n twice as far as Pluto) and is estimated to be 1.4 to 1.6 times the size of Pluto.
2003 UB313 lies near the "Kuiper Belt", but cannot be classified as an asteroid due to its large size. It will be given a new name as soon as NASA is sure they want to classify it as a real planet.
To see the link at the NASA site, click here.
This new discovery poses several problems for the Big Bang theory and other parts of the secular cosmology. 2003 UB313 not only has a highly elliptical orbit, but it is inclined 44 degrees out of the average plane of other orbiting planets.
The secular model for the formation of the solar system claims that the Solar System is a condensation of a huge, rapidly spinning dust cloud. If this were the case, all the planets would have roughly the same inclination and would spin the same direction. We already knew that Venus spins in the opposite direction from most planets, but until now the greatest deviation from the orbit plane was the 17 degrees of Pluto.
Of course, I'm sure that evolutionists will propose that some gigantic stellar body supposedly passed close enough to the solar system to pull the new planet out of the usual angle without succeeding in capturing it. This theory will be placed as fact in the textbooks of Americans; to question it will be intolerant religious bigotry.
It will be interesting to see whether Pluto is inclined the same way as this new planet. If so, they will use this to say that both planets were aligned together when the huge star passed and pulled them both partly out of orbit, producing the highly elliptical and angularly deviant orbits. If not, they'll say that planetary orbits wobble like a badly-spun top and that the planets were aligned at one time, and the same thing happened.
Regardless of the truth, they will find some just-so story that will substantiate their claims (rather than coming up with a new, scientifically valid theory).
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
8.05.2005
New Planet Discovered!
Breaking News
NASA has located what they believe to be the tenth planet in our solar system. This new chunk of rock, uninspiringly dubbed "2003 UB313", is approximately 9 billion miles from the sun (more tha
n twice as far as Pluto) and is estimated to be 1.4 to 1.6 times the size of Pluto.
2003 UB313 lies near the "Kuiper Belt", but cannot be classified as an asteroid due to its large size. It will be given a new name as soon as NASA is sure they want to classify it as a real planet.
To see the link at the NASA site, click here.
This new discovery poses several problems for the Big Bang theory and other parts of the secular cosmology. 2003 UB313 not only has a highly elliptical orbit, but it is inclined 44 degrees out of the average plane of other orbiting planets.
The secular model for the formation of the solar system claims that the Solar System is a condensation of a huge, rapidly spinning dust cloud. If this were the case, all the planets would have roughly the same inclination and would spin the same direction. We already knew that Venus spins in the opposite direction from most planets, but until now the greatest deviation from the orbit plane was the 17 degrees of Pluto.
Of course, I'm sure that evolutionists will propose that some gigantic stellar body supposedly passed close enough to the solar system to pull the new planet out of the usual angle without succeeding in capturing it. This theory will be placed as fact in the textbooks of Americans; to question it will be intolerant religious bigotry.
It will be interesting to see whether Pluto is inclined the same way as this new planet. If so, they will use this to say that both planets were aligned together when the huge star passed and pulled them both partly out of orbit, producing the highly elliptical and angularly deviant orbits. If not, they'll say that planetary orbits wobble like a badly-spun top and that the planets were aligned at one time, and the same thing happened.
Regardless of the truth, they will find some just-so story that will substantiate their claims (rather than coming up with a new, scientifically valid theory).
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
n twice as far as Pluto) and is estimated to be 1.4 to 1.6 times the size of Pluto.
2003 UB313 lies near the "Kuiper Belt", but cannot be classified as an asteroid due to its large size. It will be given a new name as soon as NASA is sure they want to classify it as a real planet.
To see the link at the NASA site, click here.
This new discovery poses several problems for the Big Bang theory and other parts of the secular cosmology. 2003 UB313 not only has a highly elliptical orbit, but it is inclined 44 degrees out of the average plane of other orbiting planets.
The secular model for the formation of the solar system claims that the Solar System is a condensation of a huge, rapidly spinning dust cloud. If this were the case, all the planets would have roughly the same inclination and would spin the same direction. We already knew that Venus spins in the opposite direction from most planets, but until now the greatest deviation from the orbit plane was the 17 degrees of Pluto.
Of course, I'm sure that evolutionists will propose that some gigantic stellar body supposedly passed close enough to the solar system to pull the new planet out of the usual angle without succeeding in capturing it. This theory will be placed as fact in the textbooks of Americans; to question it will be intolerant religious bigotry.
It will be interesting to see whether Pluto is inclined the same way as this new planet. If so, they will use this to say that both planets were aligned together when the huge star passed and pulled them both partly out of orbit, producing the highly elliptical and angularly deviant orbits. If not, they'll say that planetary orbits wobble like a badly-spun top and that the planets were aligned at one time, and the same thing happened.
Regardless of the truth, they will find some just-so story that will substantiate their claims (rather than coming up with a new, scientifically valid theory).
In Him,
David S. MacMillan III
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment