Spacecraft goes from crash landing to mission accomplished

Spacecraft goes from crash landing to mission accomplished

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene...co mplished__

"After painstakingly gathering and analyzing the shards, researchers
report that Earth’s chemistry is not like the sun’s. Compared with the
sun, the planet is enriched in two types of oxygen and one type of
nitrogen, two teams report June 24 in Science".

“The big thing is that the planets around us are so different from the
sun,” says Donald Burnett, a cosmochemist at Caltech and the Genesis
project leader. “We have uncovered something very fundamental about how
the Earth as a planet evolved.”

"Nearly 4.6 billion years ago, the sun and then the planets formed out
of a swirling disk of gas and dust. Because everything started from the
same raw material, scientists have assumed objects in the inner solar
system would share the same chemistry. But in the 1970s, researchers
discovered evidence that something must have altered the solar system’s
chemical composition during that early era. Analyses of certain
meteorites revealed that they had different proportions of oxygen
isotopes compared with Earth rocks".

See:
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene...co mplished__

On Jun 25, 8:35*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
Spacecraft goes from crash landing to mission accomplished

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene.../Spacecraft_go...

"After painstakingly gathering and analyzing the shards, researchers
report that Earth’s chemistry is not like the sun’s. Compared with the
sun, the planet is enriched in two types of oxygen and one type of
nitrogen, two teams report June 24 in Science".

“The big thing is that the planets around us are so different from the
sun,” says Donald Burnett, a cosmochemist at Caltech and the Genesis
project leader. “We have uncovered something very fundamental about how
the Earth as a planet evolved.”

"Nearly 4.6 billion years ago, the sun and then the planets formed out
of a swirling disk of gas and dust. Because everything started from the
same raw material, scientists have assumed objects in the inner solar
system would share the same chemistry. But in the 1970s, researchers
discovered evidence that something must have altered the solar system’s
chemical composition during that early era. Analyses of certain
meteorites revealed that they had different proportions of oxygen
isotopes compared with Earth rocks".

See:http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene.../Spacecraft_go....

Sun has all that "plasma" Earth has so very little. That has to tell
you something TreBert.

On 6/25/11 5:21 PM, bert wrote:
On Jun 25, 8:35 am, Sam wrote:
Spacecraft goes from crash landing to mission accomplished

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene.../Spacecraft_go...

"After painstakingly gathering and analyzing the shards, researchers
report that Earth’s chemistry is not like the sun’s. Compared with the
sun, the planet is enriched in two types of oxygen and one type of
nitrogen, two teams report June 24 in Science".

“The big thing is that the planets around us are so different from the
sun,” says Donald Burnett, a cosmochemist at Caltech and the Genesis
project leader. “We have uncovered something very fundamental about how
the Earth as a planet evolved.”

"Nearly 4.6 billion years ago, the sun and then the planets formed out
of a swirling disk of gas and dust. Because everything started from the
same raw material, scientists have assumed objects in the inner solar
system would share the same chemistry. But in the 1970s, researchers
discovered evidence that something must have altered the solar system’s
chemical composition during that early era. Analyses of certain
meteorites revealed that they had different proportions of oxygen
isotopes compared with Earth rocks".

See:http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene.../Spacecraft_go...

Sun has all that "plasma" Earth has so very little. That has to tell
you something TreBert.

I confine my plasma in light bulbs, but the sun hangs on to most
of its plasma via gravitation.

On Jun 25, 8:35*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
Spacecraft goes from crash landing to mission accomplished

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene.../Spacecraft_go...

"After painstakingly gathering and analyzing the shards, researchers
report that Earth’s chemistry is not like the sun’s. Compared with the
sun, the planet is enriched in two types of oxygen and one type of
nitrogen, two teams report June 24 in Science".

“The big thing is that the planets around us are so different from the
sun,” says Donald Burnett, a cosmochemist at Caltech and the Genesis
project leader. “We have uncovered something very fundamental about how
the Earth as a planet evolved.”

"Nearly 4.6 billion years ago, the sun and then the planets formed out
of a swirling disk of gas and dust. Because everything started from the
same raw material, scientists have assumed objects in the inner solar
system would share the same chemistry. But in the 1970s, researchers
discovered evidence that something must have altered the solar system’s
chemical composition during that early era. Analyses of certain
meteorites revealed that they had different proportions of oxygen
isotopes compared with Earth rocks".

See:http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene.../Spacecraft_go....

Sun has all that pl;asma Earth very little TreBert

On Jun 25, 6:35*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
Spacecraft goes from crash landing to mission accomplished

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene.../Spacecraft_go...

"After painstakingly gathering and analyzing the shards, researchers
report that Earth’s chemistry is not like the sun’s. Compared with the
sun, the planet is enriched in two types of oxygen and one type of
nitrogen, two teams report June 24 in Science".

“The big thing is that the planets around us are so different from the
sun,” says Donald Burnett, a cosmochemist at Caltech and the Genesis
project leader. “We have uncovered something very fundamental about how
the Earth as a planet evolved.”

"Nearly 4.6 billion years ago, the sun and then the planets formed out
of a swirling disk of gas and dust. Because everything started from the
same raw material, scientists have assumed objects in the inner solar
system would share the same chemistry. But in the 1970s, researchers
discovered evidence that something must have altered the solar system’s
chemical composition during that early era. Analyses of certain
meteorites revealed that they had different proportions of oxygen
isotopes compared with Earth rocks".

See:http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene.../Spacecraft_go....

Shouldn't this say."Nearly 4.6 billion years ago, WE THEORIZE the sun
and then the planets formed out
of a swirling disk of gas and dust. Because everything started from
the
same raw material, IN OUR THEORY, da da da da da"?
And then, surprise, surprise, observations
are not bearing our theory out.
The observations must be wrong.
Mass hallucinations?
Tired pilots mistaking starlings for huge
shiny flying discs?

Obviously!!!!


john

On 6/27/11 8:51 AM, john wrote:
On Jun 25, 6:35 am, Sam wrote:
Spacecraft goes from crash landing to mission accomplished

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene.../Spacecraft_go...

"After painstakingly gathering and analyzing the shards, researchers
report that Earth’s chemistry is not like the sun’s. Compared with the
sun, the planet is enriched in two types of oxygen and one type of
nitrogen, two teams report June 24 in Science".

“The big thing is that the planets around us are so different from the
sun,” says Donald Burnett, a cosmochemist at Caltech and the Genesis
project leader. “We have uncovered something very fundamental about how
the Earth as a planet evolved.”

"Nearly 4.6 billion years ago, the sun and then the planets formed out
of a swirling disk of gas and dust. Because everything started from the
same raw material, scientists have assumed objects in the inner solar
system would share the same chemistry. But in the 1970s, researchers
discovered evidence that something must have altered the solar system’s
chemical composition during that early era. Analyses of certain
meteorites revealed that they had different proportions of oxygen
isotopes compared with Earth rocks".

See: http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene...co mplished__

Shouldn't this say."Nearly 4.6 billion years ago, WE THEORIZE the sun
and then the planets formed out
of a swirling disk of gas and dust. Because everything started from
the
same raw material, IN OUR THEORY, da da da da da"?
And then, surprise, surprise, observations
are not bearing our theory out.

The Observations are not contradicting the formation of the solar
system, John, but evidence suggests that something must have altered
the solar system’s chemical composition during that early era. Try
not to get so "everything must be wrong" attitude, John!

On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:02:11 -0500, Sam Wormley
wrote, in part:

Try
not to get so "everything must be wrong" attitude, John!

Obviously, for as long as he lives, the attitude he will be trying to
keep is the one that says "everything written in the Bible is literally
true". Because that's the attitude that will keep him from burning in
the Lake of Fire forever and ever without Jesus to take his sins away!

Hence, reason is not useful with such a one.

John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html