Posted on 06/07/2003 3:50:41 AM PDT by Pharmboy
WASHINGTON - The Earth became a major planetary body much earlier than previously believed, just 10 million years after the birth of the sun, researchers say.
Experts now believe that the inner solar system planets — Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars — actually began forming within 10,000 years after the nuclear fires of the sun were ignited about 4.5 billion years ago, says Stein B. Jacobsen, author of an analysis appearing Friday in the journal Science.
Early in its life, the sun was surrounded by clouds of dust and gas. This material slowly clumped together into larger and larger pieces. Eventually, enough was concentrated in four bodies to form the inner solar system planets.
Within 10 million years, the Earth had reached about 64 percent of its present size and was the dominant planetary body within 93 million miles of the sun. Mercury and Venus orbit closer to the sun and Mars is farther out.
The final major event in the formation of the Earth, says Jacobsen, was probably the collision with a Mars-sized planetary body. This huge smashup added many millions of tons of material to the Earth. Some material also went into orbit of the Earth and evolved into the moon.
This massive collision, the final major event in the Earth's formation, is thought to have happened about 30 million years after the sun was born.
An earlier analysis of some chemical isotopes in the Earth's crust had concluded that the planet formed about 50 million years after the sun. But Jacobsen said a reinterpretation of the data, along with new measurements of chemicals in some types of meteorites, supports the conclusion that Earth's basic formation came much earlier.
WASHINGTON (AP) _ The Earth became a major planetary body much earlier than previously believed, just 10 million years after the birth of the sun, researchers say.
Experts now believe that the inner solar system planets -- Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars-- actually began forming within 10,000 years after the nuclear fires of the sun were ignited about 4.5 billion years ago, says Stein B. Jacobsen, author of an analysis appearing Friday in the journal Science.
Early in its life, the Sun was surrounded by clouds of dust and gas. This material slowly clumped together into larger and larger pieces.
Eventually, enough was concentrated in four bodies to form the inner solar system planets. Within 10 million years, the Earth had reached about 64 percent of its present size and was the dominant planetary body within 93 million miles of the Sun.
Mercury and Venus orbit closer to the sun and Mars is farther out.
The final major event in the formation of the Earth, says Jacobsen, was probably the collision with a Mars-sized planetary body. This huge smashup added many millions of tons of material to the Earth. Some material also went into orbit of the Earth and evolved into the Moon.
This massive collision, the final major event in the Earth's formation, is thought to have happened about 30 million years after the sun was born. An earlier analysis of some chemical isotopes in the Earth's crust had concluded that the planet formed about 50 million years after the sun.
But Jacobsen said a reinterpretation of the data, along with new measurements of chemicals in some types of meteorites, supports the conclusion that Earth's basic formation came much earlier.
So, how about a friendly bet: how much longer before it changes again?
Good morning to you too. The only think flat is your sense of humor.
End Result: 40 million year difference / 4,500 million total age of earth = 0.88% error in the original estimation. This is a very tiny difference. You'll find a much larger percentage of difference among the differing creationist claims about how old the earth is.
These researchers are acknowledging that information about the earth's formation is limited; therefore the best we'll ever know is what MIGHT have happened. Keeping in their minds the necessity that should contradictory evidence presents itself, their theories will be discarded or modified. It is a good thing that scientists can have peaceful, constructive debates over what the truth is when the full truth can never be known. It is much better than what happens when one denomination of bible thumpers disagrees with the other denomination of bible thumpers' interpretation of sacred documents. This can sometimes include excommunication, condemnations to hell, inquisition, holy wars, book burnings, persecution, and terrorism. Recognizing one's limitation of the understanding of the universe is a virtue.
Even Darwin didn't go around saying that God is some sort of cosmic trickster. That is left to some people who have figured out the timeline for the universe to the last second and expect God to follow it to the letter. God is reduced to being part circus magician and part servant. This is almost as bad as the athiests who claim that everything is matter that will someday be destroyed, therefore it doesn't matter what anyone does.
But in the meantime, YOU'D BETTER BELIEVE IT, or you're a flat-earther, right?
Then why do evolutionists say it?
No, but if you have some radical belief that contradicts the general scientific consensus don't expect any of these scientists to take your opinions seriously unless you have the evidence to back up your claims.
If the full truth can never be known then the scientists' debates over what the truth is are just an exercise in futility and science is only a guess.
You're correct about them taking anyone but themselves seriously. Evidence is not the issue. Interpretation of it is.
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.