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.
>> “Again, scientists have been caught red handed, doing the very thing they condemn in others.” <<
.
But the methodology they employ demonstrates that they are not scientists; they are biased technicians.
Typical statement by Cretin....
Below is the typical response to Creationists when Evos lose a debate; how can anyone defeat such devistating self-"wisdom" and self-"logic;" such self importance!
editor-surveyor to celmak:
"You might wish to check your meds."
Kozak to celmak
"Typical statement by Cretin...."
I submit defeat to these self gods of Evo;
OTFLOL !!!
Your self serving response left out your comment “ typical response by Evo”. You have cute little nicknames, well I have the perfect one for your ilk.
As to losing a debate there never was one. You never addressed my responses.
and for the excellent summation.
celmak,
Why do you not read the posts of others more carefully?
It would save you from making a fool of yourself (or of doing it twice).
I am probably FR’s most persistant creationist; you could check with your Evos for assurance of that. You appear to be just looking for a fight, and that is no way to win an argument.
Present facts; if they are rejected, remember that is the perogative of every FReeper, yourself included. Don’t start flame wars by repeatedly attacking another FReeper.
Exactly as much as jupiter ‘steals’ back.
Maybe, maybe not. I don't know enough about the orbital mechanics of the system, but it seems that at least some of the energy is being expended in flexing the moon enough to generate a substantial amount of heat, which I don't think Jupiter is capturing all of. Overall, it would be a net loss of rotational energy ftrom Jupiter. However, given Jupiter's size, I doubt it would be something to worry about except ni the ultra-long term, which, in the long run could possibly be leavened with the possibilty of the moon eventually spiraling in (similar to what appears to be happening with Mars' moons), or moving far enough away to be eventually lost, like what appears to be happening to our moon.
It's not my field, so I don't really know the ultimate fate of the moon (if it can even be calculated given how complex the system is), but I know enough to make SWAGs about it on the internet. :-)
Yes, I am aware of that. I am a scientist, and I know of NO scientist who refers to himself as an “evolutionary scientist”. In REAL science, the closest specialist you can get to “evolutionary scientist” is simply biologist. I was just ridiculing the notion that evolution has anything at all to do with these astronomical observations.
Uranus perhaps, but which way does Jupiter spin?
The problem with the creationists is that they attempt to portray themselves as against just one theory of science (one which most of them barely understand, if at all) - but in doing so have to keep expanding the reach of that one theory until it encompasses just about every field of science.
When you stated you agreed with kozak in post 70 and called creationists
And all of it comes from the self-appointed ‘science’ groupies that feebly attempt to ‘debunk’ reality.
what the h*ll am I supposed to think? If you’re a Creationist, then you should make that clear or put (SARC) in your response.
And you don’t want to start a flame war?
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.