To: weikel
The point is that shale is a sedimentary rock. It doesn't form deep in the Earth. It's produced from the top down, and yet it often contains petroleum. Since that petroleum comes from a different source from the one he proposes, I don't see the advantage of the new theory. In the absence of evidence, new theories should at least have more explanatory power than the models they are supposed to replace. Now, that doesn't mean his idea is wrong, but he does need to provide some compelling evidence.
To: Physicist
In the process of formation couldn't shale have acted like a sponge absorbing oil that was moving towards the surface from below?
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson