Abiogenic petroleum origin (Alternative theory)

My casual discussions with a some people in a certain industrial sector on this theory have always been shot down and cut short prematurely for unknown and closed-minded reasons.

Why is this so? Should we be more open to just other ideas at least? There’s no reason not to.

I have made a short post about it before, but just so I can get my point across, I’ve decided to put it up here for all to read.

Therefore, just for discussions sake, here we go. I’m not trying to say that this is the ultimate theory, but either traditional theory or alternative, it’s still a theory anyway.

From Wikipedia:

Abiogenic Theory

[i]"The theory of abiogenic petroleum origin holds that natural petroleum was formed from deep carbon deposits, perhaps dating to the formation of the Earth. The ubiquity of hydrocarbons in the solar system is taken as evidence that there may be a great deal more petroleum on Earth than commonly thought, and that petroleum may originate from carbon-bearing fluids which migrate upward from the mantle.

Direct observations

The following are the direct tests of the abiogenic hypothesis of petroleum or impartial evidence generated by observations of the Earth which can be used to argue the theory for or against, and is presented as such.

* The Siljan Ring meteorite crater, Sweden, was proposed by Thomas Gold as the most likely place to test the hypothesis because it was one of the few places in the world where the granite basement was cracked sufficiently (by meteorite impact) to allow oil to seep up from the mantle; furthermore it is infilled with a relatively thin veneer of sediment, which was sufficient to trap any abiogenic oil but was modelled as untenable for a biogenic origin of any oil (it had not developed the 'oil window' and structural traps typical of biogenic plays).

Drilling of the Siljan Ring with the Gravberg-1 7,500 m borehole penetrated the lowest reservoirs. Hydrocarbons were found, though in an economically unviable form of sludge. It was proposed that the eight barrels of oil produced were from the diesel fuel based drilling fluid used to do the drilling, but the diesel was demonstrated to be not of the kind of oil found in the shaft. This well also sampled over 13,000 feet of methane-bearing inclusions. [1] To be safe, a second hole was drilled a few miles away with no diesel fuel based drilling fluid and this produced 15 tons of oil. [2]

* Methanogenesis of groundwaters associated with ultramafic dykes and serpentinites, South Island of New Zealand
* Methane outflows are common from drillholes within large Archaean serpentinised olivine adcumulate bodies, such as the Honeymoon Well complex, Yakabindie ultramafic, Mt Clifford dunite, in the Yilgarn Craton, Western Australia.
* Direct observation of bacterial mats and fracture-fill carbonate and humin of bacterial origin in deep boreholes in Iran, Australia[27], Sweden and Canada
* Presence of deep-dwelling microbes in the Lechuguilla Cave complex, New Mexico"


oil is dinosaur blood, everyone knows that


im not a aware about it. How could it be? :lol: :lol: :lol:

how about the oil deposit (black gold) pump out from the ocean bed? is it not a dead whale blood? :lol: :lol: :lol:


imho, this hypotheses is backed by little evidence (yet?), so is not an “alternative” (yet?).


[quote=“stupidhead”]imho, this hypotheses is backed by little evidence (yet?), so is not an “alternative” (yet?).


A theory’s a theory. As a result, there will be many ways to theorize about it. You can’t say ‘dino blood fossil fuel’ is a fact, because it isn’t.

It’s known as ‘biogenic theory’. The alternative viewpoint to that is ‘abiogenic theory’ which is a newer theory. One does have more evidence stacked against the other, but one is based on an older model - e.g earth only, which does not take the surrounding universe into account.

Nobody knows for sure how the black thing formed in the Earth, they could only speculate so much, so it remains a theory.