[munin]

A long time ago I read a book called "Worlds in collision"
by a fellow named Emanuel Velikovsky, and he suggested a non-fossil abiotic source of oil, and that was back in the 40is
or early fifties, made some sense to me then, and more so now, anyway, why are most of the most prolific sources in areas that is covered in dessert sand or under the ocean?

[Strategerist]

Velikovsky is a rather famous kook.

Regarding why oil is where it is, the Earth is a very old place.

The vast majority of oil formed on the sea floor in the first place, so it shouldn't be a surprise that a lot of oil is drilled in the oceans.

Regarding oil in deserts, well, an awful lot of the land on earth was once covered with shallow seas or lakes; continents move around, rise and fall, etc.

Heck, you can find lots of limestone in deserts. We know for certain that limestone forms SLOWLY in shallow seas. We can observe limestone forming right now in shallow, warm seas around the world.

[Ichneumon]

A long time ago I read a book called "Worlds in collision" by a fellow named Emanuel Velikovsky, and he suggested a non-fossil abiotic source of oil, and that was back in the 40is or early fifties, made some sense to me then,

The problem is that Velikovsky's idea was that hydrocarbons "rained down" from the tails of comets as the Earth passed through them.

What Velikovsky failed to realize is that the tails of comets -- while pretty when the Sun reflects off them -- are incredibly insubstantial; mere wisps of vapor. You could probably get more hydrocarbons from a herd of farting cows.

Another howler from Velikovsky on the same topic is that he thought that maybe "manna from Heaven" during the Exodus originated from the same source (comet tails). The problem is that Velikovsky laughably presumed that "hydrocarbons" (methane and petroleum etc.) and "carbohydrates" (sugars, starches, etc.) were interchangeable molecules.