Yes, I agree that the source of Earth's water is from the interior.Be careful, the amount of water at Earth's surface is not constant over time. The amount of water depends on the volume released from the mantle. And that amount varies along the activity (growth) of the planet.
But Florian, you fail to acknowledge that the sea level during the Cretaceous was higher all over the world, including off the coast of South America. It is possible when the oceanic basins initially opened up between South America and Africa shallow lakes would form, but they would have been a relatively short lived phenomenon (geologically speaking) if they existed. It depends on the sea level at the time of the original rifting, if it was as high as the sea level coveirng part of North America, the rifts would almost immediately (again, geologically speaking) fill in with sea water at the prevailing world sea level, soon turning into a long straight running the length of the rift between the two continents (see link below for rough approximation):
http://www.paleoportal.org/index.php?gl ... riod_id=18
The oil finds have been as much as a 170 miles offshore of Brazil which mirrors the dynamics off the West African coast. That far offshore, these locations where the oil has been found would not have been "shallow lakes". The rift would have thinner crust that would shear and tear allowing deep crust and shallow mantle volatiles to flood upward towards the surface and be trapped below the salt barrier. By the time the rift opened 170 miles off Brazil and a similar distance off the coast of West Africa (roughly 340 miles wide rift between South America and Africa), we would be talking about a wide rift that would be filled in to the prevailing world sea level at that time in the geological time line. Again, shallow lakes would not be likely.
But the oil is found at such distances from the shore in such deep water and so deep below the sea bed and below the salt barrier that it is highly unlikely that a shallow lake would be found at this location because the process of rifting would be fairly advanced and water levels would be at the prevailing world sea level which scientific evidence suggests was higher than today.Florian wrote:
Fossil oil could form at the early stage.
Yes, the material that covers the salt in the Campos Basin (off the coast of Brazil) deposits are typically described as "turbidite," a sedimentary deposit that consists of material moved down a steep slope at the edge of the continental shelf. This same type of material, turbidite, is also found above the deep oil deposits in the Gulf of Mexico. But it sluffed off the sides of the continents when it was already under water.Florian wrote:
Don't forget that at the early stages of the ocean formations, the basins are very narrow, easily filled with sediments from the uplifted flank of the rift.
Of course, time will tell a great deal -- if this salt barrier, sometimes a mile thick, runs all the way out to the mid-ocean expansion ridge and deposits of oil also run all the way out to the expansion ridge, it makes it even harder to suggest that all that salt and the oil below it were formed as a result of shallow lakes.
There hasn't been wide-spread exploration farther out toward the mid-ocean expansion ridge, but if oil keeps being found the farther out you go, then I expect we will have that continued exploration and will discover whether the salt barrier and the oil keep going toward the mid-ocean ridges.
There is some truth to that, but here's the thing, to evaporate a mile of salt, it would take a tremendous amount of sea water, and if there was that much sea water, why would it evaporate at all?Florian wrote:
Actually not. Both are possible. it really depends on the amount of water present at the surface at the time of formation of the layer of salt. So again, that is not a clinching argument.
But I'll give your point it's full expression: It would take repeated flooding and evaporation over, what, hundreds of thousands of years. But again, the salt is relatively pure, if it was part of an evaporation process, then wouldn't there be sizable amounts of impurities mixed in with the salt?
Sure, I understand and appreciate that role, but you also must understand, I'll still answer you to the best of my ability with all the scientific evidence at my disposalFlorian wrote:
I remind you that we mostly agree: oil is likely not from fossil origin nor are thick salt layers "evaporites". Just playing the devil's advocate here.
And, yes, I recognize we mostly agree
Just playing devil's advocate, hope that's okay?Florian wrote:
Hell no. The theory predicts fluctuating surface amounts/level, and in any case, a lesser amount of water than present.
Yes, a lesser amount of water than present, but instead up on the continents because the continents constituted the surface of the planet. But still we are talking about the Cretaceous Period and the scientific evidence was that world sea levels were higher than today, regardless of the amount of water.