He said that Tertiary (latest geologic period) oils all contained a chemical
compound called Oleonane. Oleonane is only produced by Angiopsperms,
flowering plants. Thus he would be able to win the bets. I raised the
point that Angiosperms arose in the early Cretaceous, but they did not
become widespread around the earth until the last period of the Cretaceous,
the Maastrichtian.
He said that those Maastrichtian oils would be the few cases in which he
would lose the bet.
Here is the problem for global flood proponents. Oil comes from the decay of
organic matter, both terrestrial and marine. Oil when it forms floats upward
in the local geologic column. This is due to the fact that oil floats on
water and rocks are water saturated. Any oil which forms tries to go up.
This means that oil formed in Upper Cretaceous and Tertiary rocks is highly
unlikely to be found in older, physically lower rocks, such as the Cambrian
through Lower Cretaceous. The oil is moving upward and the older rocks are
down below the oil source layer.
According to the global flood theory, angiosperms lived on earth prior to
the flood. Some of them should have died early in the flood, and been buried
in the oldest source rocks. This should have left Oleonane in earlier oils,
but there is no oleonane in the lowestmost rocks and lowestmost oil fields.
It would appear from the molecular data that there is NO oleonane--therefore
no angiosperms-- on earth at the time those source rocks were formed. Since
the Global flood was supposed to be catastrophic and able to mix things up
really well, why do we find no oleonane in old oils? Dead flowers and plant
matter can sink and be buried in the flood.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm