Comets (Still) Shouldn't Exist
Comets (Still) Shouldn't Exist
On my Solar System DVD, I included a chapter on comets. According to the evolutionary model, comets are leftovers from the Solar System's formation. Once the Solar System is formed, no more comets can be made.
Thus, according to the model, comets are roughly the same age as the Solar System.
Problem: Many of the comets we see today can only be a few thousand years old.
Specifically, 'short period' comets revolve around the Sun in a short time (200 years or less). They lose material each time they do so.
These comets can't survive too many approaches to the Sun. Eventually, they dissolve into fragments. In fact, we've watched many comets break up because of this.
Some comets don't even last long enough to 'die' like this. They crash into the Sun or one of the planets, or get ripped apart by gravitational forces. Some get flung out of the Solar System completely.
Whatever their actual fates, short-period comets don't last long.
So what's the maximum lifespan of a short period comet? Typically, 10,000 to 20,000 years.
Since we still see short-period comets today, this is a good indicator that the Solar System is only thousands of years old, not billions.
Obviously, this is a serious challenge to the long-age evolutionary model. Evolutionary astronomers have tried to answer the challenge by proposing two different reservoirs of comet "nuclei" -- two different ways to resupply comets to the Solar System.
The two reservoirs are called the "Kuiper Belt" and the "Oort cloud." Supposedly, large amounts of cometary nuclei formed billions of years ago in the Solar System. Then the planet Neptune flung most of them outward, into a region now called the Kuiper Belt. Later on, some of the nuclei migrated out much farther, forming the Oort Cloud. And every once in a while, a cometary nucleus leaves the Oort Cloud or Kuiper Belt, moves inward, and becomes a new comet.
As I discussed in my DVD, there are several major flaws with this model. First of all, the alleged Oort Cloud has never been observed.
Evolutionists aren't bothered by this, because they believe it's unobservable. They believe it's too far away to be seen.
But there's a problem here. Science is supposed to be based on testable hypotheses. If the Oort Cloud is unobservable, it's therefore outside of science.
Next, computer simulations have contradicted the idea that the Oort Cloud could even exist. Even if there were sufficient nuclei in the Kuiper Belt region, few could move out to the Oort Cloud without colliding and destroying each other. Thus, the alleged Oort Cloud, even if it existed, would have far too few nuclei to produce comets today.
Similarly, the Kuiper Belt is also woefully underpopulated.
On the DVD, I discussed a recent in-depth search for Kuiper Belt nuclei. Researchers expected to find about 85 nuclei in the region they searched. Instead, they found... three.
That brings us to some recent research that was published after my DVD came out. Even though the Kuiper Belt region has too few nuclei to support the billions-of-years model, we have observed a few objects out there nevertheless.
Turns out that some of these are binary systems. (A binary system means there are two objects orbiting a common center of mass.)
Here's why this is important. Researchers have now discovered that binary systems could not exist in the Kuiper Belt region if Neptune had actually flung the objects out there.
(Remember, Neptune was supposed to be responsible for getting these things out into that region.)
Thus, those astronomers who deny Creation must believe that Kuiper Belt objects formed out there, and have remained undisturbed ever since.
But according to the evolutionary model, there wasn't enough material out there to form much of anything.
(That's why evolutionists had to invoke Neptune in their model in the first place.)
Add it all up, and the evolutionary model says there shouldn't be any comets today at all.
Of course, comets exist nevertheless. They're beautiful examples of the handiwork of our Creator.
But wait -- I'm underestimating the creativity of the secular community. Many evolutionists still believe that comets don't contradict the secular model after all.
You see, to solve a problem like this, you just need to take.....A Journey to the Land of Make Believe.
By Spike Psarris
as originally published in
CREATION ASTRONOMY NEWS - Volume II, #2 (sign up for the newsletter at his website)
reprinted with permission from the author.
Please call our office or email us at email@example.com for additional resources on these subjects.