New Discovery: We're Made of Comets
New Discovery: We're Made of Comets
Late last year, there was an announcement that 'confirmed' that Earth's water came from comets.
This includes not only the water we see in oceans and lakes, but also (so we're told) the water that makes up about 60 percent of *us*.
Isn't that romantic? According to secular astronomers, you're made of old comets.
(Why can secular astronomers never talk about chemistry without dragging in bogus-spirituality nonsense like "we're all made of stardust" or comets or whatever?)
I received emails from readers asking about this, so let's discuss it here.
If you've seen my first DVD, you know that I talked about the secular "solar nebula" model for the origin of the Solar System -- the idea that the Solar System, and all of its planets, condensed from a giant dust disk.
That model also says that the early Earth didn't have any water, because our part of the dust disk was too hot. Water couldn't have condensed here.
Nevertheless, the Earth has lots of water. Not only is 70 percent of our planet's surface covered by oceans, there's also lots of water in the Earth's interior.
Secular astronomers obviously have a big problem here.
They aren't worried, though. They claim that the early Earth was bombarded by millions of comets.
Since comets are basically big snowballs, millions of them crashing into the Earth would supply lots of water.
Here's where it gets interesting. Comets were the standard explanation for the Earth's water for a long time -- until we actually started measuring their composition.
In the mid-1980s, we started sending spacecraft to fly by several comets. Since 2004, we've been able to take samples from several comets and bring them back to Earth for analysis.
Through 2011, every comet we sampled (about a half dozen so far) had lots of deuterium in it.
But deuterium is very rare on Earth. Comets have about twice as much deuterium as a similar amount of Earth's ocean water would have.
This means that Earth's ocean water couldn't have come from comets.
And that means a major prediction of the secular model was disproved.
But then in 2011, scientists analyzed another comet for the first time. Late last year, they announced that this comet (named Hartley 2) contains water with roughly the same chemical signature as Earth's water.
Evolutionary astronomers were relieved. This comet 'confirms' the secular model after all (or so the media stories claimed). Now this model can account for water on Earth again.
Well, you can believe that if you want to, but you'll need to ignore some glaring problems.
For example, all the other comets we've measured still have twice as much deuterium as Earth's water.
If comets were really the source of Earth's water, why was the Earth selectively bombarded by *only* the comets with the proper deuterium ratio?
Secular astronomers retort that there are two separate sources of comets. Hartley 2 comes from the Kuiper Belt, while the previous comets we measured all came from the Oort Cloud.
(The Kuiper Belt is an alleged disk of objects outside the orbit of Neptune, while the Oort Cloud is an alleged sphere-shaped cloud much farther out around the whole Solar System. The Oort Cloud has never been observed, while the objects outside of Neptune's orbit are far fewer than the Kuiper Belt model predicted. So the secular rebuttal is itself rebutted already -- but let's ignore that for now.)
Anyway, since Kuiper Belt objects are closer to the Earth and have orbits roughly within the plane of the ecliptic, they're much more likely to have Earth-crossing orbits.
In other words, Kuiper Belt comets are more likely to crash into us.
That's true. But it also doesn't help the secular model much, for two reasons:
1. You can't say that all Kuiper Belt comets have one ratio and all Oort Cloud comets have a different ratio, because the secular model says the Oort Cloud's comets originally came from the Kuiper Belt. (Supposedly, they got flung out of its outer region by gravitational interactions with the gas giant planets.)
2. Even if the two populations were actually chemically distinct, you would have a different problem: Why was the Earth bombarded *only* by Kuiper Belt objects? Even if only a small fraction of the total bombardment came from the Oort Cloud, the Earth's deuterium ratio would have been increased above that of the Kuiper Belt comets.
Therefore, Comet Hartley 2 doesn't actually solve the problem that Earth's water poses for the secular model.
Not only that, Hartley 2 is a great example of a different problem that contradicts this model.
Hartley 2 orbits in the Sun in a short period: less than 7 years. It can't have been doing this for billions of years, because it loses mass every time it visits the Sun again.
(At its current rate of mass loss, it will be gone in another 700 years or so.)
As I discussed on the Solar System DVD, short-period comets like Hartley 2 pose tremendous difficulties for the evolutionary billions-of-years model. Short-period comets only last a few thousand years before they're either destroyed or thrown out of the Solar System completely.
Secular scientists have proposed various ways to keep replenishing the supply, but these suggestions have all failed.
So, if the Solar System were truly 4.6 billion years old, there shouldn't be any short-period comets anymore. They would have vanished billions of years ago.
But we see them nevertheless.
By Spike Psarris
as originally published in CREATION ASTRONOMY NEWS - Volume III, #1 (sign up for the newsletter at his website) reprinted with permission from the author.
While at his website, take a look at his DVD's, or check them out in our store as well.
Please call our office or email us at email@example.com for additional resources on these subjects.