Then a powerful intergalactic mining operation took over the place and stripped it of all the top side deposits useful to life ~ phosphorous, calcium, sodium, etc. as well as meteor deposits piled up since the formation of the solar system.
Earth was also mined but not as thoroughly ~ which is why we still have 40% of our original crust.
So, who were these guys and when did they do it?
Heck if I know ~ we can put some limits to it ~ certainly more than half a billion years ago, and maybe a billion before that but not much earlier. The meteor debris and detris would be insuffcient to attract secondary goldmining and there'd go the profit in this process.
It’s not like Venus is the only conundrum for evolution in our solar system!
Again from creation.com/age-of-the-earth
=== Astronomical evidence for a young(er) age of the earth and the universe ===
65. Saturns rings are increasingly recognized as being relatively short-lived rather than essentially changeless over millions of years.
66. Evidence of recent volcanic activity on Earths moon is inconsistent with its supposed vast age because it should have long since cooled if it were billions of years old.
66. Recession of the moon from the earth. Tidal friction causes the moon to recede from the earth at 4 cm per year. It would have been greater in the past when the moon and earth were closer together. The moon and earth would have been in catastrophic proximity (Roche limit) at less than a quarter of their supposed age.
67. The moons former magnetic field. Rocks sampled from the moons crust have residual magnetism that indicates that the moon once had a magnetic field much stronger than earths magnetic field today. No plausible dynamo hypothesis could account for even a weak magnetic field, let alone a strong one that could leave such residual magnetism in a billions-of-years time-frame. The evidence is much more consistent with a recent creation of the moon and its magnetic field and free decay of the magnetic field in the 6,000 years since then. Humphreys, D.R., The moons former magnetic fieldstill a huge problem for evolutionists, Journal of Creation 26(1):56, 2012.
68. Ghost craters on the moons maria (singular mare: dark seas formed from massive lava flows) are a problem for the assumed long ages. Enormous impacts evidently caused the large craters and lava flows within those craters, and this lava partly buried other, smaller impact craters within the larger craters, leaving ghosts. But this means that the smaller impacts cant have been too long after the huge ones, otherwise the lava would have flowed into the larger craters before the smaller impacts. This suggests a very narrow time frame for all this cratering, and by implication the other cratered bodies of our solar system. They suggest that the cratering occurred quite quickly. See Fryman, H., Ghost craters in the sky, Creation Matters 4(1):6, 1999; A biblically based cratering theory (Faulkner); Lunar volcanoes rock long-age timeframe.
69. The presence of a significant magnetic field around Mercury is not consistent with its supposed age of billions of years. A planet so small should have cooled down enough so any liquid core would solidify, preventing the evolutionists dynamo mechanism. See also, Humphreys, D.R., Mercurys magnetic field is young! Journal of Creation 22(3):89, 2008.
70. The outer planets Uranus and Neptune have magnetic fields, but they should be long dead if they are as old as claimed according to evolutionary long-age beliefs.
71. Assuming a solar system age of thousands of years, physicist Russell Humphreys successfully predicted the strengths of the magnetic fields of Uranus and Neptune.
72. Jupiters larger moons, Ganymede, Io, and Europa, have magnetic fields, which they should not have if they were billions of years old, because they have solid cores and so no dynamo could generate the magnetic fields. This is consistent with creationist Humphreys predictions. See also, Spencer, W., Ganymede: the surprisingly magnetic moon, Journal of Creation 23(1):89, 2009.
73. Volcanically active moons of Jupiter (Io) are consistent with youthfulness (Galileo mission recorded 80 active volcanoes). If Io had been erupting over 4.5 billion years at even 10% of its current rate, it would have erupted its entire mass 40 times. Io looks like a young moon and does not fit with the supposed billions of years age for the solar system. Gravitational tugging from Jupiter and other moons accounts for only some of the excess heat produced.
74. The surface of Jupiters moon Europa. Studies of the few craters indicated that up to 95% of small craters, and many medium-sized ones, are formed from debris thrown up by larger impacts. This means that there have been far fewer impacts than had been thought in the solar system and the age of other objects in the solar system, derived from cratering levels, have to be reduced drastically (see Psarris, Spike, What you arent being told about astronomy, volume 1: Our created solar system DVD, available from CMI).
Methane on Titan (Saturns largest moon)the methane should all be gone because of UV-induced breakdown. The products of photolysis should also have produced a huge sea of ethane. As the original Astrobiology paper said, If the chemistry on Titan has gone on in steady-state over the age of the solar system, then we would predict that a layer of ethane 300 to 600 meters thick should be deposited on the surface. No such sea is seen, which is consistent with Titan being a tiny fraction of the claimed age of the solar system.
75. The rate of change / disappearance of Saturns rings is inconsistent with their supposed vast age; they speak of youthfulness.
76. Enceladus, a moon of Saturn, looks young. Astronomers working in the billions of years mindset thought that this moon would be cold and dead, but it is a very active moon, spewing massive jets of water vapour and icy particles into space at supersonic speeds, consistent with a much younger age. Calculations show that the interior would have frozen solid after 30 million years (less than 1% of its supposed age); tidal friction from Saturn does not explain its youthful activity (Psarris, Spike, What you arent being told about astronomy, volume 1: Our created solar system DVD; Walker, T., 2009. Enceladus: Saturns sprightly moon looks young, Creation 31(3):5455).
77. Miranda, a small moon of Uranus, should have been long since dead, if billions of years old, but its extreme surface features suggest otherwise. See Revelations in the solar system.
78. Neptune should be long since cold, lacking strong wind movement if it were billions of years old, yet Voyager II in 1989 found it to be otherwiseit has the fastest winds in the entire solar system. This observation is consistent with a young age, not billions of years. See Neptune: monument to creation.
79. Neptunes rings have thick regions and thin regions. This unevenness means they cannot be billions of years old, since collisions of the ring objects would eventually make the ring very uniform. Revelations in the solar system.
80. Young surface age of Neptunes moon, Tritonless than 10 million years, even with evolutionary assumptions on rates of impacts.
81. Uranus and Neptune both have magnetic fields significantly off-axis, which is an unstable situation. When this was discovered with Uranus, it was assumed by evolutionary astronomers that Uranus must have just happened to be going through a magnetic field reversal. However, when a similar thing was found with Neptune, this AD hoc explanation was upset. These observations are consistent with ages of thousands of years rather than billions.
82. The orbit of Pluto is chaotic on a 20 million year time scale and affects the rest of the solar system, which would also become unstable on that time scale, suggesting that it must be much younger. (See: Rothman, T., God takes a nap, Scientific American 259(4):20, 1988).
83. The existence of short-period comets (orbital period less than 200 years), e.g. Halley, which have a life of less than 20,000 years, is consistent with an age of the solar system of less than 10,000 years. ad hoc hypotheses have to be invented to circumvent this evidence (see Kuiper Belt). See Comets and the age of the solar system.
84. Near-infrared spectra of the Kuiper Belt Object, Quaoar and the suspected Kuiper Belt Object, Charon, indicate both contain crystalline water ice and ammonia hydrate. This watery material cannot be much older than 10 million years, which is consistent with a young solar system, not one that is 5 billion years old. See: The waters above.
85. Lifetime of long-period comets (orbital period greater than 200 years) that are sun-grazing comets or others like Hyakutake or HaleBopp means they could not have originated with the solar system 4.5 billion years ago. However, their existence is consistent with a young age for the solar system. Again an ad hoc Oort Cloud was invented to try to account for these comets still being present after billions of years. See, Comets and the age of the solar system.
86. The maximum expected lifetime of near-earth asteroids is of the order of one million years, after which they collide with the sun. And the Yarkovsky effect moves main belt asteroids into near-earth orbits faster than had been thought. This brings into question the origin of asteroids with the formation of the solar system (the usual scenario), or the solar system is much younger than the 4.5 billion years claimed. Henry, J., The asteroid belt: indications of its youth, Creation Matters 11(2):2, 2006.
87. The lifetime of binary asteroidswhere a tiny asteroid moon orbits a larger asteroid in the main belt (they represent about 1517% of the total): tidal effects limit the life of such binary systems to about 100,000 years. The difficulties in conceiving of any scenario for getting binaries to form in such numbers to keep up the population, led some astronomers to doubt their existence, but space probes confirmed it.
88. The observed rapid rate of change in stars contradicts the vast ages assigned to stellar evolution. For example, Sakurais Object in Sagittarius: in 1994, this star was most likely a white dwarf in the centre of a planetary nebula; by 1997 it had grown to a bright yellow giant, about 80 times wider than the sun (Astronomy & Astrophysics 321:L17, 1997). In 1998, it had expanded even further, to a red supergiant 150 times wider than the sun. But then it shrank just as quickly; by 2002 the star itself was invisible even to the most powerful optical telescopes, although it is detectable in the infrared, which shines through the dust (Muir, H., 2003, Back from the dead, New Scientist 177(2384):2831).
89. The faint young sun paradox. According to stellar evolution theory, as the suns core transforms from hydrogen to helium by means of nuclear fusion, the mean molecular weight increases, which would compress the suns core increasing fusion rate. The upshot is that over several billion years, the sun ought to have brightened 40% since its formation and 25% since the appearance of life on earth. For the latter, this translates into a 1618 ºC temperature increase on the earth. The current average temperature is 15 ºC, so the earth ought to have had a -2 ºC or so temperature when life appeared. See: Faulkner, D., The young faint Sun paradox and the age of the solar system, Journal of Creation (TJ) 15(2):34, 2001. As of 2010, the faint young sun remains a problem.
90. Evidence of (very) recent geological activity (tectonic movements) on the moon is inconsistent with its supposed age of billions of years and its hot origin.
91. The giant gas planets Jupiter and Saturn radiate more energy than they receive from the sun, suggesting a recent origin. Jupiter radiates almost twice as much energy as it receives from the sun, indicating that it may be less than 1 % of the presumed 4.5 billion years old solar system. Saturn radiates nearly twice as much energy per unit mass as Jupiter. See The age of the Jovian planets.
92. Speedy stars are consistent with a young age for the universe. For example, many stars in the dwarf galaxies in the Local Group are moving away from each other at speeds estimated at to 1012 km/s. At these speeds, the stars should have dispersed in 100 Ma, which, compared with the supposed 14,000 Ma age of the universe, is a short time. See Fast stars challenge big bang origin for dwarf galaxies.
93. The ageing of spiral galaxies (much less than 200 million years) is not consistent with their supposed age of many billions of years. The discovery of extremely young spiral galaxies highlights the problem of this evidence for the evolutionary ages assumed.
94. The number of type I supernova remnants (SNRs) observable in our galaxy is consistent with an age of thousands of years, not millions or billions. See Davies, K., Proc. 3prd ICC, pp. 175184, 1994.
95. The rate of expansion and size of supernovas indicates that all studied are young (less than 10,000 years). See supernova remnants.