The Boy Who Cryo'd Vulcanism and the Failing Nebular Hypothesis

"Astronomers mislead geologists with their uneventful evolutionary story of the solar system and to complete the deadly embrace, geologists mislead astronomers with their stories which assume the Earth being a closed system for most of its mythical four and a half billion year history." - Wal Thornhill

Last Edited by Birkeland on 08/07/2015 11:19 AM

Interesting topic, OP! Thanks!
I love that thread title, by the way, it's very
funny!
It's amazing to me that any elementary school child
would look at Jupiter and Saturn and understand
that if the whole solar system was "created at once"
with "uniformitarianism evolution" happily at work,
it just doesn't FIT the obvious appearances.

Listen to the first 8 minutes of this video in the
words of the late great Immanuel Velikovsky and you
will be light-years ahead of many mainstream science
guys!

[link to youtu.be (secure)]

(Fast-forward to 2:00 min thru 10:00 min.
at least--Velikovsky explains uniformitarianism
as the error in current science at 4:00 min mark.)


O'sCookie

Last Edited by TheOracle'sCookie on 08/07/2015 11:46 AM

Thank you for this post. I was at a loss for "uniformity" the other day..lol.

This is one big reason why Velikovsky had to be put down. The fire and brimstone catastrophic beliefs were quieted with Darwin's Theory of Uniformity and Evolution. Then Velikovsky came along and fire and brimstone was back on the table and it's been a real dog fight ever since. It's been good to see him get his due with scientific discoveries at Venus and Pluto just this summer.

1 star coward.

Have another one, moron.

Care to make a comment on the subject AC5199? If not, thanks for the bump.

Maybe you could provide a short synopsis of the current accepted hypothesis for our solar systems formation?

Last Edited by Birkeland on 08/07/2015 07:13 PM

How the Study of Exo-Systems has Contradicted Theories of Planet Formation

"Geoff Marcy, who has headed Berkeley’s search for earthlike planets, wrote an article in which he states that what we’ve learned about exo-solar systems flatly contradicts our two leading theories of planet formation. The truth is, traditional astronomers have no viable working theory. Likewise, there are documented examples in exo-systems where earthlike planets are understood to have been formed from gas giants."

"Geoff knows of no exo-system that definitively does not include one or more gas giant planets. Gas giants tend to form in the first 10 million years after star formation; smaller planets in the first 20 million years. Given that scheme, smaller planets could reasonably arise from gas giants." - Laird Scranton

[link to astro.berkeley.edu]


From a paper by Geoffrey W. Marcy and R. Paul Butler ..

Reconsidering How Planets Form

"What we have learned about the nine planets in our own solar system has constituted the basis for the conventional theory of planet formation. The theory holds that planets form from a flat, spinning disk of gas and dust that bulges out of a star's equatorial plane, much as pizza dough flattens when it is tossed and spun. This model shows the disk's material orbiting circularly in the same direction and plane as our nine planets do today. Based on this theory, planets cannot form too close to the star, because there is too little disk material, which is also too hot to coalesce. Nor do planets clump extremely far from the star, because the material is too cold and sparse."

"Considering what we now know, such expectations about planets in the rest of the universe seem narrow-minded. The planet orbiting the star 47 Ursae Majoris in the Big Dipper constellation stands as the only one resembling what we expected, with a minimum bulk of 2.4 Jupiter-masses and a circular orbit with a radius of 2.1 astronomical units (AU)--1 AU representing the 150-million-kilometer distance from Earth to the sun. Only a bit more massive than Jupiter, this planet orbits in a circle farther from its star than Mars does from the sun. If placed in our solar system, this new planet might appear as Jupiter's big brother."

"But the remaining planetary companions around other stars baffle us. The two planets with oval orbits have eccentricities of 0.68 and 0.40. (An eccentricity of zero is a perfect circle, whereas an eccentricity of 1.0 is a long, slender oval.) In contrast, in our solar system the greatest eccentricities appear in the orbits of Mercury and Pluto, both about 0.2; all other planets show nearly circular orbits (eccentricities less than 0.1). These eccentric orbits have prodded astronomers to scratch their heads and revise their theories. Within two months of the first planet sighting, theorists hatched new ideas and adjusted the standard planet formation theory."

[link to w.astro.berkeley.edu]