vs. Unconventional
Plays?
Message:
Linear regression is definitely NOT MACHINE LEARNING OR AI. They do not
exist. That's why Dr. Mohaghegh cannot substantiate any of his claims with
an improved solution to any known problem. As competent engineers and
scientists, if a claim can't be demonstrated we must assume it is false.
Also see "What are Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning" at
coatsengineering.com/artificial_intelligence.htm.
Regards,
Brian
------------------------------
Brian Coats
Coats Engineering
------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-18-2019 10:55 AM
From: Jeff Baldwin
Subject: How Does the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
Differ for Conventional vs. Unconventional Plays?
How does the use of linear regression differ for conventional vs.
unconventional plays?
Linear regression is machine learning (ubiquitously held opinion). Machine
learning is artificial intelligence (so say many). Linear regression is
artificial intelligence (as a consequence).
Original Message:
Sent: 10-08-2019 11:49 AM
From: Shahab Mohaghegh
Subject: How Does the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
Differ for Conventional vs. Unconventional Plays?
How Does the Use of Artificial Intelligence and
Machine Learning Differ for Conventional vs. Unconventional Plays?
SPE Data Science and Digital Engineering in Upstream Oil and Gas
https://pubs.spe.org/en/dsde/dsde-article-detail-page/?art=6062
------------------------------
Shahab D. Mohaghegh
Professor; Petroleum & Natural Gas Engineering
West Virginia University
------------------------------
Your content below was received
and sent to moderation for review. Upon review, we have determined that the
content violates SPE Connect Guidelines, and has therefore been removed from
the site. The SPE Connect Guidelines establishes participation rules and
guidelines to ensure the best possible experience for all members. If you
have any questions, please contact the Member Services Department at
SPEConnect@spe.org
We appreciate your participation
and cooperation in ensuring a positive community experience for all members.
Regards,
The SPE Connect Moderation Team
Subject:RE: How Does the Use of
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Differ for Conventional vs.
Unconventional Plays?
Message:
Obviously, linear or nonlinear
regression are not AI nor ML and any claim that they are is fraudulent. All
of the fluid characterization programs have used nonlinear regression
programs for many decades to tune eos parameters to match experimental
results of all kinds. I may be wrong but I think the simulation industry
was the first to develop non-linear regression. At JS Nolen I think it was
Jim Nolen and Rod Grisham that wrote ours, called EOSPAK, sometime around
1980. I added a few experiments for VIP-THERM while at Landmark. I think
it's still the only thermal compositional reservoir simulator. Claims that
weighting determination or optimization was done by AI are false as far as I
know, in any of the industry's regression programs.
Since
neither AI nor ML exist, their use
is no different for any plays. They have no use at all.
Regards,
Brian
------------------------------
Brian Coats
Coats Engineering
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-18-2019 10:55 AM
From: Jeff Baldwin
Subject: How Does the Use of
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Differ for Conventional vs.
Unconventional Plays?
How does the use of linear
regression differ for conventional vs. unconventional plays?
Linear regression is machine
learning (ubiquitously held opinion). Machine learning is artificial
intelligence (so say many). Linear regression is artificial intelligence (as
a consequence).
Original Message:
Sent: 10-08-2019 11:49 AM
From: Shahab Mohaghegh
Subject: How Does the Use of
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Differ for Conventional vs.
Unconventional Plays?
How Does the Use of Artificial
Intelligence and Machine Learning Differ for Conventional vs. Unconventional
Plays?
SPE Data Science and Digital
Engineering in Upstream Oil and Gas
https://pubs.spe.org/en/dsde/dsde-article-detail-page/?art=6062
------------------------------
Shahab D. Mohaghegh
Professor; Petroleum & Natural
Gas Engineering
From
Gayl Tobias
To
Brian Coats
Sent
Tue, 05 Nov 2019 11:48 AM
Subject
Decline message from
connect.spe.org
Thank you for participating in
the Society of Petroleum Engineers website connect.spe.org and for being
part of our community.
Your content below was received
and sent to moderation for review. Upon review, we have determined that the
content violates SPE Connect Guidelines, and has therefore been removed from
the site. The SPE Connect Guidelines establishes participation rules and
guidelines to ensure the best possible experience for all members. If you
have any questions, please contact the Member Services Department at
SPEConnect@spe.org
We appreciate your participation
and cooperation in ensuring a positive community experience for all members.
Regards,
The SPE Connect Moderation Team
Subject:RE: Data_Science
Message:
Hi Gowtham,
AI and ML do not exist. See
https://www.coatsengineering.com/artificial_intelligence.htm.
Data is not a science. It's an
academic blunder and a disgrace. It is the simplest part of all of the real
disciplines of math and science. There is nothing new in data science that
we haven't known about data for decades. It used to be called data
processing and was not a very attractive position. Those using the term
'data science' are pretending to have developed something new.
Regards,
Brian
------------------------------
Brian Coats
Coats Engineering
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-28-2019 02:12 AM
From: Gowtham R
Subject: Data_Science
Hi to all,
I'm new to AI/ML. I'm preparing
on my own (still now learned python basics and basics of ML). Could anyone
show the light to the path of data science especially in the petroleum
field? and share what are the essential knowledge to get hired in the
company.
Thanks in advance.
From
Gayl Tobias
To
Brian Coats
Sent
Tue, 05 Nov 2019 12:04 PM
Subject
Decline message from
connect.spe.org
Thank you for participating in
the Society of Petroleum Engineers website connect.spe.org and for being
part of our community.
Your content below was received
and sent to moderation for review. Upon review, we have determined that the
content violates SPE Connect Guidelines, and has therefore been removed from
the site. The SPE Connect Guidelines establishes participation rules and
guidelines to ensure the best possible experience for all members. If you
have any questions, please contact the Member Services Department at
SPEConnect@spe.org
We appreciate your participation
and cooperation in ensuring a positive community experience for all members.
Regards,
The SPE Connect Moderation Team
Subject:RE: Combined CO2 and
Surfactant EOR to reduce the MMP.
Message:
CO2 has absolutely nothing to do
with climate change!
How can any competent scientist
or engineer possibly think that a trace gas CO2 composition of .0004 can
have any significant effect on climate? Saturated water composition is about
.04 near the water surfaces and varies wildly in the atmosphere (.01-.04),
of course with storms, and is fifteen times more powerful a "greenhouse" gas
than CO2, per molecule! CO2 is called a greenhouse gas because it's plant
food and encourages plant growth. Increased CO2 is good for all plant and
animal life on earth! Photosynthesis is an endothermic reaction!!! So what
do you think happens when we kill off more than 50% of plant life on earth
by poisoning our oceans and deforestation and urban development? Exactly
what is happening, is the answer. All competent scientists know that CO2
does not cause warming, warming causes increased CO2 because our waters are
a giant sink and when temperature increases, CO2 is released into the
atmosphere. I'm an expert on that as I added the CO2 solubility in water
option to the only fully compositional thermal model ever developed, VIP-THERM.
We wrote a SPE Journal paper on it in the 90's. Also see our web page on
"sustainability".
Can you please answer the
question John?
Thanks,
Brian
------------------------------
Brian Coats
Coats Engineering
brian@coatsengineering.com
Original Message:
Sent: 11-04-2019 11:49 AM
From: John Tingas
Subject: Combined CO2 and
Surfactant EOR to reduce the MMP.
Patrick, this discussion began
asking the question if miscible CO2 EOR can be achieved in reservoir where
the MMP is higher than the rock mechanically maximum allowable pressure then
reducing the MMP by surfactants as miscibility enhancement agents and
highlighting that if laboratory experiments confirm their use, surfactant
will be a practical cost-effective more efficient option to the already know
alternatives of H2S, ethane, propane, etc.
Indeed, "miscible WAG" does not
necessarily recover oil by achieving zero interfacial tension between the
petroleum liquid phase and the gas phase. Also, "Miscible WAG" does not
necessarily achieve zero interfacial tension between the aqueous liquid
phase and the liquid petroleum phase or the gas phase. Consequently, for
this reason, field cases of CO2 EOR achieved historically petroleum
recoveries lower than the expected by efficient miscible petroleum
displacement by CO2. "Miscible WAG" could be partially immiscible even at
average reservoir pressure above the MMP and the reservoir recovery
processes may not be miscible in the entire reservoir, because the reservoir
pressure may be lower than the MMP in parts of the reservoir.
Hence, miscibility enhancement
agents, possibly surfactants, increasing the difference between reservoir
pressure and the MMP will be useful providing a guarantee that the
miscibility will be achieved and it will prevail everywhere in the
reservoir. The additional big question is if the reduction of the
interfacial tension between CO2 and the liquid petroleum phase will convert
multiple contact CO2 miscibility to first contact CO2 miscibility. Again, in
this case, experimental work will answer this question.
John Tingas
Your content below was received
and sent to moderation for review. Upon review, we have determined that
the content violates SPE Connect Guidelines, and has therefore been
removed from the site. The SPE Connect Guidelines establishes
participation rules and guidelines to ensure the best possible
experience for all members. If you have any questions, please contact
the Member Services Department at SPEConnect@spe.org
We appreciate your participation
and cooperation in ensuring a positive community experience for all members.
Regards,
The SPE Connect Moderation Team
Subject:RE: Combined CO2 and
Surfactant EOR to reduce the MMP.
Message:
The way to optimize any project
is to maximize npv. See our "goals" web page.
------------------------------
Brian Coats
Coats Engineering
brian@coatsengineering.com
Original Message:
Sent: 11-04-2019 11:49 AM
From: John Tingas
Subject: Combined CO2 and
Surfactant EOR to reduce the MMP.
Patrick, this discussion began
asking the question if miscible CO2 EOR can be achieved in reservoir where
the MMP is higher than the rock mechanically maximum allowable pressure then
reducing the MMP by surfactants as miscibility enhancement agents and
highlighting that if laboratory experiments confirm their use, surfactant
will be a practical cost-effective more efficient option to the already know
alternatives of H2S, ethane, propane, etc.
Indeed, "miscible WAG" does not
necessarily recover oil by achieving zero interfacial tension between the
petroleum liquid phase and the gas phase. Also, "Miscible WAG" does not
necessarily achieve zero interfacial tension between the aqueous liquid
phase and the liquid petroleum phase or the gas phase. Consequently, for
this reason, field cases of CO2 EOR achieved historically petroleum
recoveries lower than the expected by efficient miscible petroleum
displacement by CO2. "Miscible WAG" could be partially immiscible even at
average reservoir pressure above the MMP and the reservoir recovery
processes may not be miscible in the entire reservoir, because the reservoir
pressure may be lower than the MMP in parts of the reservoir.
Hence, miscibility enhancement
agents, possibly surfactants, increasing the difference between reservoir
pressure and the MMP will be useful providing a guarantee that the
miscibility will be achieved and it will prevail everywhere in the
reservoir. The additional big question is if the reduction of the
interfacial tension between CO2 and the liquid petroleum phase will convert
multiple contact CO2 miscibility to first contact CO2 miscibility. Again, in
this case, experimental work will answer this question.
John Tingas
e-mail:
------------------------------
J. Tingas Petroleum Engineering
Ltd
Putney, London SW15 6HZ
e-mail:
From
Gayl Tobias
To
Brian Coats
Sent
Tue, 05 Nov 2019 12:08 PM
Subject
Decline message from
connect.spe.org
Thank you for participating in
the Society of Petroleum Engineers website connect.spe.org and for being
part of our community.
Your content below was received
and sent to moderation for review. Upon review, we have determined that the
content violates SPE Connect Guidelines, and has therefore been removed from
the site. The SPE Connect Guidelines establishes participation rules and
guidelines to ensure the best possible experience for all members. If you
have any questions, please contact the Member Services Department at
SPEConnect@spe.org
We appreciate your participation
and cooperation in ensuring a positive community experience for all members.
Regards,
The SPE Connect Moderation Team
Subject:closing discussions on
unsubstantiated claims
Message:
Dear Moderator,
(Please don't post this)
I made 2 replies to Dr.
Mohahegd's post of his article, can you please allow them and restore
discussion? Dr. Mohahegd is consistently making completely unsubstantiated
and false claims, and refuses to provide any substantion of any of them,
even when asked (on many occasions here and on the old Simtig). I believe
that this represents violations of our codes of conduct and our basic
responsibilities as engineers and scientists, which include the ability to
properly substantiate the publicly claimed achievement of any improved
solution, by the simplest possible known example. Those who refuse to
substantiate their claims are no scientists or engineers at all in my
opinion, and should be banned from making any contributions in our technical
discussions (and literature).
If you will allow my comments,
the truth will come out and at least this particular problem of allowing
false and inappropriate claims in posts with no provision for discussion
will be solved. This is even more important with the problem of
unsubstantiated claims in published papers, since in theory they can be
discussed here and the truth can be found by applying the scientific method
that has mostly been forgotten, as I continually try to demonstrate.
If you don't restore discussion
and add my comments, I request that you remove Dr. Mohahegd's post that is
embarrassment to engineering and in my opinion is fraudulent and highly
damaging to our industry, technology, and ethics. I think I may suggest
that those who refuse to substantiate their claims properly be banned from
any making posts in SPE discussions.
Thank you,
Brian Coats
From: Brian Coats
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2019 12:49 PM
To: 'Gayl Tobias'
Subject: RE: SPE Short Course - Python for Petroleum Data Analytics
Gayl, why did you remove my post on AI and ML? This is the opposite of what
I was hoping for in
resolving this.
Regards,
Brian
From: Brian Coats
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2019 10:52 AM
To: 'Gayl Tobias'
Subject: RE: SPE Short Course - Python for Petroleum Data Analytics
Gayl, I suggest that you have the technical directors reconsider their
position on covering up
fraudulence rather than eliminating it, while doing extreme harm to our
industry. I don’t think the
directors would like to have that be public knowledge, would they? I have
discussions on LinkedIn on
these subjects now because your moderation prevents me from having a
conversation at SPE. Many
thousands of views now. If I add this email I’ll bet it will hit 10k. Please
confirm that the directors wish
to be accused of unethical behavior since the public is apparently the only
possible way to charge them
with fraudulence and extreme violation of our ethics causing extreme damage
to our industry.
When I find them I’ll ask them that same question to their face. I doubt
that any will admit to being a
fraud and a criminal.
Regards,
Brian
From: Brian Coats
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 1:47 PM
To: 'Gayl Tobias'
Subject: RE: SPE Short Course - Python for Petroleum Data Analytics
But they are not the ones who have heard my complaint of ethical violations,
are they? Should those be
directed elsewhere?
Thank you,
Brian
From: Gayl Tobias [mailto:gtobias@spe.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 1:36 PM
To: 'Brian Coats'
Subject: RE: SPE Short Course - Python for Petroleum Data Analytics
Dear Brian,
The Technical Directors are members of the Board of Directors. As referenced
in my original email, they
are the ones who made the determination on the discussion thread.
Best Regards,
Gayl Tobias
Member Program and Services/IT Coordinator
Society of Petroleum Engineers
222 Palisades Creek Drive
Richardson, TX 75080-2040 USA
www.spe.org
From: Brian Coats
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 2:19 PM
To: Gayl Tobias <gtobias@spe.org>; shahab@wvu.edu; brian@coatsengineering.com
Subject: RE: SPE Short Course - Python for Petroleum Data Analytics
Hi Gayl,
This is entirely a technical debate. I have proven everything I say and can
substantiate it. You always
terminate technical debates when it becomes apparent that technology that
SPE supports and condones
is absolutely fraudulent and is causing extreme harm to our industry.
I would like to file a complaint with the Board of Directors based on
violation of the SPE Code of Conduct
and the NSPE based on your suppression of the truth with respect to
technical issues, which is an
obvious violation. And also I suggest that fraudlent members be expelled
from SPE. Previous Board
decisions regarding unethical behavior by SPE employees claimed that these
ethical guidelines don’t
apply to SPE employees regardless of whether or not they are members or
professional engineers. I
highly disagee with promoting and protecting absolutely false claims and
fraudulent behavior by
members or by SPE employees. Refusal to substantiate a public claim should
be grounds for expulsion
from SPE, and I claim and have proven over many years that Dr. Mohaghegh
refuses to substantiate his
false claims. You are covering up fraudulence and promoting incompetence by
not allowing open
discussion of it.
Regards,
Brian Coats
From: Gayl Tobias [mailto:gtobias@spe.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 1:09 PM
To: shahab@wvu.edu; 'brian@coatsengineering.com'
Subject: Re: SPE Short Course - Python for Petroleum Data Analytics
Dear Shahab and Brian,
The discussion thread on the subject SPE Short Course – Python for Petroleum
Data Analytics has come
to the attention of the Technical Directors. The Technical Directors have
determined that “this
argument has turned into a personal debate. It is clear that the sides will
not come to a resolution and
there is no more value for the members to continue the current discussion.
From this point on, their
continuing posting on the same thread will be removed.”
Thank you for your cooperation.
Best Regards,
Gayl Tobias
Member Program and Services/IT Coordinator
Society of Petroleum Engineers
222 Palisades Creek Drive
Richardson, TX 75080-2040 USA
www.spe.org
|
