PANORAMA Small Bodies In the Kuiper Belt: Not Enough Comets? We see too many comets if the solar system is 5 billion years old. In the 1950s, Dutch astronomer, Jan Oort, proposed that long-period comets (those that approach the sun once in every 200 years or longer) originated from a leftover cloud of gas, dust, and ice on the outer fringes of the solar system. The region is called the Oort cloud. Evidence for the Oort cloud has yet to materialize, but a smaller source of icy bodies has been detected. Called the Kuiper Belt, after another Dutch astronomer, Gerard Kuiper, these bodies lie beyond the orbit of Neptune, and most beyond Pluto’s orbit. Since 1992, astronomers have discovered nearly 1,000 icy objects beyond Pluto. These range from 20 miles or more in diameter. However, the Kuiper Belt only gives short-period comets, ones with periods under 200 years. Now x-ray astronomers observing Scorpius X-1, the first and strongest x-ray source found in Scorpius, report finding much smaller bodies. Using NASA’s Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer satellite over the course of the last seven years, a team led by Hsiang-Kuang Chang of the National Tsing Hua University in Taiwan searched for drops in the brightness of Scorpius X-1. (Scorpius X-1 is the brightest x-ray source in the sky and is located near where the galactic center and the Kuiper Belt cross.) Each drop in brightness lasted a few thousandths of a second. The team found 58 short-lived dips, presumed to be caused by icy bodies 10 to 100 yards (meters) in diameter. Reporting in the August 10 issue of Nature, the researchers estimated that the number of small, icy objects in the Kuiper Belt could reach a quadrillion, which is a thousand trillion of 1015. That is from a thousand to a million times the number of potential comets assumed by computer simulations of solar-system formation. The simulations assume that the small bodies will coalesce by collisions with one another. Collisions between small and large bodies produce dust which should either be pushed out of the solar system by sunlight (radiation pressure) or, for larger dust particles, spiral into the sun. In effect, the problem now is that there may be too many bodies in the Kuiper Belt to support evolution. Refinements in detection equipment and techniques could theoretically give the distances to the objects. Archaeological Frustrations for Evolutionists[1] Were our
first ancestors civilized or uncivilized?
Did they wander constantly, hunt and fish for a living? Could they write? Modern science once thought our first ancestors were the most
ignorant barbarians. However, the
recent findings of archaeologists have altered this concept. Dr. W. W. Dawson, Canadian scientist, has
this to say in his book, The Bible Confirmed by Science. Neither in Egypt nor in Babylon has
any beginning of civilization been found.
As far back as archaeology can take us, man is already civilized,
building cities and temples, carving hard stone into artistic forms, and even
employing a system of picture writing.
Of Egypt it may be said, the older the country the more perfect it is
found to be. The fact is a very
remarkable one, in view of modern theories of development, and of the evolution
of civilization out of barbarism. Such
theories are not borne out by the discoveries of archaeology. Instead of the progress we should expect, we
find retrogression and decay. Where we
look for the rude beginnings of art, we find an advanced society and artistic
perfection. Is it
possible that the Bible view is right after all, and that civilized man has
been civilized from the outset? [This
is exactly what we would expect if there was a global flood and man resettled
the earth with his antediluvian technology and knowledge intact, particularly
with a longer lifespan than today’s man. —Ed.] Globular Clusters: Not Older than the Milky Way? For most of
the twentieth century, astronomers taught that the globular clusters—clusters
of stars that appear as densely-packed spheres of stars—consist of old
Population II stars while the disk of the Milky Way consists of young
Population I stars. The stars in
globular clusters were assumed to be older than the stars in the disk because
they are low in elements heavier than helium.
These are generally called metal deficient. It was presumed that the globulars are older than the disk and
thus are richer in the hydrogen and helium produced by the supposed big bang,
while the stars in the disk formed later, after exploding stars had enriched
space with elements heavier than helium.
Also, the globulars seemed devoid of the dust produced by smoking and exploding
stars.
Blue
Stragglers in a Globular Cluster.
The small rectangle in the picture of the globular at left is enlarged
at right. Blue stragglers are circled
in yellow in this Hubble Telescope picture.
(Courtesy NASA.) In short,
the commonly accepted theory for the formation and evolution of stars in the
universe appears to be increasingly falling short of the observed facts. Contrails or Chemtrails? In the past we have covered the global warming scare and attempted
to put that fiasco in a proper perspective.
Ditto for the coming ice age debacle of the 1970s and the baseless
charges leveled against DDT. Then, too,
there was the ozone scare that weaned us off fluorocarbons even though the
worst ozone holes in history occurred in the late 1940s, before 1954 when the
heavy usage of freon started. Too far
from our publication’s scope was the spotted owl scare started by the Sierra
Club’s executive director Michael Fisher to “save” said owl from the rape of
its virgin forests by Pacific Lumber in the northwest. Fortunately, Mr. Fisher’s lumber recycling
company, Western Wood Fabricators, was there to help make up for the resulting
virgin timber shortage. We now know
that spotted owls nest not only in virgin forests but also in K-Mart
signs. It should be clear to any
thinking individual that our left-wing powerbrokers feel they have to frighten
us to keep us under its thumb. It is
clear that fictitious, scary stories of doom can be quite profitable. In the 1990s there arose
another scare, this time to cripple the airline industry. That scare involved the accusation that the
airlines (or the government, or the leftists, or the nationalists, or the army,
or the air force, or Donald Duck were putting chemicals in tanks of airliners
and spraying the land as they went. The
contrails we have all known since birth or, at least, since the Second World
War when propeller-driven bombers would leave such trails, came to be called
“chemtrails.” The anecdotes that were the
substance of chemtrail accusations usually involved a series or network of
contrails. People reported they could
taste the chemicals or feel their effects immediately. There were fuzzy photos posted on the Internet
that “showed” deadly chemicals being loaded on airplanes. Serious science investigated
if there could be something to this.
The prime culprit was aluminum poisoning. However, tests for burning jet fuel revealed no aluminum. Some of the testing hoped to implicate the
contrails for global warming. However,
your editor recalls that the ice age scare of the 1970s accused contrails of
seeding clouds which reflected more sunlight into space and so cooled the
earth’s surface. Contrails form when water or
steam produced by the burning of kerosene or jet fuel hits the cold air at high
altitudes. The steam cools to ice
crystals, which can cause a rainbow effect in the contrail, or cools to water
droplets, which are what clouds are made of.
But was it all
imagination? Yes and no. Researchers found that contrails formed more
readily near weather fronts. Such
fronts can cause sudden changes in air pressure, humidity, and dust, all of
which affect health and precipitate joint pains. Cold, damp weather is especially detrimental to health. For instance, most colds and flu attacks occur
at temperatures between 20 and 55 degrees Fahrenheit. They are less frequent at temperatures above that and almost
unheard of below that range. That is
why, before the coming of the white man, Eskimos never had colds. So it was neither the contrails nor
psychosomatic effects that caused the symptoms. The passing weather fronts created the contrails and were
responsible for the symptoms. Still, I
am certain there will be some who will never be convinced. What of the dark
contrails? I recall one day when there
were a great many contrails over Cleveland.
Most were a muddy color and they formed a network grid running
north-south and east-west. The radio
mentioned it and some of the talk show hosts speculated that they might be
chemtrails. However, it was unusually
hazy that summer day. It occurred to me
that dust in the air absorbed the white light from the contrails and tinted it
a sandy color. This also explains why many
of the chemtrails are associated with desert areas, areas where it makes no sense
to poison people if this were a population control measure. Since then, I have also observed and
photographed shadows of contrails falling on thin lower-level clouds. The shadows also look grayish and
dirty. The conclusion is that the
chemtrail scare is a myth, most likely started by environmentalists to frighten
people away from the airline industry.
That would explain why, after 911 when the airline industry was
depressed by the restrictions of the Federal government, chemtrails disappeared
from the scare radar.
How to Lie with Statistics “How to Lie with Statistics” was the title of a leading statistics text in the 1970s. The practice is rampant in politics and pseudosciences such as evolution and environmentalism. Consider this example. Not too long ago the press trumpeted scientists’ announcement the completion of the chimpanzee genome, the chimp’s genetic formula. The completion was heralded as a “really big deal.” After all, it involved decoding some three billion building blocks of chimp DNA. While it was the chimp’s genome that was deciphered, it was the human genome that was the subject of the study. This is so, of course, because the chimp is considered by evolutionists to be man’s “closest living relative.” Evolutionists hope to find those genetic “changes” responsible for the emergence of modern man. It is claimed that man and chimp have 98% of their DNA in common. Thus evolutionists herald this as proof positive for evolution. They claim this can only be an indication of evolution and common ancestry. A
difference of two percent does not sound like a lot, it is true, but two
percent of three billion is sixty million.
In other words, there are sixty million differences, sixty million steps
that had to have changed to produce man.
That is a great many changes.
Even if it took five million years for man and chimp to evolve from
their common ancestor, it averages to twelve genetic changes per year; twelve
changes that would have to be common to the entire population of the evolving
race. The
two percent claim is, however, a deflated figure. All life on earth, from bacteria to human, has 75% of its DNA in
common. That 75% amounts to the
foundation of life. So we are not
talking about a potential difference in three billion building blocks but one
quarter of that or 750,000,000 building blocks. If 60,000,000 of those have changed, then the fraction that chimp
and man have in common is not 98% but only 92%. What evolutionists are doing to boost their statistics is
equivalent to claiming the differences in people’s height from head to toe
should be determined by measuring from the chin to the top of the head. History Confounds
Evolutionary Ages for Supernovae Increasingly in the last two decades, evolutionists have
been vying for the maximum ages of stars, planets, cosmos, and events. At the same time, evolutionary theologians
have been vying to make the Bible as young as conceivably possible in order to
deprive it of prophecies fulfilled. On
the other hand, evolutionary historians are trying to push historical events
back in time as far as possible. These
contrary strivings are predestinated to lead to contradictions. Supernovae, exploding massive stars, shine as brightly or
brighter than all the stars in a galaxy combined when they explode. If one of these stars were to explode within
100 light years of earth, it is believed that virtually all life on earth would
be exterminated by the radiation produced in the explosion. Fortunately, the Lord created the earth so
that there are no potential supernovae near enough to threaten earth. However, given their brightness, it is clear
that supernovae in the Milky Way can be seen from earth.
Left: Supernova remnant in
the Large Magellanic Cloud. (Courtesy
NASA) The most accurate records of novae and supernovae are the “guest star”
records of the Chinese. Although the
light of the explosion fades, supernovae do leave traces of themselves in the
form of debris clouds such as that of LMC N49 above. Tradition has it that the time of the explosion can be inferred
from the expansion rate of the debris cloud.
The expansion rate can sometimes be measured against surrounding stars
or from the Doppler shift of the debris in front and behind the cloud. If the supernova was observed then we can
check on that tradition since we know the actual date of the explosion. A supernova remnant, RCW 86 in the constellation of
Centaurus, was reported to have exploded 10,000 years ago. Last year (2006) astronomers discovered that
the supernova was observed by the Chinese in A.D. 185, only 1,822 years
ago. The age had been overestimated by
a factor of five. The Chandra X-ray satellite data were consulted and the
scientists now believe that the material ejected 1822 years ago slammed into interstellar
gas and dust, was slowed, giving an inflated age. RCW 86 was not the only supernova remnant moved forward in
time. In 2001 we reported a similar result
for the Veil Nebula in Cygnus.[2] Its age was reduced from tens of thousands
of years to about 5,000. Likewise,
light echoes from two supposedly ancient SNRs in the Large Magellanic Cloud
gave ages for the two supernovae of about 400 and 600 years. Long-time readers of the B.A. may
recall a discussion about the expansion of the ring-like light echoes of SN
1987 in the Large Magellanic Cloud.[3] The light echoes give a much more reliable
distance and expansion age. When light
passes through dust it dims, but its speed remains the same so it is not
subject to the problems of trying to measure the expansion rate of the gas. The slowing effect of interstellar dust and gas on
expanding gas clouds has been known for decades. We have also known that the supernova’s
shock front heats up the interstellar gas to glowing as the two collide. So there was no reason to assume that the
expansion rate would give anything but an absolute maximum age, but because the
ages so determined made the supernovae older than allowed by the Bible, the
dates were uncritically accepted. One of the unmentioned consequences of the discovery that supernovae
ages have to undergo major revisions is that the frequency of supernovae in the
Galaxy will have to increase. Currently
it is assumed that a supernova happens about once a century. Revising the ages downward will require them
to occur more frequently. This promises
to bring the supernova occurrence rate of the Milky Way in line with that
observed with other galaxies. Theoretical models of novae and supernovae predict that the
core of the exploding star may compress into a neutron star. If the neutron star is oriented properly to
the earth we observe it as a pulsar. In
2001 the Chandra X-ray telescope discovered a pulsar that was pronounced to be
24,000 years old. Later astronomers
noted that it, too, was the product of a supernova observed by the Chinese in
A.D. 386. The 24,000 dropped to 1621
years old. Back in 1980, your editor
presented a similar age mismatch for the Vela pulsar which is apparently mentioned
on a Sumerian tablet reputed to be 6,000 years old. In a footnote, using the slow-down rates for the Crab and PSR
1913+16b pulsars, the tablet’s age was reduced to as recent as 3200 years ago.[4] All this means that scientists’ insistence that all
explanations must be evolutionary in nature or must mention evolution is now
getting in the way of doing science. We
have documented numerous other occurrences over the years, but the problem is
getting worse with politicians now endorsing junk science. [1] Comparet, Inez. Reported in the February 2007 issue of “Hite’s Home Mission Outreach,” 816 E. Birch
St., Palmyra, PA 17078. [2] Panorama, 2001. “Age of the Veil Nebula,” B.A., 11(96):54. [3] Panorama, 1994. “More Evidence for a Large Universe,” B.A.,
4(70):18. [4] Bouw, G. D., 1980. “The Star of Bethlehem,” Creation Research Society Quarterly, 17(3):174, footnote 12. |