Originally Posted by
vdesire
Here's what conservapedia had to say about it, seems balanced and fair.......
How can you tell it's fair and balanced if you have not studied the source material? You can't you are just taking their word for it.
It's not even close to fair and balanced. Just spend some time on google scholar and see for yourself what the scientific community thinks.
It's
established science that petroleum can be produced abotically, that has been done MANY times by different teams. Again NASA itself admits
it happened on Titan. The question is not CAN it happen. ALL of geology knows it can happen. The question that is being debated in the literature is HOW MUCH of the Earth's petroleum is abotic and how much is not.
The idea that there is debate that it is
possible is patently absurd to anyone who understands the science. Wikipedia makes it sound like it's fringe science to even think it possible. That's just straight up untrue and easily identifiable if you read the literature.
So if your goal is to defend the American media's status quo on petroleum production you should argue with me on what the isotope tests show.
If someone wants to argue with me start with an article like this one. Study this, and then read the articles that use various techniques to test the carbon isotopes. This is your best bet for telling me I'm wrong and sounding like you have a clue what you're talking about.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...12821X06000641
The truth is in the journals, it's not in wikipedia. Wikipedia (or whatever conservapedia is) is a good judge of what mainstream culture says. You are not supposed to stop there. You take taht for what it's worth and you start learning more.
The more time you spend in google scholar the more you will understand why i believe what i believe. Eventually it'll become obvious. You just have to put in the time.
Bookmarks