A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Earth is more than 10 billion years old & evidence from TV show ORIGINS



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 30th 04, 07:47 AM
Archimedes Plutonium
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Earth is more than 10 billion years old & evidence from TV show ORIGINS

Mr. Tyson is the host of this miniseries. I caught a glimpse of only one
program and did not expect to watch any because these things usually are
too biased to even call science.

They treat speculation as foregone conclusion. They never air a
competing theory that makes more sense such as the Atom Totality. And
worst they inculcate young people to believe that the Nebular Dust Cloud
theory and the Big Bang as proven and foregone conclusion.

This is a grave fallacy in Logic that says something like it is
ridiculous to think the Nebular Dust Cloud theory with its Earth age at
5 billion years is anything more than speculation when the origins of
minor structure on Earth such as where the Oceans of water came from
which is a utter unkown. So how can Mr. Tyson keep selling a 5 billion
year old Earth and the Nebular Dust Cloud theory of Earth origins and
then say the origins of oceans is mysterious.

Logically you cannot buy or sell a theory if its minor parts are utterly
mysterious. You cannot buy or sell Nebular Dust Cloud theory and then
admit that the origin of the oceans is totally mysterious. What you can
buy or sell is that the Nebular Dust Cloud theory is a high speculation
because oceans are speculation.

And Mr. Tyson makes this same fallacy with the Big Bang when there are
so many unknowns and mysteries of parts of the Cosmos to say that we
believe in the Big Bang is preposterous and pretentious.

But seeing that one program having something to do with Michael Mumma
and Steven Mojzsis, one about heavy water in comets and heavy water in
our oceans and the other having to do with zirconium crystals of their
uranium isotopes being the oldest material on Earth at 4.4 billion
years.

Which got me to thinking.

Since I have the theory of Growing Solar System where Earth and Sun and
inner planets are 10 billion years old and outer planets only 5 billion
years old and where solar systems grow from Dirac radioactivity such as
cosmic rays that fall to Earth daily with enormous amounts of energy. So
can the origin of the Oceans tell us that Earth is not just 5 billion
years old but in fact 10 billion years. Mr. Mumma claims that the comets
studied so far have too much heavy water compared to our Ocean water.

My question would be, if the Earth were 10 billion years old and not 5,
then would not the waters of our Oceans have converted much of that
heavy water into regular H2O????

And as for the zirconium dating by Mr. Mojzsis et al, that they then
restrict the history of Earth in acquiring an ocean of water to a mere
couple of hundred million years which is fast time compared to 5 billion
years. But if EArth were truly say 10 billion years old, we get rid of
that artificialness and that we can thence say the Earth had a
comfortable 5 billion years to acquire all of that ocean water.

Which leads me even further to think.

If the origin of solar systems is Dirac radioactivity of energy
particles shot from the Nucleus of the AtomTotality and that our solar
system is growing daily from new particles that land on the planets and
Sun over a time period of 10 billion years, then would not such a system
build up water in a precise ratio compared to other forms of compounds?
In the Utah "Fly Eye" apparatus that collects cosmic-rays some with 10^9
MeV are common occurrences, are some of those collections seeing water
where there was no water???

Seems to me that we should be able to compare test the Nebular Dust
Cloud theory against the Growing Solar System theory from the case of
water. That as the solar system is built the amount of water should be
different to those 2 theories. And that the oldest planets with a
favorable distance from the Sun should be water collectors. So that the
water that existed on Mercury, Venus, Mars and asteroids gradually make
their way to EArth and collected on Earth.

And that satellites such as Europa of Jupiter have an amount of water
that is in agreement with the rate of Dirac radioactivity.

In this manner we see that comets are fragments of ancient planets or
moons that were destroyed in the 10 billion year age.


Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

  #2  
Old September 30th 04, 08:00 AM
Archimedes Plutonium
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thu, 30 Sep 2004 01:47:14 -0500 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:



Since I have the theory of Growing Solar System where Earth and Sun and
inner planets are 10 billion years old and outer planets only 5 billion
years old and where solar systems grow from Dirac radioactivity such as
cosmic rays that fall to Earth daily with enormous amounts of energy. So
can the origin of the Oceans tell us that Earth is not just 5 billion
years old but in fact 10 billion years. Mr. Mumma claims that the comets
studied so far have too much heavy water compared to our Ocean water.

My question would be, if the Earth were 10 billion years old and not 5,
then would not the waters of our Oceans have converted much of that
heavy water into regular H2O????


Better yet, the above maybe a "deciding experiment" between that of Nebular
Dust Cloud and Growing Solar System via cosmic-ray bombardment.

Would a cosmic ray shower produce heavy-water HDO more often then produce
H2O??

In high energy physics is it more likely to create deuterium atoms rather
than hydrogen atoms? So the Nebular Dust Cloud theory has a awful tough
time of reconciling how heavy-water ever came into existence and so much
heavy water. Whereas the Growing Solar System theory where planets are
borne from cosmic rays that continually land and become absorbed by the
planet would have a high degree of heavy-water.


Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

  #3  
Old September 30th 04, 05:26 PM
Archimedes Plutonium
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In the Growing Solar System theory where Dirac radioactivity grows most
every solar system in the cosmos via cosmic-rays or gamma-rays and other
high energy particles shot from the Nucleus of the Atom-Totality, then each
of these solar-systems is layered with different ages like a onion
layerings. Sun and the inner planets are 10 billion years old and Jupiter
and the outer planets are 5 billion years old.

So that leaves the question of comets. A Nebular-Dust Cloud theory that is
currently accepted by nearly 100% of the scientists in astronomy is deaf,
dumb and silent as to why or how the Nebular Dust Cloud can give birth to a
cometary field whose members consist mostly of ice.

The Growing Solar System theory is part of the Atom Totality theory and
most every solar system is borne by cosmic rays that accrete a solar
system. Water is formed uniformly for 5 billion years but then those
planets and their moons collide and escape and are broken up and the water
and ice seem to congregate in special places of the debris field and comets
are one debris field. Heavy metal congregate in other debris fields and
asteroid belt is an example of that.

So 10 billion years ago our Sun and Mercury Venus Earth Mars and some other
early planets and their moons were borne via cosmic rays that accumulated
on protoplanetary seeds. After several billion years they started to
collide and some were swallowed by others but some collided and left debris
fields.

If we look at the outer planets of Jupiter and beyond we see signs of water
but those water deposits are somewhat uniform and as these outer planets in
the future collide and shatter and create debris fields, they create new
cometary fields loaded with water and ice.


Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Space Calendar - April 30, 2004 Ron Misc 0 April 30th 04 03:55 PM
UFO Activities from Biblical Times (Long Text) Kazmer Ujvarosy UK Astronomy 3 December 25th 03 11:41 PM
Gas Planets Evolve to be Rock planets??? G=EMC^2 Glazier Misc 114 October 16th 03 12:51 PM
Space Calendar - August 28, 2003 Ron Baalke History 0 August 28th 03 05:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.