Earth's atmosphere & oceans came from space, not from volcanoes

Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Dec 13, 6:09*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
dlzc wrote:
Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Dec 12, 2:55 pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two
most prominent surface fluids, air and water, came
not from within but from outer space.

Well, the contents of the Earth came from outer
space. *These materials did not come from our Sun.

I have no problem accepting that the materials al
l came during the original formation event, since
everything came from space during that time.

Well, not "everything", but 99+%...

It's whether or not most of the atmosphere and
water came during the later period of Late Heavy
Bombardment that I have trouble with.

I don't hear them saying this. I only hear them ruling out one source
of our atmosphere, not saying anything about when it arrived.

Planets are the vacuum cleaners of space.
*The Sun is constantly venting materials that
can supply hydrogen for water production, and
the "missing mass" in intergalactic space was
hydrogen and lots of oxygen.

Yes, understood, but why would it come later
rather than right at the beginning?

I think all they are saying is that our atmosphere was not produced
primarily by subterrainian emission.

For all we know, Theia could have been covered in ice... both water
and atmosphere. If you'll recall, there have been quite a few
discussions about lightning passing through the gases in the early
atmosphere, making the "soup" from whence life sprang. That cannot
happen with a vacuum, and water can just as easily be steam and still
be attached to the Earth.

David A. Smith

On Dec 13, 1:28*pm, dlzc wrote:
On Dec 13, 6:09*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
I have no problem accepting that the materials al
l came during the original formation event, since
everything came from space during that time.

Well, not "everything", but 99+%...

It's whether or not most of the atmosphere and
water came during the later period of Late Heavy
Bombardment that I have trouble with.

I don't hear them saying this. *I only hear them ruling out one source
of our atmosphere, not saying anything about when it arrived.

Really? You didn't hear them saying that? That's all I heard them
saying. At least in one of the articles they had specifically quoted
one of the scientists, Dr. Greg Holland:

"Therefore the atmosphere and oceans must have come from somewhere
else, possibly from a *late bombardment* of gas and water rich
materials similar to comets."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1210153538.htm

And in the other article, they didn't specifically reference "late
heavy bombardment", but identified it by its description quite
thoroughly:

"The major delivery of volatile elements on our planet could have
corresponded to a phenomenon that occurred some tens of millions of
years after the lunar impact: this was the big clean up of the outer
Solar System initiated by the giant planets. Due to their very strong
gravity, they sent the final ice-rich planetary rubble in all
directions, including in our own direction."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1111110045.htm

Yousuf Khan

Dear YKhan:

On Dec 13, 5:16*pm, YKhan wrote:
On Dec 13, 1:28*pm, dlzc wrote:

On Dec 13, 6:09*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
I have no problem accepting that the materials al
l came during the original formation event, since
everything came from space during that time.

Well, not "everything", but 99+%...

It's whether or not most of the atmosphere and
water came during the later period of Late Heavy
Bombardment that I have trouble with.

I don't hear them saying this. *I only hear them
ruling out one source of our atmosphere, not
saying anything about when it arrived.

Really? You didn't hear them saying that? That's
all I heard them saying. At least in one of the
articles they had specifically quoted one of the
scientists, Dr. Greg Holland:

"Therefore the atmosphere and oceans must
have come from somewhere else, possibly

pretend quote
"possibly, but our data set does not touch this interpretation"

from a *late bombardment* of gas and water rich
materials similar to comets.
"http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210153538.htm

And in the other article, they didn't specifically
reference "late heavy bombardment", but
identified it by its description quite thoroughly:

"The major delivery of volatile elements on our
planet could have

another pretend quote
"could have, but our data set does not touch this interpretation"

corresponded to a phenomenon that occurred
some tens of millions of years after the lunar
impact: this was the big clean up of the outer
Solar System initiated by the giant planets.
Due to their very strong gravity, they sent the
final ice-rich planetary rubble in all directions,
including in our own direction.
"http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091111110045.htm

.... which could have occurred anytime in the last 4 billion years.
Their data only decreases the likelihood of the "volatiles" having
been emitted from the interior of the Earth. It says nothing about
when they arrived. It says nothing about how they arrived (other than
"not from inside the Earth").

You are getting your ire up at their *opinions*, not their reports, it
seems to me.

David A. Smith

On Dec 13, 8:34*am, John Curtis wrote:
On Dec 12, 1:55*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote: Are Earth's Oceans Made Of Extraterrestrial Material?

Isotopic composition of hydrogen in juvenile water speaks otherwise.
Water emanating from Halema'uma'u crater at Kilauea is low in
deuterium, a composition closer to solar hydrogen as well as
primordial hydrogen trapped in seafloor basalts:

Thanks, it helps me populate the Dispute Finder.

Yousuf Khan

On Dec 12, 4:23*pm, dlzc wrote:
Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Dec 12, 2:55*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two
most prominent surface fluids, air and water, came
not from within but from outer space.

Well, the contents of the Earth came from outer space. *These
materials did not come from our Sun.

I have my doubts about these studies' conclusions,
it seems like a stretch that there could be enough
air and water brought from meteors that are being
randomly hurled toward the inner solar system,
especially when the vast majority of them are likely
heading towards the Sun.

Planets are the vacuum cleaners of space. *The Sun is constantly
venting materials that can supply hydrogen for water production, and
the "missing mass" in intergalactic space was hydrogen and lots of
oxygen.

David A. Smith

Quite a bit of our solar system may have come from the sudden and
recent demise of the nearby Sirius(B) situation.

~ BG

On Dec 13, 10:28*am, dlzc wrote:
Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Dec 13, 6:09*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:

dlzc wrote:
Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Dec 12, 2:55 pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two
most prominent surface fluids, air and water, came
not from within but from outer space.

Well, the contents of the Earth came from outer
space. *These materials did not come from our Sun.

I have no problem accepting that the materials al
l came during the original formation event, since
everything came from space during that time.

Well, not "everything", but 99+%...

It's whether or not most of the atmosphere and
water came during the later period of Late Heavy
Bombardment that I have trouble with.

I don't hear them saying this. *I only hear them ruling out one source
of our atmosphere, not saying anything about when it arrived.

Planets are the vacuum cleaners of space.
*The Sun is constantly venting materials that
can supply hydrogen for water production, and
the "missing mass" in intergalactic space was
hydrogen and lots of oxygen.

Yes, understood, but why would it come later
rather than right at the beginning?

I think all they are saying is that our atmosphere was not produced
primarily by subterrainian emission.

For all we know, Theia could have been covered in ice... both water
and atmosphere. *If you'll recall, there have been quite a few
discussions about lightning passing through the gases in the early
atmosphere, making the "soup" from whence life sprang. *That cannot
happen with a vacuum, and water can just as easily be steam and still
be attached to the Earth.

David A. Smith

Our moon(Selene) was likely icy and worth at least 8e22 kg before
lithobraking into us.

~ BG

Jan Panteltje wrote:
If you look at very old maps of the earth, you will see the continents
sort of glued together.
Those are now apart, due to continental drift they say.
In the middle of the oceans between those continents there is
a volcanic ridge still spewing out material.
It could also be that some giant body impacted and increased the earth mass,
blew it up like a balloon, and caused the oceans and the separation of the continents,

Well, it sounds like you're thinking about the Theia hypothesis. The one
that suggests that a Mars-sized protoplanet hit the Earth protoplanet
early in its history which resulted in the Moon being created in orbit
around the Earth from the leftover debris. But of course that hit
would've happened 4.5 billion years ago, too long ago for the
continental drift you're talking about.

There is another theory of Moon formation, called Fission, which
suggests that a rapidly spinning Earth with an instability in its
interior ended up lopping off a portion of itself. The remaining piece
went into orbit as the Moon. The continents are the scar left behind by
the emergence of the Moon.

I personally don't think either theory is likely. I prefer the
co-formation theory, which suggests that both the Earth and Moon formed
within the same region simultaneously as co-planets. The Earth got the
bulk of the materials, and became the main body. This would better
explain the fact that the Moon orbits in the same plane as the Earth
orbits the Sun.

Yousuf Khan

dlzc wrote:
... which could have occurred anytime in the last 4 billion years.
Their data only decreases the likelihood of the "volatiles" having
been emitted from the interior of the Earth. It says nothing about
when they arrived. It says nothing about how they arrived (other than
"not from inside the Earth").

You are getting your ire up at their *opinions*, not their reports, it
seems to me.


Well, most of the science is about the final interpretation of the
opinions, not the initial raw data.

Yousuf Khan

On a sunny day (Sat, 19 Dec 2009 13:21:03 -0500) it happened Yousuf Khan
wrote in :

Jan Panteltje wrote:
If you look at very old maps of the earth, you will see the continents
sort of glued together.
Those are now apart, due to continental drift they say.
In the middle of the oceans between those continents there is
a volcanic ridge still spewing out material.
It could also be that some giant body impacted and increased the earth mass,
blew it up like a balloon, and caused the oceans and the separation of the continents,

Well, it sounds like you're thinking about the Theia hypothesis. The one
that suggests that a Mars-sized protoplanet hit the Earth protoplanet
early in its history which resulted in the Moon being created in orbit
around the Earth from the leftover debris. But of course that hit
would've happened 4.5 billion years ago, too long ago for the
continental drift you're talking about.

There is another theory of Moon formation, called Fission, which
suggests that a rapidly spinning Earth with an instability in its
interior ended up lopping off a portion of itself. The remaining piece
went into orbit as the Moon. The continents are the scar left behind by
the emergence of the Moon.

I personally don't think either theory is likely. I prefer the
co-formation theory, which suggests that both the Earth and Moon formed
within the same region simultaneously as co-planets. The Earth got the
bulk of the materials, and became the main body. This would better
explain the fact that the Moon orbits in the same plane as the Earth
orbits the Sun.

Yousuf Khan

I was not talking about the moon's formation.
Could well have happened that last way you mentioned, or some other way.
Try reading again what I wrote.

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:55:27 -0500, Yousuf Khan
wrote:

Two separate studies are claiming that Earth's two most prominent
surface fluids, air and water, came not from within but from outer
space. I have my doubts about these studies' conclusions, it seems like
a stretch that there could be enough air and water brought from meteors
that are being randomly hurled toward the inner solar system, especially
when the vast majority of them are likely heading towards the Sun.

Yousuf Khan

Where did the crepe rings around Saturn come from? The are made up of
water/ice coated dust particles.

Gordon