Mercury’s Magnetic Field is Young!

Creation on the Web ^ | August 26, 2008 | Dr. Russell Humphreys

[GodGunsGuts]

Once again, a NASA space probe is supporting the 6,000-year biblical age of the solar system. On 14 January 2008, the Messenger spacecraft flew by the innermost planet of the solar system, Mercury. It was the first of several close encounters before Messenger finally settles into a steady orbit around Mercury in 2011.1 As it passed, it made quick measurements of Mercury’s magnetic field and transmitted them successfully back to Earth. On 4 July 2008, the Messenger team reported the magnetic results from the first flyby.2

As I mentioned on the CMI website earlier,3,4 I have been eagerly awaiting the results, because in 1984 I made scientific predictions—based on Scripture—about the magnetic fields of a number of planets, including that of Mercury.5 Spacecraft measurements6,7 have validated three of the predictions, highlighted in red in the web version of the 1984 article. The remaining prediction was:

[skinkinthegrass]

I think people like Dr Humphreys need to realize this:
1. The Earth is not flat.
2. The universe is way older than 6000 years.
3. The Earth is not the center of the universe.

Now you've done it ace, the villagers are lighting their torches, gathering their pitchforks and heading to your house. ;=)

while I agree w/ you...
KD, Your on your own, they'll never find me...
I live on a road mapquest/googlemap can't find.
each place my house 5 miles away from its actual position.

[jimmyray]

Don't put your whole young earth belief in this one specimen

So you agree, then, that the independent migration of Potassium and Argon out of and into samples can dramtically change the apparent age of a dated specimen?

[Caramelgal]

And we thought all the moonbats were libs...

If only that was true. Unfortunately when debating some of my liberal friends I have to spend way too much time disavowing my supposed fellow conservatives who espouse some completely moonbat views that have nothing to do at all with Conservatism.

[js1138]

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/RESOURCES/WIENS.html#page 4

[jimmyray]

M104(Sombrero Galaxy) 28 million light years from Earth, we are seeing the light now.

Beautiful, isn't it? Of course, there is no evolutionary reason for us to appreciate beauty of this magnitude.

I will be happy to explain to you how it can be apparently so far away, and still be only 6000 years old, when you explain the wave-particle duality of light, how gravity works, and how you know the speed of light has been constant since the beginning, whenever you think it is.

[mountainbunny]

Great list, but you left out Gravity: It's Only A Theory.

[Rudder]

I made scientific predictions—based on Scripture...

Yessir

[Coyoteman]

Don't put your whole young earth belief in this one specimen

So you agree, then, that the independent migration of Potassium and Argon out of and into samples can dramtically change the apparent age of a dated specimen?

My comment was in relation to a new article suggesting the "dinosaur blood" was possibly a biofilm of recent age rather than fossilized soft tissue 70 million years old.

That has nothing to do with potassium and argon. But here is what appears to be a good article dealing with that subject.

By the way, a google search shows that the presumed migration of potassium and argon into and out of samples is a major creationist talking point. I found a couple of dozen creationist websites all dealing with that subject.

See if the article I linked to helps explain the details. I don't know that much about this particular subject (my specialty is radiocarbon dating, not the other methods of radiometric dating).

[onedoug]

Ol’ Doc Humphreys hasn’t yet figured on relativity. His 6ky figure is fine, but given E=mc² and the density (m/v) of the expansion across its myriad phases, 15by is okay too.

[wafflehouse]

So, you are saying the theory of relativity is valid then?

[jonno]

YES! He really is batting a thousand! (if he his batting a non existent religious ball in a theoretical evangelical zero vacuum batting cage) Yea YEC! Faith without reason wins again! .... Man didn’t walk on the Moon, it was all staged on a Hollywood movie set (Because to believe otherwise would have to mean we accept a heliocentric solar system and a whole bunch of other scientific-y sort of stuff that we don’t really understand and don’t want to think about because it’s just too hard).

OK - a lot of very nice straw men that you constructed and destroyed.

Are you ready to offer an explanation as to why he is batting 1000 regarding his predictions of magnetic field decay? Or are you suggesting that he is just presenting his "lucky guesses".

Either way it would be more helpful for you to offer an explanation of the Mercury data - rather than putting your fingers in your ears chanting nah nah nah - you can't be right your can't be right!

[wafflehouse]

what is this humphreys guy a doctor of? theology i suppose. the lack of critical thinking from both evolutionists and creationists horrify me. God has never been one to make things easy.. why should astrophysics be any different?

[jimmyray]

heliocentric solar system

Well, they do quote Sunrise and Sunset times on the evening news and in the newspaper, everyday! It's all relative to your point of view.

[jimmyray]

Adam would have been created with an apparent age of 20 years, at least. And trees, if mature, with an apparent age of 50 years.

Anti-creationsim and Creationism are completely incompatible, starting with the Genesis sequence of events.

[webboy45]

It well known that planets magnetic fields wax and wane in cycles. When the field is reduced to 0 it starts up again sometimes in the opposite direction. What these figures show is that the field for mercury reached a maximum about 6000 years ago. It does not imply that mercury was created 6000 years ago.

[Jeliota]

To whomever it may concern:

Being loudly stupid and Christian is not a good thing. As someone who studies both astronomy and geology AND is a Christian, I can tell you that nearly every thinking person in the world is laughing at you young Earth people.

Seriously, you are killing Christianity by holding it up as ridiculous. Please, please, please go find a clue somewhere. I have a Ph.D. in Physics and nearly a B.S. in geology. I can tell you guys with absolute certainty that this is verifiably incorrect 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

What gets passed off as “up in the air” is nothing of the sort. We know damn well how old the Earth is and there is ZERO supporting evidence for a young Earth. ZERO ZERO ZERO.

Please stop making Christians look like a bunch of ignorant ass-hats. It is so unhelpful to trying to save people in the name of Christ.

[jonno]

If the universe is only 6000 years old, God went to a LOT of trouble to make it look otherwise.

I don't know how old the universe is. And since I've never created one, I guess I can't provide a hypothesis for what it would look like when it was finished - how old it would appear when complete.

But then again, how much trouble is it to create a human being? Harder than creating an "old" universe?

How old would this Adam have appeared? I'm guessing that he wasn't created a young boy - but rather a mature man. Why not then a mature universe?

The bottom line is that if your going to allow for a creator, you have to give him complete license.

In the end the WHY (all the trouble) may have to do with the idea that the righteous will live by faith (the Bible is pretty clear that the wicked demand a sign).

[GodGunsGuts]

==Being loudly stupid and Christian is not a good thing.

Then keep your mouth shut, poser.

[GodGunsGuts]

==I have a Ph.D. in Physics and nearly a B.S. in geology

Am I supposed to be impressed by your unverified credentials? And even if you were able to verify them, what of it? There are plenty of degrees on both sides of the issue on FR and beyond. So get a life, and stop trying to create the air of authority around yourself. Your arguments will stand or fall on their own merits, which so far amount to ZERO.

[wafflehouse]

LOL