There is a well accepted Theory of the Biological Origin of Petroleum. Use of it has predicted numerous sources of petroleum over the last century or more. There was a hypothesis of Abiogenic Petroleum Origin that was circulated in the 19th century, but after failing to predict the location of a single oil field, it was abandoned.
Science doesn’t deal in facts. It deals in probabilities. A theory in scientific jargon is not the same thing as a gut feeling or a hunch. Those are called hypotheses. An hypothesis only graduates to the level of theory after it predicts future observations, and a scientist runs experiments to confirm that those predictions are exactly what we observe. It then gets published in a peer reviewed journal and other scientists all over the world think about what “should” be observable of the hypothesis is true. They conduct experiments of their own trying to disprove it. Only if it proves predictive of actual observations in all cases does it graduate to the level of Theory. At that point it is probably that it is true.
But scientists recognize that future revelations may require that it be adjusted. Newton’s theory of gravity, for instance, was eventually proven to be ever so slightly wrong in certain very unusual circumstances. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity forced scientists to modify their understanding of gravity just a bit. But I know of not a single instance where an established theory had to be completely discarded due to further study. Not yet, anyway.