>>Here?<<
From “there”: >> The debate over oil's origin has been going on since the 19th century.<<
No, the abiotic oil myth is a 16th century idea reintroduced by some Russian numb-skulls in the early 1950s and reinvigorated by American post-modern scientifically illiterate conspiracy freaks. It is a “hypothesis” (apologies to every scientist who has ever and will ever live for even using the term in this context) whose most striking feature is its complete, total, and absolute failure to ever correctly predict the location of a single drop of oil anywhere – ever.
If the petroleum industry had listened to abiotic-idiots instead of petroleum geologists, the internal combustion engine never would have been invented, the world as we know it would not exist, and there would be plenty of oil deposits left to be discovered – because none of them would have ever been found.
Creationism, clearly. It's wishful thinking just as the rest of their 'science'.
Those who are prone to believe in global conspiracy theories where 'the truth about oil's abiogenic characteristics are being suppressed' have shown to eagerly drop what little critical thinking they had left and adopt this 'theory' as well.
Here's a real geologists' take on why Abiotic Oil pops up every now and then:
http://geology.about.com/b/2008/08/15/ab...
As for Illuminati, have a look at this site: http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.es/2...
I strongly suggest you understand contemporary science of the US religious right
If you read Genesis 6:14 : "Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch."
However , Biblical geologists, such as Dr Kent Hovind and Ron Wyatt , tell us that all sedimentary rocks were deposited in the Noachian flood (and cool stuff like how the Grand Canyon was formed in one day , in unconsolidated sediments) - although some dissenting scholars suggest that some sedimentary deposits have other origin (eg some fossils were planted by Satan to mock god)
Therefore hydrocarbon deposits are not of sedimentary origin.
In other words , the "theories" are from crackpots (using the alternative definition of "theory" being "some stupid idea I pulled out of my *** due to my obsession with bronze age myths")
There could be a small, and I say small, sliver of truth to abiotic oil and gas. Hydrocarbons are found on asteroids, comets, Jupiter, Saturn, Titan, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto, and were likely present on the primordial Earth. In the case of abiotic hydrocarbons on primordial Earth, they were oxidized to carbon dioxide and water when Earth's atmosphere became rich in nitrogen. Today, and in the last few hundred million years, oil and natural gas are formed when microorganisms break down decaying matter. Methane is actually formed when archea act on carbon dioxide and hydrogen produce by bacteria to produce methane.
Coal is formed when heat and pressure act on buried organic material, such as trees under swamps, like the Everglades.
Sorry, but I have no clue to offer you on this one. Their logic fails me. If supply and demand determine the market prices and if there is such an abundance of abiotic oil in existence, then either the existence of abundant abiotic oil is a fallacy or supply and demand setting market prices is a fallacy. Which is it? Is it that both are a fallacy? *shrugs shoulders*
The only person I've heard spoken with who made such claims used to cite drilling data from the soviet union. He didn't grasp that most production reports were fabricated to meet quotas, so there were wells claiming to bring in oil from truly absurd depths.
That's twice now an answer of mine has led to a post with reference to moon matrix and other strange things. I'm a bit confused.
I have a suspicion that someone thinks this poster is actually some other poster. That's twice now I've seen my posts cause a mention of moon matrix.
Here?
http://rense.com/general58/biot.htm
crackpots...Did I win??
