[orionblamblam]

Is there some reason why you chopped the article up?

Regardless, it does not change the fact that the petrochemical industry uses geologists who use trace fossils and knowledge of how theEarth has changed over millions of years to locate oil. While it is certainly possible that oil may be made in part deep in the Earth... the fact is, the "formed from critters" theory of oil production has been successfully used to *find* oil for decades. Oil formed deep in the Earth cannot explain this.

[clearsight]

There is no way there were that many critters to make that much oil and according to one of my posts the researcher makes a good point that those critters had to be a lot deeper than where the actual oil is found in order to even be converted to petroleum, because the conditions at those shallow levels would not be right for the conversion to occur.
There also is research showing that coal can form in a matter of months at rather shallow depths. Mt St Helen's for instance; Coal is already forming under the debri fields and at surprisingly shallow depths.
The rate of accumulation of lunar or space dust is approximated at 1/8" to 1/4" every 10,000 years. The reason for the large dia. landing pads on the lunar lander was because of the expected depth of the dust on the moon based on the moon's assumed age. Nasa was shocked when they only discovered at the max an average of 1/4" of lunar dust.
There is just to much conflicting science out there to accept that the earth is millions and millions of years old.
Back to Petrochemicals; The known natural rate of pressure depletion (loss) in unreleased gas fields flys in the face of the old earth theory. The gas pressures are currently to high to support old earth theory, suggesting a much younger earth.