Search results

Unresponsive, unsupported claims do not an argument make. (i.e. Saying it doesn't make it so.) They haven't done so because it cannot be done. Explosions do not create more order, they create far less. Pluto, flat out, was not ever part of the Earth - period. The second law of thermodynamics is...

Repeat yourself all you like. Your implication that such details are relevant doesn't make it so. At the end of the day, we are talking about an explosion of one sort or another producing an orderly system of planetary bodies billions of miles away from the energy source that supposedly produced...

Think of it this way. Imagine a much easier scenario. Let's pretend someone was trying to create a stable system that rested inside one of Earth's Lagrange points. Let's say, for the sake of the hypothetical, that the technology existed to allow us to send any quantity of material into the...

I do not need to know anything more about what it does or how it behaves beyond the fact that it is an uncontrolled explosion, columnated as it may be, that supposedly is capable of accidentally creating a stable binary planetary system some 3 or 4 billion miles away from where the explosion...

There are really really excellent reasons why this line of thought has been understood to be a fallacy for longer than anyone has believed in the doctrine of exhaustive infallible foreknowledge. Appeal to Tradition Fallacy (29 Examples + Definition)

We are repeating ourselves. Those six bodies wouldn't have been the only six pieces of debris sent there in such an explosion - granting for the moment that ANY debris could have been sent there at all. Pluto has orbited the sun less than 20 times throughout the whole history of mankind. There...

It is not merely a mathematics problem. The mathematical difficulty reflects something true about reality itself, namely that extremely small differences in initial conditions can produce radically different long-term outcomes. This does not mean that every system containing three or more...

That is a LOT easier to say than it is to do.

It would have lit up the sky like a Christmas tree. The biggest meteor showers recorded in history would have paled in comparison. However much you think landed on the Moon, 10,000 times that would have fallen back to Earth and every piece of it the size of a grain of sand or larger would have...

Your third option isn't precisely the same as the second but it is little more than a modified version of it and it would fail for the same reason. Objects with the size we are talking about simply do not do gentle collisions, they do not cluster together and there simply hasn't been sufficient...

I don't know how any of you tolerate interacting with him.

My post was too short and conveyed hostility that wasn't intended. The simple fact is that neither of us is making any progress toward convincing the other. I present a dichotomy that you call a false dichotomy and then firmly sit on one of the dichotomy's horns. I talk about how much energy it...

We're done.

Oh, yes it does! Pluto and its five moons would have had to leave the Earth together, in close proximity with each other and in just such a way as to end up in almost perfectly circular and very very stable orbits. The three-body problem demonstrates how entirely impossible such an idea is. It...

Why? It's just another way in which a large amount of material can exist in a stable orbit around the Sun. Why is it any more incredible than having another planet there? Ceres is big enough to be considered a planet and, in fact it is a so called "Dwarf planet". It's 940 kilometers across. Do...

The degree to which it is critical to the HPT to believe that the asteroid belt, comets and Pluto have their origin in Noah's Flood is the degree to which I reject the HPT. I simply do not believe it is possible. Nothing I've read in Brown's book or on this website has succeeded in convincing...

This is the only coherent response to such objections that I recall having ever seen. I can't say I'm convinced but that objection seems to have been answered.

No. Orbits are quite difficult to achieve accidentally. That's why all the theories require vast clouds of material to exist at the beginning of such systems. The vast majority of the material either coalesces into larger bodies or gets ejected out of the system and only that portion of the...

I am 1000% not confused at all about what the three-body problem is. The rest of your post is moot.

No! Not because I say so! Ever heard of the three-body problem? Try it with six bodies! The idea that such a system could arise as a result of a steam explosion on a planet some 3 billion plus miles away is NOT PLAUSIBLE! If Pluto was out there by itself, it still wouldn't be plausible. The...