Now that's some of the worst bollocks I've heard yet:
Quote: Corsi and Smith argue that the deep abiotic theory of oil is a more reliable theory than the fossil fuel theory. It rejects the contention that oil was formed from the remains of plant and animal life that died millions of years ago. Instead, they believe in Thomas Gold's argument that oil is abiotic: "a primordial material that the earth forms and exudes on a continual basis" and is "pushed upward toward the earth's surface by the intense pressures of the earth's core and the influence of the centrifugal force that the earth exerted upon the specific gravity of oil as a fluid substance."
Hmm... let me guess, God puts all that carbon and hydrogen inside Mother Earth so she can make oil from them, for us to use happily ever after?
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
Logan22L From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 829 times:
Quoting AirplaneDork (Reply 5): Anything promoted by a web site like worldnetdaily.com would obviously have to promote a theory other than "fossil fuels." Fossil fuels can't exist if the world is only 6,000 years old, after all...
Why couldn't fossil fuels have been "intelligently designed?"