The Sound Of Settled Science

Popular Mechanics;

A new study led by geologists at the University of Johannesburg found that compounds in the Hypatia stone are distinct from anything discovered in the solar system. The researchers therefore conclude that parts of the rock formed before the solar system, and if these compounds are not presolar, the prevailing idea that the solar system formed from a nebula of homogenous gas is called into question.

18 Replies to “The Sound Of Settled Science”

  1. well halleluah. Ive been saying this (and getting scoffed at) for roughly 30 friggin years. it WASNT a ‘4B yr old dust cloud yada yada ya’.
    see my very recent entry in a post about oil reserves and where they came from; organic/inorganic/combination/etc.

  2. “Experts”
    The only things they don’t know are things they don’t know.
    Says specialist, expert you may say, on wholly unimportant things.

  3. Isn’t South Africa one of those countries that wants to “de-colonialize” science?

  4. Further study should be conducted by NASA whose special Mission to Islam will best understand and interpret the geology of their homeland. I suspect they will conclude that these compounds were formed where Allah’s feet walked on the earth. Case closed … “Allah is Great! May every man fall prostrate before his might, and confess his name” (the next NASA prayer break comes at 3pm).

  5. Great question actually. The answer is it’s all an educated guess based on current understanding. Scientists seeking grant money are excellent at conjecture and making up “what ifs” that sound really cool. The problem to me isn’t what’s theorized but that it’s done in ways to make it sound much more probable than can be reasonably claimed. Anything bright and shiny to attract more money. A lot of this stuff is only a shade more respectable then the searches for big foot, Nessie and UFO’s.

  6. Ugh. This is why conservatives have a reputation for being anti-science.
    found that compounds in the Hypatia stone are distinct from anything discovered in the solar system.
    Read that sentence properly. They don’t “know” what’s native to the solar system and what isn’t; they just have data from different rocky planets and moons that show consistent composition. From there, the conclusion is that the solar system formed all at once from a homogeneous gas cloud. Since this rock’s composition doesn’t match the rest of the solar system that we know about, then either the rock isn’t from our solar system or the homogenous gas cloud model is wrong. That’s it. Far and away the most likely answer is that it’s an extrasolar comet core because the homogeneous cloud model makes predictions that have been confirmed by observation. That answer all by itself is pretty awesome, because if it can be confirmed then we have tangible proof that rocky planetoids exist outside our solar system and what their composition is.

  7. well said. You either have some knowledge in a field, or you have reasoning skills that allow one to form reasonable opinions. The above comments are probably due to the fact that this article does not fit in with “their” ideological beliefs and there fore they just go stupid with their response. Smart people have mostly questions, idiots have all the answers!!

  8. Daniel Ream let me give you a hint: Religion is belief, science is doubt. I don’t believe we have enough information from ‘other planets and moons’ to know what is native and what is not. The only actual samples we have are from a few meteorites and the material brought back from the moon by the Apollo astronauts. We have never taken samples from Venus or Mars or Jupiter or Saturn or …… We don’t know if there is Hypatia stone in those other planets or moons. Therefore your point is more religion than science. IOW my science says don’t believe the cult religion of scientism and don’t seek the approval of the members of said cult. Belief is religion. Science is doubt.

  9. Really ?
    http://education.seattlepi.com/spectroscopy-identify-elements-3503.html
    Each natural element has a characteristic light spectrum that helps identify it in samples of unknown substances. Spectroscopy is the practice of examining spectra and comparing them to those of known elements. Using spectroscopy methods, scientists can identify pure substances or compounds and the elements in them. Because it is based on light, spectroscopy works equally well whether the sample is on your desktop or many light-years distant.

  10. Well Kenji I may have been born at night but it wasn’t last night. Tell you what why don’t we use spectroscopy to find gold and other precious elements on earth and send all the geologists home? Sorry but I am not religious enough to believe that you can send a rocket to a different planet and by measuring the light reflected off the planet tell how and why that planet came into existence.

  11. actually J, He did.
    the prob. for countless opinioners incl strident bible thumpers they confuse the ‘how dat ‘appen?’ with the ‘what’.
    ie: Mr Hawkings claims it ALL came outta nuttin’. on its own. spontaneously.
    compared with the my humble view the Creator spoke, and then it ALL came outta nuttin’….
    and, get this, He chose to let the thing expand a truly incomprehensible and staggering distance BEFORE turning on the Cosmic Clock.
    huh?
    yep. I think an explanation of the whats and hows and wheres and whos and whens includes this little and equally immense explanation that God *held back* this ‘thing’ called TIME whilst the rest of all creation
    (mass, energy, dimension,gravity, etc) zoomed about and took its place.
    instantaneously. all rushing out unimpeded by time. light traversing the 14B light years, and bouncing off the ‘edge’, faster than snapping your fingers.
    giving the *appearance* of great age but in fact by our measure was much, much more recent.
    ergo, when we measure the speed of light, we are *actually* measuring the speed of TIME.
    etc etc.

Navigation