OK Truth Hunters, here is a great little article I highly recommend.
Its written by a Young Earther who happens to be a Geologist. John D. Matthews from the UK on the origins of oil. John has a new theory that is causing a stir of sorts.
This rocked some of my preconceived notions that’s for sure but for the good! Getting out of comfort zones can help you grow. After reading this you will see there is far more at play than you thought. Its rather technical in spots (written with a geologists perspective), but readable enough for the laymen to get the gist of it… especially the beginning and the conclusion.
It really challenged my perspective on this. I was in the camp of the Biogenic model (I still am to a degree; as what happened to all that lush planet life that was on the early earth pre-flood?) Here’s the skinny. Keep in mind, even the big boys can’t agree over this issue so it’s not solved at all. (Big surprsie. More assumptions hiding everywhere on both sides.
There are two main theories regarding the origins of oil.
Abiogenic Model – Meaning that the precursors are not biological in any way.
Biogenic Model- Derived from living matter
This fellow proposes a third theory and it has much going for it – The Theobaric Model – meaning the oil was made by God! (Just like Gold and other minerals we find on earth!)
Here’s the abstract and conclusion for those in a hurry, but the whole article is really worth reading if you have the time.
The dominant view of the origin of oil amongst western oil companies until 1969 was that it was due to the decay of living matter. Now other views are making themselves heard. To try and resolve the issue whether oil is biogenic (derived from living matter) or abiogenic (built up from primordial matter and therefore not from living matter) a Hedberg Conference recently took place. The issue was not resolved.
This suggests that a third alternative is needed, especially as neither model fits into a young-earth scenario. The purpose of this paper is to discuss those naturalistic models, show that there are severe problems with both models, and offer a robust alternative which respects the geochemistry of oil, the known geology of rocks involved in the process, the Creator’s power, and the geological events surrounding the Noachian Flood. I have called it the “theobaric” model, meaning made by God. The oil existed in pristine state before the Flood, and moved during the Flood into the reservoirs where we now find it. This has interesting implications for Christian apologetics and the choice of Flood models.
Summary and Conclusions
The biogenic process that supposedly converted organic matter into the full suites of oils and gases is a seriously deficient idea.
The abiogenic route has some merits, but is ill-defined in terms of its geochemistry and secondary migration. Its main support comes from those who see problems with biogenic oil, but are not willing to accept any form of metaphysical origin of oil.
Neither of the two models provides a geological explanation as to how oil and gas entered reservoirs whilst they were still at shallow depth, and how the hydrocarbons were subsequently retained.
We are therefore left with the distinct possibility that oil and gas were made by God in the Creation Week, and that they moved into their present positions during the biblical Flood.
Scientific and theological reasons have been provided to substantiate this thesis.
The conclusions about the origin of oil confirm that the bulk of the fossiliferous geological strata are Flood deposits.
This means we have some potential powerful Christian apologetics.
Here’s a small wrench I am going to throw in at the end. What did Noah Cover the ark with for water proofing? Pitch, is pitch necessarily connected to petro oil? Nope!
Snip >>> For those who are not geologists, pitch is a black glue-like substance left behind when coal tar is heated or distilled. It belongs to the same family of substances as asphalt or bitumen. Today, it is largely produced by heating coal. Most modern geologists know of no other source for it. But coal tar and petroleum are not the only source for pitch. Anyone who takes the time to consult a reasonable dictionary of geology will find that pitch can be extracted by distilling or heating wood. In fact, prior to the rise of the petroleum and coal industries, this was exactly how pitch was made.
For at least one thousand years, the pitch-making industry in Europe flourished. It was the pitch from this industry which assisted in the construction of those great wooden sailing ships which figured so prominently in European history. Pitch making was a skilled trade, and many European surnames bear testimony to that fact today. In Polish, the word for pitch or tar is ‘smola’. Any Polish telephone directory displays names such as Smola, Smolander, Smolen, Smolenski and Smolarz. These surnames simply mean ‘the man who makes pitch’.<<<<
How to make pitch!