Posted on 09/04/2009 8:50:36 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Once again, a NASA space probe is supporting the 6,000-year biblical age of the solar system...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Mars has been visited recently (1997–2001) by the
Mars Global Surveyor mission. It provided a more
accurate upper limit on its present low magnetic
moment. It also found striking evidence that Mars
had a strong magnetic field in the past, confirming a
prediction I made in 1984 (Humphreys, 1984, p. 147).
Orbiting low over the Martian surface, the spacecraft
measured alternate-polarity magnetic “stripes” of
magnetization in the crustal rocks. Figure 8 shows
these “magnetic crustal anomalies.” These linear
features are similar to those found on earth’s ocean
floors, but the Martian magnetizations are up to 20
times stronger than those on earth (Acuña et al.,
2001, pp. 23403–23417). That points to a strong field
reversing many times in the past, when the rocks
were formed. It is difficult for theorists to explain why
a Martian dynamo would be functioning robustly in
the past but not at all in the present. The water origin
theory, on the other hand has no problem with both
past and present fields, and as I said, even predicted
crustal magnetizations. The core conductivity
required is close to that of earth, so it is within the
expectations of the water origin theory.
http://www.icr.org/i/pdf/research/ICC08_Cosmic_Magn_%20Fields.pdf
Evolutionary theories of planetary magnetic fields?
Do these jokers think that Darwin discussed Mercury or magnetic fields?
Careful. According to the crevos you can't be a Christian or a conservative if you don't believe as they do.
Never mind that magnetic fields fluctuate, including Earth's, and that it is NOT linear in value. But that would be science based on observation, not scripture, so to them, irrelevant.
6,000-year biblical age of the solar system
Preposterous.
And Obama ineligible to be president
Preposterous?
Again, why did Mars’ magnetic field decay to zero while much smaller Mercury’s didn’t? By his theory Mercury’s field should have decayed to zero BEFORE Mars.
The people that deny science are the Temple of Darwin fanatics who deny God’s handiwork in creation, attribute life to non-life, intelligence to non-intelligence, and a super-sophisticated digital DNA code to chance fluctuations of inanimate matter plus survival.
The smaller the core or greater the resistance, the faster the field will decay
Thanks for the ping!
He is not running the circus, he’s merely one of teh clowns.
Lay off the peyote.
I’m a Christian and I don't know about 6 literal days or not. BUT, it does say so in the bible so until it can be explained to me, I will keep an open mind. Many supposed scientific “FACTS” are proven WRONG every day.
Magnetic fields wax and wane, even on Earth as shown by rock evidence of fossil magnetic fields over millions of years.
Take off your blinders and use real science.
Which has changed over the years?
“Science” (human understanding)
or God’s Word?
I’m with you GGG.
It takes more faith to believe that all life is a monumental accident violating the second law of thermodynamics than it does to believe in a Creator.
What’s your theory gonna predict when it goes to zero and then regenerates to pre 1975 levels only in an opposite polarity like magnetic rock evidence on the spreading Atlantic Ocean floor has shown earth’s field to do on about a 250000 year basis.
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/earth/Magnetosphere/earth_magnetic_reversals.html
6,000=15,000,000,000 if looked at in relativistic terms, and humans ability to write.
I do not think the second law of thermodynamics means what you think it means.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.