Search results

I'm not convinced that's so and it isn't necessary to believe it in order to explain retrograde orbits of small bodies in the solar system. In fact, the smaller the body, the easier it would be for it to end up in a retrograde orbit because their orbits are so easily effected by gravitational...

No. I'm sorry, but the Earth absolutely will not ever be destroyed by such things unless God uses them to do it Himself. It is God who will destroy the Earth, not any accidental consequence of the fall of Adam. People have been killed by trees, fire, mud, sand, wind, rocks, water, holes in the...

I watched a good portion of that video. I skipped over portions. Perhaps I missed that bit. I definitely grant that I'm not a physics and so IF the energies involved are sufficient then fine and dandy. It just feels a bit far fetched to me, that's all. The portion of the video most directly...

Are you saying that this is Dr. Browns approximation of the energy released when this trapped water was released? Okay, so you believe its plausible and I'm more than a little bit skeptical about the origin of comets and asteroids and such. As for main stream explanations for the origin of...

Mass is mass. A certain mass of rock has the volume it has. A typical comet is something on the order of 10-12 miles across, some more some less. On the scale of the planet Earth, even a gap as wide as twenty or thirty miles wide would tiny. Just how narrow are you think it was? The 300...

The seam had to have been at least of few miles wide to send chunks of Earth the size of comets into an elongated orbit around the Sun. 300 trillion tons was a hell of a lot in comparison to the 1 gram sized projectile that science has figured out how to accelerate to one third the speed of the...

Quite so except that rockets aren't needed per se, just sufficient amounts of energy applied toward accelerating an object in the proper direction.

It's completely true BECAUSE it depends on the forces involved. The forces involved are gigantic, even for a relatively small object, like a man made rocket, to achieve a barely stable low Earth orbit. The Sun's gravity has nothing to do with it. The Sun's gravity is at play from the start as...

You are not a Christian. If you think otherwise, you're very much confused. If you think you're eternal life has something (ANYTHING) to do with your willingness to fight evil and stand up to wickedness, you're in danger of Hell fire. The whole secret is that you cannot fight. You have no...

Yes, and things that ejected from the Earth would tend to either fall back to Earth or end up in orbit around the Earth. In order for it to end up not being in Earth orbit, you'd have to not simply get far enough away from the Earth because part of your velocity came from having been on the...

I don't think so. The asteroid belt can't be considered any form of ring, really. The entire asteroid belt is less than four percent of the mass of our moon and 40% of that is found in the single asteroid called Ceres and two third of the rest of the mass is found in the next three largest...

I agree with this sentiment entirely but, just to be super clear (for those who might try really hard to misunderstand), when you say " we do not gain in spirit....", you mean that we do not gain in our standing before God, not that we profit nothing of spiritual significance by attending a...

In order for something to go from being in orbit around the Earth to being in an orbit around the Sun, you have cancel out most of the kinetic energy that is making the object(s) follow the Earth in its orbit. The Earth is moving something like 67,000 miles per hour in its path around the Sun...

The amount of energy it would take to send that much material just into low Earth orbit is more than would likely be generated by the processes described in the book, never mind sending it into an orbit around the Sun! The idea is more than a little bit implausible to my mind. Clete

Walt Brown's Hydroplate Theory is the best I've ever seen, BY FAR! I'm not sure that I buy every aspect of it, though. The idea that ejecta from the Earth could account for comets needs a more robust analysis, for example. Over all, however, it is easily the most scientifically sound and...

Okay, so what is it about whatever canopy that you think was there that's superior to the best theories that bible believing scientists are currently putting forward? In what way would it be a superior hypothesis, either scientifically or biblically?

I thought the idea of a water canopy died a long time ago. I remember it was popular when I was a kid but wasn't it abandoned decades ago now? Atmospheric pressure was only one of its problems. Seems like there was something about a major issue about the temperature. Water vapor is a very...

Does anyone else find it weird when people analyze Genesis as if it had been published in the Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics?

Well, that's one way for my prediction to come true! :cool:

There are something like 23 moons and planets that we know have water, not the least of which is the planet Saturn who's entire ring system is almost entirely made up of about 15.4 quadrillion metric tons of 95% pure water ice. (Quadrillions is equal to millions of billions or thousands of...