Old Earthers stumped by comets

[church mouse guy]

Old earthers really don't know what to do about comets. If the universe is as old as they say it is, then the comets should have melted billions and billions of years ago. You see, comets have a very short life span. They are called dirty snowballs and as they orbit the sun or some other star, they melt and fade away into a dew. A lot of facts from a space probe to Pluto caused speculation about comets from a Kuiper Belt to be discarded. There aren't any comet there.

"...Comets are essentially "dirty snowballs" that orbit the sun. Secular scientists believe that comets are leftover materials from the solar system's formation some 4.5 billion years ago. Because it is a "dirty snowball," a comet loses some of its mass every time its orbit takes it close to the sun, not unlike an ice cream cone exposed to a heat lamp. Comets lose their mass so rapidly that no comets should exist at all today if the solar system really were billions of years old!

"Secular scientists are well aware of this problem and have proposed two sources to replenish this dwindling comet supply. The Kuiper Belt was proposed to be a disk of trillions of comet-sized icy bodies orbiting beyond Neptune. Secular astronomers believe that, from time to time, some of these icy bodies are disrupted from their orbit and redirected into the inner solar system where they become comets. This Kuiper Belt is thought to serve as a source for short-period comets—those that require less than 200 years to make a single orbit of the sun.

"The second of these supposed sources is the "Oort Cloud," an enormous reservoir of comet nuclei thought to surround our solar system, but (conveniently) located too far away to be seen, even with our most powerful telescopes. The Oort Cloud is said to be a source for long-period comets—those having orbital periods greater than 200 years.

"One major problem with the Oort Cloud is that there is zero observational evidence that it even exists! The Oort Cloud is purely hypothetical...."

"But if neither the Oort Cloud nor a Kuiper Belt of trillions of comet-sized masses exist, then secular scientists have no explanation for how comets could continue to exist in a 4.5 billion year-old solar system. But comets can exist in a solar system that is only about 6,000 years old, even without a Kuiper Belt or an Oort Cloud."

New Horizons, Pluto, and the Age of the Solar System

 

[church mouse guy]

"Comets’ short lifetimes and the absence of a plausible way to replenish them over billions of supposed years testify that our solar system is young, fully consistent with the Bible’s 6,000-year timescale. Comets are a reminder that since God’s Word has told us the truth about Earth’s history and the creation of the universe, we can also trust it to tell us the truth that God loves us, and if we turn from our sins and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ we have God’s gracious promise of salvation and eternal life."

Comets: Signs of Youth

John 3:16 (KJV) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 

[Centrist]

I thought it was a sin to lie. Saying "Old Earthers stumped by comets" is, in my opinion, just that. I'm not stumped at all. And for the allegation that the comets are more recent creations, that could be true, nothing no where says that everything in outer space must be 4.5 billion years of age for the Old Earth theory to be correct.

 

[church mouse guy]

I thought it was a sin to lie. Saying "Old Earthers stumped by comets" is, in my opinion, just that. I'm not stumped at all. And for the allegation that the comets are more recent creations, that could be true, nothing no where says that everything in outer space must be 4.5 billion years of age for the Old Earth theory to be correct.

Ha! Where do they originate if they are new since they would have all have been melted billions of years ago if they are old?

 

[Centrist]

Just because they havn't melted does not mean they are of a certain age. There is so much that we don't know of outer space that we are truly ignorant on the creation of not only comets but asteroids, planets and even suns. Everything is truly speculation. We don't know how stars are truly created, so does that mean they are young, or old?

 

[church mouse guy]

Just because they havn't melted does not mean they are of a certain age. There is so much that we don't know of outer space that we are truly ignorant on the creation of not only comets but asteroids, planets and even suns. Everything is truly speculation. We don't know how stars are truly created, so does that mean they are young, or old?

I noticed that you don't have any evidence linked to your statement. We know that comets are a combination of space rock debris and ice and sometimes are called dirty snowballs. As they orbit near the sun they melt and become smaller. We know this from observations. Halley's Comet, for example, is getting very small. If the universe were 14 billion years old, there should be no comets anywhere. They should have all melted by now. The existence of comets is consistent with a universe about 6,000 years old according to science.

 

[Centrist]

You want me to provide evidence? HA! You're the one saying you know how old the comets are.
The comets are not "gassing off" or "melting" when they are in deep space. There is also the possibility they are regenerated by either collision or accumulation. Outer space is not an absolute total void, instead there are pockets of gasses that have been identified by astronomers.

 

[church mouse guy]

You want me to provide evidence? HA! You're the one saying you know how old the comets are.
The comets are not "gassing off" or "melting" when they are in deep space. There is also the possibility they are regenerated by either collision or accumulation. Outer space is not an absolute total void, instead there are pockets of gasses that have been identified by astronomers.

Thank you for your post!

So far, you have just given me your opinion without any links to the scientists who hold the same opinion as you do. I am not sure that scientists agree with you. I think that everyone agrees that comets are dirty snowballs that melt when they get close to the heat of the sun. We know that they are getting smaller because there are observations from the past. For example, Haley's Comet was greatly diminished the last time that it passed near the earth. We know this because it passed by the year Mark Twain was born and the year that he died so there was historical observation plus it seems to me that the newspapers talked about the reduction in size of the comet the last time.

I have already discussed the two theories of old earthers that Kuiper Belt and the Oort Cloud are the source of comets. So far no one has been able to prove that as was discussed above. If you have another source, please state it.

If comets are becoming smaller, then that would mean that there should not be any comets at all if the universe is more than 6,000 years old. Time would have wiped them out. Indeed, if Jesus tarries, time may wipe out what comets that there are now.

 

[InTheLight]

If comets are becoming smaller, then that would mean that there should not be any comets at all if the universe is more than 6,000 years old. Time would have wiped them out.

Could you make any more faulty assumptions in one sentence? I don't think so.

Thanks for the laugh.

 

[church mouse guy]

Could you make any more faulty assumptions in one sentence? I don't think so.

Thanks for the laugh.

You laugh at the strangest things. Look at the links. It is a fact that the sun melts comets.

 

[InTheLight]

You laugh at the strangest things. Look at the links. It is a fact that the sun melts comets.

Is it a fact that ALL COMETS in the entire universe have passed close enough to a sun multiple times in the past 6,000 years so that ALL COMETS EVERYWHERE WOULD HAVE MELTED?

Or are you taking the example of Halley's Comet and its 76 year cycle and applying it to all comets everywhere in the universe?

 

[church mouse guy]

Is it a fact that ALL COMETS in the entire universe have passed close enough to a sun multiple times in the past 6,000 years so that ALL COMETS EVERYWHERE WOULD HAVE MELTED?

Or are you taking the example of Halley's Comet and its 76 year cycle and applying it to all comets everywhere in the universe?

They melt slowly but they melt. They could not last 14 billion years as you imply. I am saying that Halley's Comet is an example of what I am talking about because it is diminishing as they all do.

 

[InTheLight]

They melt slowly but they melt. They could not last 14 billion years as you imply. I am saying that Halley's Comet is an example of what I am talking about because it is diminishing as they all do.

I'm not implying they are 14 billion years old. I am not implying all, or even any, are 14 billion years old.

I am saying that not all comets needed to be formed at the instant of creation.

I am saying that the fact that there are comets today does not mean the universe is 6,000 years old.

I am saying there could be comets that in the last 6,000 have not come within a billion miles of a sun.

 

[church mouse guy]

I'm not implying they are 14 billion years old. I am not implying all, or even any, are 14 billion years old.

I am saying that not all comets needed to be formed at the instant of creation.

I am saying that the fact that there are comets today does not mean the universe is 6,000 years old.

I am saying there could be comets that in the last 6,000 have not come within a billion miles of a sun.

So are you saying that in 14 billion years a dirty snowball in orbit around the sun would not have melted?

 

[church mouse guy]

Comets are divided into two groups: short-period (<200 years) comets, such as Halley’s (76 years); and long-period (>200 years) comets. But the comets from the two groups seem essentially the same in size and composition. Short-period ones normally orbit in the same direction as the planets (prograde) and in almost the same plane (ecliptic); long-period comets can orbit in almost any plane and in either direction. One exception is Halley’s, which has retrograde motion and a highly inclined orbit. Some astronomers suggest that it was once a long-period, and strong gravity from a planet dramatically shrunk its orbit, and thus the period. So long-period and Halley-type comets are grouped together and called ‘nearly isotropic comets’ (NICs).

The highest period of a stable orbit would be about four million years if the maximum possible aphelion (furthest distance of an orbiting satellite from the sun) were 50,000 AU.9 This is 20% of the distance to the nearest star, so there’s a fair chance other stars could release the comet from the sun’s grip.10

However, even with this long orbit, such a comet would still have made 1,200 trips around the sun if the solar system were 4.6 billion years old. However, it would have been extinguished long before. The problem is even worse with short-period comets.

Comets—portents of doom or indicators of youth? - creation.com

 

[Nonsequitur010]

From the largest estimation (14 Billion years old)....to the shortest (6000 years old)....can anyone tell me who was monitoring it during either of these times? And for how long they were monitoring?...And how they measured the size?....And where is their data? ....Based on what? Personal observation?....This is the same argument when 'scientists' say the air was different 5000....no 4000....no 3000 years ago....or when ever they say it was different from today....Where did they get their air samples from that were from the periods they say are different? Asking for a friend

 

[church mouse guy]

From the largest estimation (14 Billion years old)....to the shortest (6000 years old)....can anyone tell me who was monitoring it during either of these times? And for how long they were monitoring?...And how they measured the size?....And where is their data? ....Based on what? Personal observation?....This is the same argument when 'scientists' say the air was different 5000....no 4000....no 3000 years ago....or when ever they say it was different from today....Where did they get their air samples from that were from the periods they say are different? Asking for a friend

Comets are just one of many scientific indications of a young earth.

 

[Scott Downey]

Comets won't be getting bigger by regeneration in crashes with other comets in outer space.
How could they, if space is so vast. The few near earth orbiting asteroids fly on by almost never hitting.
Supposedly over millions or hundreds of millions of years, there are very few recorded earth impacts, and the earth is a much bigger target than say 2 comets hitting each other, the probabilities approach zero..boggles the mind to suggest 2 comets are going to whack into each other way out there often enough to keep the comets going for eons of time.
If space is as scientists say, it is mostly empty space.