Job 9:9
9 Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south.
According to Job, The Kuiper Belt is just this side of Arcturus.
Posted on 09/13/2003 5:17:25 PM PDT by bondserv
Not Enough Comets in the Cupboard 09/03/2003
There’s a shortage of comets. The Hubble Space Telescope peered into the Kuiper Belt cupboard, and found it nearly empty – only 4% of the predicted supply was found.
Astronomers needed a bigger storehouse to explain the number of short-period comets now inhabiting the solar system. The Kuiper Belt, a region of small icy bodies beyond Neptune, has been the favored source of comets with orbital periods 200 years or less, but the new measurements, soon to be published in the Astrophysical Journal, are “wildly inconsistent” with the observed number of comets. Astronomers expected to find 85 trans-Neptunian objects in the cupboard, and found only three.
Science News1 calls this a riddle. For this region to be a viable source, there should be hundred or even thousands of times as many objects as were actually found. Perhaps the objects expected had been dashed into dust by collisions. The measurements indicate that another hoped-for source at the outer edge of the Kuiper Belt “might not be sufficiently massive to spawn the short-period comets.”
As quoted in the report in Science Now, how does one researcher describe the finding? “This is very exciting work.”
1Science News Week of Sept. 6, 2003 (164:10): Ron Cowen, “Hubble Highlights a Riddle: What's the source of quick-return comets?”
A true scientist should be excited that a hypothesis proves false, as much as when it proves true; what is undesirable in science is ambiguity. Unfortunately, no amount of evidence seems to ever cause naturalistic planetary scientists to falsify the idea that the solar system formed out of undirected, purposeless natural forces billions of years ago. “Exciting” becomes their euphemism for baffled, disappointed, and clueless. What would really be exciting would be to see a planetary scientist follow the data where it leads, and question the assumption that the solar system is so old.
This empirical measurement leaves planetary scientists in a quandary. Why do we still have comets after the assumed 4.5 billion years the solar system has existed, when we know they are burning out within just thousands of years? Several recent comet stories reported here are leaving them with diminishing options:There aren’t enough sources, and they are burning out too fast to last 4.5 billion years. This is very exciting work.
- Comets are not pristine objects (Aug. 12).
- Comets fizzle fast (March 27).
- Nanodiamond counts too low (Jul 12, 2002).
- Comet deficit puzzling (June 21, 2002).
- Comets commit suicide (Feb. 26, 2001).
- Oort cloud only 10% of theory (Jan 31, 2001).
Job 9:9
9 Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south.
According to Job, The Kuiper Belt is just this side of Arcturus.
9 Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south.
According to Job, The Kuiper Belt is just this side of Arcturus.
Thanks, man. Is Job right about the Kuiper Belt? Is it just this side of Arcturus? And how did he know about the Kuiper Belt?
How far away is Arcturus?
Of course a scientific theory can be wrong. That is after all, the purpose of a scientific theory. In the realm of science there is no truth, meaning nothing is above scrutiny. Creation is in fact a religious law, and in the realm of religion, there is truth. Meaning there can be no scrutiny of religion.
In science, if someone has built a theory that there are X objects in an orbit, anyone can try to dis-prove that theory. Because there is no truth in science.
In religion, anyone can build a theory that X Angels can dance on the head of a pin. But no-one can dis-prove that theory. Because there is truth in religion.
Ok, 'fess-up. In addition to the Tesla coil and the Van de Graff generator you built in your garage while still a youngun', didn't you also build a working flying saucer??? "Barada nikto", yourself! LOL
I heartily agree!
God bless
The moment of truth for me was when evolution was mathamatically proven imposible in 4 billion years. If the DNA chain was mutated once every second for 4billion years, there hasn't been enough time for a random string to make a virus(the simplest chain). Even if you give them one accident right off the bat, and say the virus was formed in the first mutation, there hasn't been enough time for that to mutate into a bacteria. All this assumes DNA can manipulate itself once a second for billions of years. The statistical odds of a virus happening was something on the order of 10 with 1500 zero's after it. Most statistitions figure that to be zero posibility. Math is observable and provable and can be repeated. Einstein knew things before they were proven by mathamatics. It was a worthwhile endevor to persue his theories because the math said they were possible. Why keep the theory of evolution, I don't know. That is why creationists believe IT is a religion. It's imposible, never been seen, can't be proven, and no evidence. Because evolution is not true, doesn't prove the Bible true, but there is nothing in the Bible that has ever been proven wrong. All the evidence proves the Bible true, so the things we can't prove, we believe on faith because it has been trustworthy thusfar. The whole reason for prophesy was not to show off, but to prove mere men were not writing their own thoughts. Most people believe there was a King David. But it was only recently archeology proved that there was a King David other than the Bible account. Sodom and Gomorah are being explored right now, and they were found right where the Bible said they were. They have to drain a portion of the Dead Sea to explore there.
When evolutionists say a cow came from a whale, and cockroaches are billions of years old, scales turned into feathers, my mind reals at all the unanswered questions these statements conjure up. If an artist can draw it, an evolutionist can believe it. Are we on Darwin still, ot the punctuated equalibrium theory now? I can't keep up. Did we come by the Bering Strait10k yrs ago, or have they explained the civilization in S. America that is supposed to be 25k years old with iron tech and built pyramids? A lady scientist was fired, lost tenure, and her grant for finding that one. These are just a few of the anomolies that the evo's have trble with.
Time for bed, can't spell.
Traveling at the speed of Earth? Most impressive.
How far away is Arcturus?
That information is on a need to know basis.
People can be sincere, but they can also be sincerely wrong. God is not above scrutiny, His message has been picked apart by the greatest minds for thousands of years. We judge Him by what He said and what He did, as we should with all religions.
Reason enables us to discard false testimonies.
In this, we are in agreement.
Our kids are never told that the earth is "possibly," "probably," "likely," or "appears to be" 4.6 billion years old. They are told it is 4.6 billion years old. How can you, with credibility, teach kids that "'science' is open to correction" unless you use contingent language---at least once in awhile?
I've been dying to ask a few questions of comet experts and enthusiasts.
So here goes: Not long ago I was rereading Lucifer's Hammer for about the 12th time and I keyed on a passage that got me thinking:
The phrase went something like: "If the coment struck the earth ( a large one) it would result in a blast equivelant to a 640 thousand megaton nuclear explosion."
Of course the result of the blast would totally devastate the earth causing tidal waves and earthquakes and rain for days and a cooling of the atmosphere.
So my question is can the earth survive ANY coment strike? Because it seemd like even half the amount they talk about in the book would still pretty much screw up the planet for a long time.
It must feel good to have a source of authority that never changes in its details. That way we can always be sure of what is acceptable to eat, when it is acceptable to have sex, what to do when your brother leaves a widow, stuff like that. Ideas that get refined with additional information are wimpy, liberal ideas, like rules that change with circumstances.
Hello js1138,
If you have any problems with the consistency of scripture, I would be glad to humbly attempt to answer them.
P.S. You are aware of the two covenants of the one God. The covenant that protected the Israelis from disease, and traditions that restricted marriage to believers only, in order to assure the coming of the Messiah Jesus Christ, whose covenant was of grace for He had conquered death for all who do not deny Him as their Lord.
Free at last!
I love and respect science, even with it's revisions. Exploration of truth is part of our need as humans.
Hope you are well!
Glad to have you back online, and what a fast ball God has!
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.