RSR's List of Problems with Solar System Formation

[6days]

Let's keep to the topic of the thread. How does the planet Mercury support YEC?

You keep ignoring answers and replies.
See post 25

 

[Stripe]

Creationists hate a discussion, apparently. Or at least one of them does.He wants me to concede something I posted but I'm not even sure which point it is he wants me to concede. Stripe, in the words of Foghorn Leghorn, “What’s it all about boy, elucidate!”

Try reading the post I wrote about what is required for geological activity on Pluto.

You responded to it incorrectly first time around.

 

[User Name]

Try reading the post I wrote about what is required for geological activity on Pluto.

You responded to it incorrectly first time around.

Thank you for quoting the erroneous portion of my reply and explaining where I went wrong. I'm sure everyone else keeping up with this thread appreciates it too, assuming they can find it. :idunno:

 

[Tyrathca]

This is Stripes typical MO, when he runs out of things to say he regresses to "try reading next time" instead of a meaningful response. He's like a broken record.

 

[alwight]

Let's keep to the topic of the thread. How does the planet Mercury support YEC?

On planet 6days some creationist somewhere only has to assert something, based on as little evidence as possible, repeat with a long list of equally unlikely but similarly derived hasty YEC assertions and bingo, their whole supernatural 6000 year YEC scenario has all been vindicated before your very eyes, ...like magic.

 

[Stripe]

Thank you for quoting the erroneous portion of my reply and explaining where I went wrong.

Did you want to readdress the issue?

 

[User Name]

Did you want to readdress the issue?

Sure, why not?

 

[User Name]

On planet 6days some creationist somewhere only has to assert something, based on as little evidence as possible, repeat with a long list of equally unlikely but similarly derived hasty YEC assertions and bingo, their whole supernatural 6000 year YEC scenario has all been vindicated before your very eyes, ...like magic.

I'm a former YEC myself. Well do I recall how my beliefs trumped real science, any day of the week. It was a trip to the Grand Canyon that started to make me realize that the true age of the earth can't be 6,000 years. Physical evidence shows otherwise. But that is a topic for another thread...

 

[6days]

On planet 6days some creationist somewhere only has to assert something, based on as little evidence as possible, repeat with a long list of equally unlikely but similarly derived hasty YEC assertions and bingo, their whole supernatural 6000 year YEC scenario has all been vindicated before your very eyes, ...like magic.

Hey Alwight
Its nothing to do with a creationist assertion. And, really your and my views about Pluto and Mercury are not even based on science but on two different religions... Or, we could say its based on two different histories.
We both look at the same craters on Mercury. We both look at the lack of craters on Pluto. We both interpret the data according to the history we believe in.
As a Christian, I base my interpretations on the absolute truth of God's Word.

 

[Stripe]

Sure, why not?

Great. Go read my post on the requirements for geological reworking and respond rationally to it this time. :up:

 

[User Name]

Great. Go read my post on the requirements for geological reworking and respond rationally to it this time. :up:

 

[alwight]

I'm a former YEC myself. Well do I recall how my beliefs trumped real science, any day of the week. It was a trip to the Grand Canyon that started to make me realize that the true age of the earth can't be 6,000 years. Physical evidence shows otherwise. But that is a topic for another thread...

I live near a place called Alum Bay where multiple layers of strata have been exposed by sea erosion rather than by a river.
Not only could all the many coloured layers not have been formed in 6000 years nor from one single event, but is far more likely to have been a great many, over many millions of years, on top of which they have all become folded to a near vertical position.
A few thousand years is complete and utter nonsense of course as you have come to realised too, good for you.

The Romans lived here 2000 years ago and pagans long before them. Their earthworks and burial mounds (barrows) seem to have remained eroded (weathered) but unmoved in perhaps well over 3000 years.
The YEC timescale is just so plainly wrong if based on natural evidence, thus perhaps YECs should quit disingenuously arguing with, and nit-picking, genuine scientific conclusions and admit that their beliefs require that God "magicked" everything into a position that only gives the appearance of great age instead, if they want to remain YECs?lain:

 

[Stripe]

OK, bye. :wave2:

 

[alwight]

Hey Alwight
Its nothing to do with a creationist assertion. And, really your and my views about Pluto and Mercury are not even based on science but on two different religions... Or, we could say its based on two different histories.
We both look at the same craters on Mercury. We both look at the lack of craters on Pluto. We both interpret the data according to the history we believe in.
As a Christian, I base my interpretations on the absolute truth of God's Word.

There is currently much interested speculation about the lack of craters on Pluto, I'll agree none of which seriously involves the notion that the universe began 6000 years ago (the global scientific conspiracy perhaps?). When all the data has been examined let's just see what they conclude rationally instead of jumping to any YEC type pre-conclusions? :up:

 

[User Name]

While Pluto’s backlit silhouette is beautiful, this is more than a simple glamour shot. See that band of light surrounding the rock? That’s Pluto’s atmosphere, and looking closely at its illumination tells New Horizons’ atmospheric team some surprising things about its size and its makeup. “This is the image that almost brought tears to the eyes of the atmospheric scientists on the team,” says co-investigator Michael Summers.

For 25 years, scientists have known that Pluto has an atmosphere. But in this image, the New Horizons team could pull out discrete layers of haze—small particles in the atmosphere, scattering sunlight. First off, the entire haze layer is at least 100 miles high, five times higher than the team predicted. And that layer seems to be broken into layers, one up about 30 miles and the other about 50 miles up.

Those two layers may provide clues about the red color on Pluto’s surface. Atmospheric scientists think that methane in Pluto’s atmosphere gets bombarded by UV light, which helps to form other compounds like ethylene and acetylene that finally end up as red-hued hydrocarbons called tholins. Those heavier particles in the low atmosphere eventually fall to the surface, giving Pluto its distinctive hue. Studying the layers in Pluto’s atmosphere should help explain that chain of reactions better—and the team has a year’s worth of data on the way to help.

Source: http://www.wired.com/2015/07/new-horizons-parting-shot-pluto-just-beginning/

Pluto's atmosphere is replenished by ices that sublimate off its surface. New Horizons has identified three major types of ice—nitrogen, methane, and carbon monoxide—all within the bright 'heart' feature called Tombaugh Regio. -- http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...inds-nitrogen-glaciers-and-hazy-air-on-pluto/

 

[User Name]

[C]lose-up images of the edges of fractured plains called Sputnik Planum reveal the nitrogen glaciers. At Pluto's frigid temperatures—about -235 °C, 38 degrees above absolute zero—water ice is too brittle to flow. But nitrogen can, which means the features must be made of nitrogen, says William McKinnon, a team member and a planetary scientist at Washington University in St Louis, Missouri. “To see evidence for recent geological activity is really a dream come true,” he adds.

Source: http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...inds-nitrogen-glaciers-and-hazy-air-on-pluto/

This "recent geological activity" helps to explain the lack of craters on Pluto's surface. They've been covered up by ice flows.

 

[User Name]

When all the data has been examined let's just see what they conclude rationally instead of jumping to any YEC type pre-conclusions? :up:

Speaking of which, it will take from now until around November 2016 for the New Horizons satellite to finish broadcasting all of the data it has acquired from Pluto.

 

[User Name]

Just a few months ago, the International Astronomical Union used an image of Pluto that represents the expectations of secular astronomers depicting a heavily cratered body grimy from sweeping up billions of years of space dust. Again though, the predictions of old-earth astronomy failed.

What’s most interesting about this new range is that we’re finally seeing the craters that have been oddly absent inside Tombaugh Regio. The lack of craters within the light heart is indicative of curiously young terrain freshly-resurfaced within the past 100 million years. In sharp contrast, these new cratered mountains look more on order of billions of years old, with layers of craters, some partially infilled with brighter material. Best of all, the distinction between light, smooth, young terrain Tombaugh Regio and this newly-photographed dark, cratered old terrain is sharply defined, lending credence to the idea that some active geological process is taking place within the heart.​

Source: http://space.io9.com/newly-discovered-mountains-on-pluto-finally-have-those-1719669805

 

[way 2 go]

They don't rule out billions of kilometers, but they might indicate that its distance from the sun was once much less.

Their existence indicates instability, non-equilibrium. The driving forces behind geological reworking require proximity to a large neighboring body or deformation from the spherical for the body that is active.

Pluto is a long way from anything that could generate geological processes on it.

However, if it formed recently — as the evidence indicates — the "surprises" facing the evolutionists all but disappear.

The surface is younger than previously supposed. The surface, not the whole planet. Much like the way most of the earth's ocean floor has been dated to within 125 million years even though the earth is estimated to be 5.4 billion years old. This is because the ocean floors have been subducted, carried down into the mantle and recycled. Likewise, the surface of Pluto has been covered over by fresher layers due to geological processes.

 

[way 2 go]

looks like great evidence for the Walt Browns hydroyplate theory