This theory is rather old. Most geologists reject it as its predictions aren't often borne out. It doesn't explain the sulfur and nitrogen in oil nor why oil isn't found in the oldest rocks.
Yep, it gets much more play here than it does in the scientific community; there really isn't much of a "debate."
Dear Doctor,
You obviously do not know what you are talking about, nor do you comprehend what you read.
What do you think they are talking about in the above article, if not the "oldest rocks"? The well in question was drilled in precambrian granite. Rocks don't get much older than that.
The American Association of Petroleum Geologists has scheduled a conference in July 2004 to review the evidence supporting the theories about the formation of oil.
DKK
What stupidity. We can create oil from organic garbage, lets see these bright boys create oil from rocks.
Given the age of the Appalachians, how are the discoveries of oil at much greater depths than accessed by conventional drilling explained?
Yes, but it does provide an explanation as to why played out oil well suddenly become productive again.
This theory gets posted here every couple of months. It doesn't get less stupid.
Correct. Nor does the abiogenic theory explain why most oil provinces are associated with marine sediments and organic source rocks.