1	Our Created Solar System What you aren’t being told about evolutionary astronomy
2	The Bible vs. the Big Bang Bible: Everything created in 6 days, about 6 thousand years ago. Every object in the sky was created for signs and seasons, and to glorify its Creator. Big Bang: Everything formed by itself billions of years ago. Everything can be explained by current theories, no appeal to Creation is necessary or desirable.
3	Our Solar System (not to scale)
4	The standard model Our Solar System formed billions of years ago from a large swirling cloud of gas and dust. This cloud (called a “nebula,” thus this is the “nebula theory,”) began to rotate. As it rotated, it flattened into a disk. A central bulge in the middle formed and became our Sun. Smaller collections of material became the planets.
5
6	Nebula theory, cont’d As the gas and dust coalesced, larger grains of dust formed. These stuck together to become rocks…. which became bigger rocks… which became “planetesimals”… which became planets.
7
8
9	Nebula theory, cont’d This theory explains the flat shape of our Solar System, and the counterclockwise orbits of all the planets. It also explains the rocky inner planets and the gaseous outer planets. First proposed by Immanual Kant and Pierre Laplace back in the late 1700s.
10	Minor Detail… …it doesn’t work. Can get up to planetesimals, but not planets. “Once these planetesimals have been formed, further growth of planets may occur through their gravitational accretion into large bodies. Just how that takes place is not understood.” Martin Harwit, Astrophysical Concepts, p. 553
11	Which does it support? The solar nebula model (formed from gas and dust billions of years ago) A Biblical model (formed recently by an intelligent Creator for signs, seasons, and His own glory)
12	Terrestrial Planets
13	Mercury
14	A tiny planet The closest planet to the Sun Smaller than all planets except Pluto – even smaller than Ganymede and Titan Temperatures of 840 to -180 degrees. Looks much like our Moon.
15
16
17
18	A little planet, a big surprise Scientists were surprised when the Mariner 10 space probe visited Mercury. We measured the planet’s gravitational pull on the probe, and took other measurements as well. We discovered that Mercury is extremely dense: the highest known density of all planets other than Earth.
19
20	Big problem for evolution Evolutionary nebula theories say that Mercury can’t be this dense – not even close. “The driving force behind previous attempts to account for Mercury has been to fit the high density of the planet into some preferred overall solar system scheme… It has become clear that none of these proposed models work, and the high density is conveniently accommodated by the large-impact hypothesis, which makes Mercury unique.” Taylor, Solar System Evolution: A New Perspective, p. 194
21	Rescuing evolution from the facts Evolution can’t explain Mercury. The planet has to be far less dense than it is. Therefore, Mercury must have formed according to evolutionary predictions. But early in its history, an asteroid must have crashed into it. The lighter material must have been stripped away, leaving behind the dense planet we see today.
22	The solution
23	A collision saves the day What’s the evidence that this collision occurred? Only that if it didn’t occur, Mercury would disprove evolution.
24	Another rude jolt for evolutionists Mariner 10 also discovered that Mercury has a magnetic field. But according to evolution, it can’t.
25	The Dynamo Theory The only way for a planet with a magnetic field to be billions of years old Requires that those planets which have magnetic fields, also have cores made up of molten metal Fluid motions inside each planet’s core can supposedly generate a magnetic field around that planet (complicated process)
26	Dynamo Theory and Mercury In order for a planet to be billions of years old and still have a magnetic field, there must be fluid motions inside of its core. Therefore, the core itself must be molten.
27	Dynamo Theory and Mercury cont’d But, as one evolutionist says, “Mercury is so small that the general opinion is that the planet should have frozen solid eons ago.” Taylor, Destiny or Chance: our solar system and its place in the cosmos, p 163 Therefore, Mercury’s core cannot be molten, and so evolutionary theories say that Mercury cannot have a magnetic field. But it does!
28	The proposed explanation “A pure iron core would have frozen long ago, so the most likely candidate is an FeS core… The presence of the volatile element sulfur as a constituent of the planet closest to the Sun has important implications for models of planetary accretion. If Mercury contains a substantial (2-3%) sulfur content, then this removes much of the rationale for a heliocentric zoning of nebular composition. Models in which Mercury accretes from high-temperature components only are no longer viable. If the innermost planet has a substantial volatile component (although FeS is the probable source of the sulfur), there is little basis for condensation models of planetary accumulation based on heliocentric distance.” Taylor, Solar System Evolution: A New Perspective, p 191
29	The cure causes the disease In order to preserve a billions-of-years age for Mercury, evolutionists speculate that it has an iron sulfide core. But the nebula theory says that volatile elements like sulfur can’t be this close to the Sun In trying to rescue Mercury for the evolutionary theory, the entire theory itself is undermined!
30	What you aren’t being told about Mercury Evolution says it can’t be dense, but it is. Evolution says it can’t have a magnetic field, but it does. Trying to rescue evolution from the facts just makes the problem worse
31	The tiny planet that causes huge problems for evolution 1 Corinthians 1:27: “But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty.”
32	Venus
33
34	The Biblical Hades? Atmosphere is primarily carbon dioxide, with clouds of concentrated sulfuric acid. A massive greenhouse effect makes Venus the hottest place in the Solar System: 900 degrees Fahrenheit. Pressure is 90 atmospheres.
35	Earth’s “sister planet” Should be very similar to Earth – both planets supposedly formed at the same time, at roughly the same place, from the same materials, by the same natural processes. Very similar in size, mass, and composition…. …but Earth has a crust made up of multiple tectonic plates. Venus has only one. Earth has a magnetic field. Venus has none, even though the dynamo theory says it should.
36	Problems cont’d Venus’ surface is young and fresh – it doesn’t have billions of years of erosion.
37	Venus rotates backwards!
38	Venus rotates backwards!
39	Proposed explanations Formerly: Gravitational braking on a tidal bulge But Venus doesn’t have a tidal bulge, it’s almost perfectly round. Today’s explanation: Venus formed as predicted by evolution, but then an asteroid hit it and spun it around the “wrong” way.
40	The solution
41	No evidence for the supposed collision Venus’ axial tilt is only 2 degrees from perfectly perpendicular to the ecliptic plane Its orbit is the most circular in the Solar System The only evidence is that otherwise, Venus would contradict evolutionary theory
42	What you aren’t being told about Venus Evolution says it should be similar to Earth, but it has no magnetic field, and its crustal structure is very different Its surface is obviously young It rotates the “wrong” way
43	Earth
44	Uniquely designed for life
45	Designed for life Rotation period: Too slow would mean extreme temperature changes. Too fast would cause violent winds. Axial tilt: Gives us moderate seasons Circular orbit: Gives us climate stability Isaiah 45:18: For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
46	Our atmosphere nurtures us: it protects us from deadly radiation, and gives us air to breathe. A thicker atmosphere, or one with a different composition, could produce a massive greenhouse effect instead.
47	Life-Giving Water (which shouldn’t be there)
48	Flood or no Flood? The Earth has more than enough water to flood its entire surface. Lots of evidence a global Flood has occurred. But such a Flood is a non-repeatable catastrophe, and thus is “unscientific”
49	Our Protective Magnetic Field
50	What Causes Our Magnetic Field?
51	Dynamo Theory revisited We saw magnetism is a problem for Mercury and Venus Doesn’t work for the Earth either, which it was invented to explain: “The mechanism for generating the geomagnetic field remains one of the central unsolved problems in geoscience.” http://earth.agu.org/revgeophys/roberp01/node1.html, quoting the report from the National Geomagnetic Initiative, as of 19 Dec 2002
52	Our Young Magnetic Field Since its first measurement in 1829, its total energy has fallen by 14%. Loses half its energy every 700 years or so. Archaeomagnetic and paleomagnetic measurements show wild fluctuations of polarity in the past. Field can only be tens of thousands of years old, not billions (Dynamo theories can’t explain these facts.)
53	Planetary Magnetism “Magnetism is almost as much of a puzzle now as it was when William Gilbert (1544-1603) wrote his classic text ‘Concerning Magnetism, Magnetic Bodies, and the Great Magnet, Earth’ in 1600.” Taylor, Destiny or Chance: our solar system and its place in the cosmos, p 163-164
54	What They Aren’t Telling You About the Earth Uniquely designed for life: rotation period, axial tilt, orbit, atmosphere, many other things Plenty of water for the Flood, but shouldn’t have any at all Magnetic field can’t be billions of years old
55	Our Moon
56	Uniquely Designed The Moon is close enough so that its gravity creates tides in Earth’s oceans. This prevents the oceans from becoming stagnant. Conversely, if the Moon were significantly closer, the tides would be harmful to us. At exactly the right distance for “signs and seasons”
57	Uniquely Positioned
58	Uniquely Studied
59
60
61
62
63
64	Where did this thing come from?
65
66
67	Three Competing Origin Theories at the time of the Apollo program Fission Theory Nebula Theory Capture Theory
68	Fission Theory The early Earth was spinning rapidly. A chunk of material tore off and became the Moon.
69	Fission Theory Problems Tests showed that lunar rocks are different than Earth rocks in some important ways (Moon is relatively deficient in iron) Earth’s rotation would need to be once per ~2.6 hours “If the rotation of the earth had been slowed by tidal friction from 4 to 24 hours, there would have been an energy dissipation of 1.2x10¹⁰ ergs…such an energy release is sufficient to raise the temperature of the entire earth by 1000^o C.” R.B. Baldwin, A fundamental survey of the moon, pp 42-43
70	Nebula Theory The early Earth formed out of a swirling cloud of gas and dust. The Moon formed out of the same material.
71	Nebula Theory Problems Collapse of a gas/dust cloud into two bodies is problematic. Why doesn’t Venus have a Moon? Moon’s core is proportionally smaller than Earth’s Apollo missions showed lunar rocks are different than Earth rocks.
72	Capture Theory
73	Capture Theory Problems Dynamic questions. Where did the excess energy go? Lunar rocks are the same isotopically as Earth rocks
74	Three Answers, But No Satisfaction “In spite of everything that we have learned during the last few years, we still cannot decide between these three theories. We will need more data and perhaps some new theories before the origin of the Moon is settled to everyone’s satisfaction.” Berian M. French, The New Moon: A Window on the Universe (Washington D.C.: NASA, 1975), p. 11
75	The solution
76
77	The Giant Impact Theory Early in the Earth’s history, a BIG asteroid (roughly the size of Mars) crashed into the Earth Fragments were blasted out into space. Some fell back to Earth, the rest aggregated into our Moon Computer simulations have “proved” this to be true
78	Giant Impact problems Not proof, just a story Not even necessarily a good story – computer simulations are approximations Requires everything to be just right Why doesn’t Venus have a Moon? Requires the Moon to be formed 4.5 billion years ago
79
80
81	The Moon can’t be billions of years old
82	Lunar recession The Moon is receding at about 4 cm (1.5 inches) per year Looking backwards in time, the recession rate was faster The Moon would have been touching the Earth just 1.5 billion years ago
83	TLP Transient Lunar Phenomena
84	"Gassendi Crater" Gassendi Crater
85	"Aristarchus Plateau" Aristarchus Plateau
86	What you aren’t being told about the Moon Problems with its origin Lunar recession says it can’t be billions of years old TLP say it can’t be billions of years old
87	Uniquely designed for us
88	Mars
89
90	A Planet of Extremes
91
92	Valles Marineris
93	Was there water on Mars?
94	The Eberswalde Crater
95	Is this a “delta”?
96	Recent Gully Erosion
97	Evidence of water?
98	Water, water, everywhere…? Evolutionists love to speculate about water on other planets Since life “obviously” formed here by itself, water elsewhere could mean life elsewhere too Life elsewhere would confirm evolution Maybe there’s even intelligent life elsewhere, more highly evolved than us
99	The Martians must be thirsty Liquid water on Mars is impossible Would boil away in hours But evolutionists want water on Mars really badly. In fact, some want enough water to flood the entire planet. This creates a problem.
100	The solution
101	Hypocrisy There can’t be water on Mars, yet they want a global flood there. Therefore an asteroid is responsible for a one-time catastrophe Earth is covered with water, yet we’re mocked for believing in a global Flood because catastrophes are “unscientific” Water-like features on Mars have other explanations (thermokarsts, etc.). We’ve even seen some features form w/out water
102	Thirsty Martians cont’d Recent soil samples by probes have shown only trace amounts of carbonates (e.g., limestone) Samples have also found minerals like olivine, which break down in the presence of water
103	What you’re not being told about Mars “Evidence” for water has other explanations Water is impossible there today Saying that it used to be there is hypocrisy
104	Gas Giants
105	Jupiter
106
107
108	All in a Day’s Work “ ‘We came to the conclusion,’ says Lissauer, ‘that if you accrete planets from a uniform disk of planetesimals, prograde rotation just can’t be explained.’ The simulated bombardment leaves a growing planet spinning once a week at most, not once a day.” Richard A. Kerr, “Theoreticians Are Putting a New Spin on the Planets,” Science, Vol. 258, 23 October 1992, p. 548 Jupiter spins on its axis once every 10 hours!
109	Where did Jupiter come from? “Jupiter is the largest of all the planets. But results in Nature now reveal the embarrassing fact that we know next to nothing about how—or where—it formed.” Philip Ball, Nature Science Update, 18 Nov 99 Jupiter’s composition doesn’t match the nebula theory
110	Io
111	Enormous volcanoes (Tvashtar)
112
113	Europa
114	Europa Smoothest body in the Solar System Frothy speculation about water under the ice
115	Callisto The most heavily cratered object in the Solar System Both Europa and Callisto are ½ ice Europa has a core, Callisto doesn’t
116	Ganymede
117	"Grooved terrain" Grooved terrain
118	"More bizarre terrain" More bizarre terrain
119	Amalthea: should be a rock, but it’s an iceball
120	What you’re not being told about Jupiter Can’t be spinning as fast as it is Can’t be made up of what it’s made up of Io appears to be young, Ganymede can’t have a magnetic field, etc.
121	Saturn
122	The famous rings
123
124	Young Rings "After all this time we're still not sure about the origin of Saturn's rings," says Jeff Cuzzi, a planetary scientist at the NASA Ames Research Center. Astronomers once thought that Saturn's rings formed when Saturn did: 4.8 billion years ago as the Sun and planets coalesced from a swirling cloud of interstellar gas. "But lately," Cuzzi says, "there's a growing awareness that Saturn's rings can't be so old." http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/12feb_rings.htm
125	Young Rings cont’d Rings are bright and shiny, but they sweep up space dust as Saturn orbits the Sun. After a few hundred million years, they’d be darkened. Moons and ring material are exchanging angular momentum. Eventually moons will be flung away while outer half of rings will fall toward the planet. But we “know” Saturn is old So where did these young rings come from?
126	The solution
127	The rings are explained “Cuzzi speculates that some hundreds of millions of years ago—a time when the earliest dinosaurs roamed our planet—Saturn had no bright rings. Then, he says, something unlikely happened: ‘A moon-sized object from the outer solar system might have flown nearby Saturn where tidal forces ripped it apart. Or maybe an asteroid smashed one of Saturn's existing moons.’ The debris encircled the planet and formed the rings we see today.”
128	Mysterious spokes
129	Braids!?
130	Enceladus
131
132	Water Geysers?
133	Far too “old” to be geologically active!
134	Mimas Same-size neighbor with no geological activity
135	Titan
136	Methane atmosphere broken down by sunlight. Evolutionists expected seas of methane on surface – not there!
137	Dancing Moons: Janus and Epimetheus
138	What you aren’t being told about Saturn Rings are young, Enceladus is young, Titan is young Dancing moons, odd ring phenomena The Creator is not only skilled, but He appreciates beauty
139	Uranus
140	Surprise!
141	The solution
142	Oh, really? “Models for the development of the solar system cannot produce such an orientation without invoking a collision with another object.” Christiansen and Hamblin, Exploring the Planets, p. 405 But Uranus’ orbit is one of the most circular of all the planets (only Venus, Earth, and Neptune have orbits that are more circular) Uranus’ orbit lies more closely within the ecliptic plane than any other planet except Earth.
143	Why are Uranus’ moons there? Moons are in normal orbit around the equator, almost at right angles to the ecliptic Must have been formed after the collision…but all of the moons combined are only about 0.1 % of the mass of the planet (Earth’s Moon is 1.2% that of Earth)
144	Other problems Why no radiation of energy? “To the complete astonishment of scientists, the magnetic axis [of Uranus] is tilted approximately 60 degrees with respect to its axis of rotation. It is not known why.” Christiansen and Hamblin, Exploring the Planets, p. 406 Magnetic axis is also offset from the center of the planet
145	Miranda
146	Space art?
147	Highest cliff in the Solar System: 6 miles high!
148	Would you like to explain this?
149	Pity the poor evolutionist “No one predicted anything looking like Miranda.” Taylor, Destiny or Chance: our solar system and its place in the cosmos, p. 86 “The central problem in modeling the thermal histories of the uranian satellites is accounting for Miranda.” Croft, Uranus conference extracts, 5.10 Who wants to guess the answer?
150	Yup!
151	Your tax dollars at work “Scientists believe that Miranda may have been shattered as many as five times during its evolution. After each shattering the moon would have reassembled from the remains of its former self with portions of the core exposed and portions of the surface buried. Miranda's appearance can be explained by theories, but the real reason is still unknown.” http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/features/planets/uranus/miranda.html, 15 Jan 2002 “Although some sort of collisional disruption appears to be required, it is not obvious that the present terrain, with relief up to 20 km, would survive catastrophic disruption and reassembly.” Taylor, Solar System Evolution: A New Perspective, p. 261
152	What you aren’t being told about Uranus Sideways rotation disproves evolution Magnetic field disproves evolution Should be radiating energy but isn’t Miranda is a complete mystery
153	Neptune
154	A youthful planet? Supposedly formed billions of years ago: old, cold, and dead
155	None of the above Farthest large planet from the Sun: 30 times as far away as Earth Not cold: radiates 2x energy received Not dead: Great Spot storm disappeared since Voyager II in 1989
156	Still not dead The most violent winds in the Solar System (1,300 mph)
157	Another magnetic problem In 1986, Voyager discovered Uranus’ magnetic field was tilted and offset. “Scientists suggested that Voyager had caught the field in the middle of a reversal (when the magnetic north and south poles switch places)” Christiansen and Hamblin., Exploring the Planets, p. 424 But then in 1989 Voyager discovered that Neptune’s magnetic field was the same way! “It seems that the possibility of finding two planets both experiencing magnetic polarity reversals is small.” Ibid Creationist Dr. Russell Humphreys had successfully predicted the strengths of both fields years earlier, by basing his model on the Bible. (His predictions were 100,000 times greater than evolutionist predictions. He was right and they were wrong.)
158	Uranus and Neptune don’t exist! “Pssst ... astronomers who model the formation of the solar system have kept a dirty little secret: Uranus and Neptune don’t exist. Or at least computer simulations have never explained how planets as big as the two gas giants could form so far from the sun. Bodies orbited so slowly in the outer parts of the sun’s protoplanetary disk that the slow process of gravitational accretion would need more time than the age of the solar system to form bodies with 14.5 and 17.1 times the mass of Earth.” R.N., Birth of Uranus and Neptune, Astronomy 28(4):30, 2000
159	Uranus & Neptune cont’d “What is clear is that simple banging together of planetesimals to construct planets takes too long in this remote outer part of the solar system. The time needed exceeds the age of the solar system. We see Uranus and Neptune, but the modest requirement that these planets exist has not been met by this model.” S.R. Taylor, Destiny or Chance: our solar system and its place in the cosmos, p. 73
160	How long has this been known? “There have been many attempts to model the evolution of a swarm of colliding planetesimals... Safronov calculated the characteristic timescales for planetary growth. In the terrestrial region he found timescales of 10⁷ [10,000,000] years but the time estimates increased rapidly in the outer regions of the solar system and was 10¹⁰ [10,000,000,000] years for Neptune – which is twice the age of the solar system. “It is clear that, in view of the large timescales found for the formation of the outer planets, a satisfactory theoretical model for the accretion of planets from diffuse material is not available at present.” Dormand, J.R. and Woolfson, M.M., The Origin of the solar system: the capture theory, p. 39 News? Nope – Safronov published this in 1972!
161	Shouldn’t this be a problem?? “It’s clear that our level of sophistication of studying planet formation is relatively primitive…So far, it’s been very difficult for anybody to come up with a scenario that actually produces Uranus and Neptune.” Martin Duncan, Queens University, quoted in Astronomy 28(4):30
162	The heart of the matter “Come up with a scenario” They seem to believe that the mere act of coming up with a story proves it all happened that way Doesn’t even have to be a good story Rather than acknowledge their Creator, evolutionists would rather cling to a story that denies the very objects it’s supposed to explain!
163	What you aren’t being told about Neptune Looks young: winds, dynamic storms, heat Magnetic field defies evolutionary fables Biggie: evolution says it can’t exist at all.
164	Pluto
165	“Formerly” an escaped moon from Neptune
166	What you aren’t being told about Pluto Nobody knows what to do with it/them. Is it an escaped moon? Is it a planet? Is it a double planet? Is it something else entirely?
167	Comets
168	Dirty Snowballs Wild 2 (about three miles in diameter)
169	They come in two flavors Long-period: more than 200 years to orbit the Sun. Short-period: less than 200 years Short period comets burn out quickly, can’t last for hundreds of millions of years So why are there still so many short-period comets left? Kuiper Belt objects are too big and too few
170	What you aren’t being told about comets No proven source for short-period comets Shouldn’t be there, unless the Solar System is only thousands of years old
171	What’s the bottom line? “Thus far we have seen that we know very little about the development of the solar system.” Harwit, Astrophysical Concepts, p. 37
172	What was that again? “To sum up, I think that all suggested accounts of the origin of the Solar System are subject to serious objections. The conclusion in the present state of the subject would be that the system cannot exist.” Sir Harold Jeffreys, The Earth: Its Origin, History, and Physical Constitution, p. 359
173	Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork.