From the article.
Posted on 02/15/2013 12:08:09 PM PST by fishtank
Youthful Solar System Bodies Puzzle Evolutionary Scientists by Jake Hebert, Ph.D. *
A feature story in a recent issue of the journal Nature described four solar system bodies that are puzzling to evolutionary scientists.1 Specifically, the article discussed the rings of Saturn, two of Saturn's moons (Enceladus and Titan), and Jupiter's moon Io. These four bodies all exhibit properties that cannot persist for billions of years.
The brightness of Saturn's rings is puzzling because after billions of years, they should have been darkened by dust from comets and asteroids. Yet these rings are still brilliantly beautiful.
Likewise, watery geysers erupting from the south pole of Saturn's moon Enceladus suggest that the moon is giving off a great deal of heat, yet this heat should "die down" relatively quickly. A mechanism proposed by Australian planetary scientist Craig O'Neill can theoretically provide enough release of heat to sustain the geysers for only about ten million years—far fewer than billions of years.
Secular researchers are also puzzled by the methane in Titan's atmosphere. Because sunlight degrades methane, Titan's atmospheric methane should have been depleted after only a few tens of millions of years. Yet methane is still present in Titan's atmosphere.
Likewise, the extreme volcanic activity on Jupiter's moon Io seems incapable of being sustained for extremely long periods of time.
Secular planetary scientists have proposed multiple hypotheses to explain these "anomalies." Many of these explanations assume that we just happen to be simultaneously viewing multiple short-lived astronomical phenomena. However, even secular scientists acknowledge that such a coincidence seems unlikely. For instance, O'Neill acknowledged that his explanation for the continuing geologic activity on Enceladus seems like "special pleading," since it requires researchers to view Enceladus at a special time in its history. Other proposed explanations for the persistence of these phenomena are also problematic.
Economy of explanation, or parsimony, is an important principle in science. A single hypothesis that can simultaneously explain multiple phenomena is more likely to be correct than multiple hypotheses needed to explain those same phenomena. Of course, there is such a hypothesis that could easily explain all four of these astronomical "anomalies." If the solar system were only thousands, rather than billions, of years old as implied by a straightforward reading of the Bible, then the continued brilliance of Saturn's rings, the continued presence of methane in Titan's atmosphere, and the continuing geological activity of Io and Enceladus would not be surprising—those would actually be expected.
In fact, creation scientists and astronomers have been pointing out such youthful features of our solar system for many years.2 Yet not only have secular scientists refused to even consider the possibility of a young, created solar system, they have discriminated against creation scientists.3
Secular planetary scientists would deny that there is any good reason to believe the universe is young. And yet their puzzlement over these four solar system bodies is a direct result of their insistence that the universe has been in existence for billions of years. Could their unwillingness to consider this possibility be due to other reasons?
If the universe really is just thousands of years old, then evolution is completely discredited. A slow evolutionary process needs billions of years in order even to appear plausible. If evolutionary processes are disqualified, then special creation is the only remaining logical alternative. But special creation requires a Creator. And many—even scientists who are supposedly logical, objective, and impartial—are simply unwilling to acknowledge their Creator's authority over their lives.
References
McKee, M. 2013. Caught in the Act. Nature. 493 (7434): 592-596.
For a good summary of such features, see Psarris, S. 2009. DVD. What You Aren't Being Told About Astronomy, Volume 1: Our Created Solar System. Creation Astronomy Media.
For instance, many suspect that scientist David Coppedge's employment at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory was terminated due to his belief in and support of biblical creation. See: At Pro-Darwin Blogs, Knee-Jerk Responses to the David Coppedge Intelligent Design Case Validate Discrimination Claims. Evolution News & Views. Posted on evolutionnews.org November 7, 2012, accessed February 11, 2013. Image credit: NASA/JPL - Caltech/Space Science Institute
* Dr. Hebert is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research and received his Ph.D. in Physics from the University of Texas at Dallas.
Article posted on February 13, 2013.
From the article.
Oh wait...is this about astronomy?
Creation Scientists Puzzled by Science.
Space Cows......
Everyone keep in mind this fact...
Uranus spins sideways.
Yeppers; don't want to question science; just look at global warming.
Not to mention the methane on Uranus............
What if the planetary rings are a million years old instead of a billion or more? Does that make the cosmos or the earth only a few thousand years old?
Much of science is speculation but speculative error is also the error of the young earth people.
Mainstream astronomers are going to learn some new stuff that heretic astronomers have been hooting about for ages:
1. Saturn’s rings are recent
2. Io’s eruptions are electrical discharges
3. The sun (and all stars) is the remnant of a galactic Birkland current Z pinch
4. Big Bang, Dark Matter, Dark Energy and Black Hole are mathematical hallucinations.
5. Almost all life was wiped out in North America 10,000 years ago by a comet impact
6. The sun (and all stars) are electrical arc discharges not H-bombs
7. 99% of all matter in the Universe is in the plasma state and hence is electrical in nature
8. The “solar wind” would be more aptly named the solar electric current
9. Radiometric dating is heavily skewed in the presence of static electrical fields thus all geological and archaeological dating relying on isotope decay is unreliable.
10. Gravity has an electrical component
www.thunderbolts.info
What if the universe is a computer simulation and that computer has only been running for 6,000 years....
Would that make god a computer programmer nerd that booted it up?
Also one thing about creationism is we know how to measure distances via triangulation and we know that there are objects further than 6,000 light years out there, in fact some of the furtherst objects are 14+ billion light years away, so did God create an entire universe and simulate the photons of such distant objects comming into the earth, if god can simulate far and fast moving photons then why actually build anything that is over 6,000 light years away, just simulate the photons.....
Why build any planets either, just “build it on the cheap” and put a holo projectuion screen around the earth sun moon system and simulate the universe around it....
Maybe god is a cheapskate...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjc0n4MiaUQ
The thing is God is immensly more vast than can even be fully and accurately explained by a book written by people who barely mastered fire. God could come down and explain himself to our brightest minds today and there would be a forrest of question marks hovering over their heads....
We have a hard time accurately relating information to primitives living in the amazon... Imagine a being several billion magnitudes more advanced than us trying to talk to stone age peoples about the nature of the universe......
Some details are bound to get “glossed over”, God was not going to go into boringly crazy detail about how he twisted several dimensions together to craft space time, he is going to give them the abdriged verson so he can get on to teaching them the lessions that matter, that is, how to treat one another.
Er, who is that?
I think she’s saying the same thing about you. :0)
You can question science all you want - make your observations, collect and present the data, and come up with a better theory. Science is a method of inquiry. Not all scientists practice good science - global warming is just one such example. But people claiming the earth is 6,000 years old and throwing up their arms every time they find a gap in the data and saying "God did it." is not science. Idiocy, yes, but not science.
I believe the current theory is that the rings are constantly being renewed by out gassing of moons, collisions among other smaller bodies etc. Not to mention the countless collisions that must be happening among the ring materials.
There are lots of organic compounds in space. None of it shakes my faith in God. Even Newton who was very much the pure scientist believed that comets were messengers from God. From what we’ve seen today, I’d have a hard time disagreeing with him. To me it says God wants us to get off our butts and start seriously thinking about how to prevent the impacts.
Dang! That sounds painful!
Earth is not young. Accept it.
I’d check with Slartibartfast...
What if the earth is 6,000years old and the rest of the universe is Billions of years old....
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.