re: #434 HelloDare

Yes, I realize that Dyson had written an introduction. However, is that a plus for the idea of abiotic oil, or is it another ding in Dyson’s credibility? Dyson has been called “the bad boy of science” for his attraction to controversy. Outside his field I’m not sure you’d want to count on his interest in a subject as proof of an idea.

Every place I’ve looked on the genesis of petroleum, that is accepted by various scientific professions, agree that petroleum is a fossil fuel. No one is saying that there couldn’t be simple hydrocarbons (methane) from non-living sources. But that is not what the oil industry finds when it goes searching out for petroleum.