Where did Venus come from?

euser1984

Thanks.

g0g

euser1984 wrote: »

Thanks.

Uranus?

euser1984

g0g wrote: »

Uranus?

The question wasn't the point of my thread. My angle is that it's assumed that the solar system just developed, and that it's been like that since the beginning of the solar system....the solar system changes just like everything else and how old is the solar system? Orthodox science refuse to acknowledge that changes could have occurred and in fact have not even investigated it AFAIK.

So were all the new planets on our solar system formed at the same time? Or would something large have come after earth (in regards to time frame) for example. Venus is a similar planet to the earth. If Venus came after the earth, then there lies no answers to the following two questions. 1) did it hit something directly? & 2) affected the gravity off other planets via close misses....

If Venus was born afterwards then it would still have more energy vs. other planets; and more heat, even after taking into account the difference there would be because of the planets distance to the sun. Well the heat of Venus is up to about 4 times hotter than earth. What would either of those questions set out in the last paragraph say if there was an impact on earth or a gravitational effect from another newer planet on earth? What effect would it have on the moon?

nokia69

euser1984 wrote: »

Orthodox science refuse to acknowledge that changes could have occurred and in fact have not even investigated it AFAIK.

thats not true, while most people do agree on how the planets were formed most also agree the system is not static and can change

for example in the past many thought that the asteroid belt was formed by the destruction of a small planet but as more evidence came to light the theory changed

science has no problem changing theories as better evidence arrives

also the heat of Venus is due to a runaway greenhouse effect, Venus was different in the past as were many planets

euser1984

The books of exodus from about 3500 years ago talks about a comet and a red planet having being hit by this comet. It also talks about blood everywhere which suggests that possibly the earth was heated up by this near miss and they were referring to lava.....then Moses apparently moved the sea to one side so they could cross (gravitational effect) - thus they became the chosen people. It's all documented in Ancient ways of writing on walls and statues etc. This events were recorded in various cultures around the world at the same time. Cultures whom would have never known about each other.

Does that mean about 1500 years before "christ" a large Comet hit Mars and knocked it out of orbit? What effects would the gravity of such an event affect the world and the moon?

Finally the God of all Gods was Jupiter, the mother god suggests that Venus was born from Jupiter. Perhaps it explains the 800 year storm and also that 800 years is actually an incorrect figure. If the earth is like Neptune then could we have come from Jupiter also?

greedygoblin

A reasonably short but interesting article on how Jupiter (and Saturn) may have affected the formation of the innermost planets of our solar system: linky.

happyoutscan

euser1984 wrote: »

It's all documented in Ancient ways of writing on walls and statues etc. This is recorded in various cultures around the world at the same time. Cultures whom would have never known about each other.

Care to elaborate on this?

euser1984

Check out this guy:
http://www.velikovsky.info/Main_Page

endacl

euser1984 wrote: »

The books of exodus from about 3500 years ago talks about a comet and a red planet having being hit by this comet. It also talks about blood everywhere which suggests that possibly the earth was heated up by this near miss and they were referring to lava.....then Moses apparently moved the sea to one side so they could cross (gravitational effect) - thus they became the chosen people. It's all documented in Ancient ways of writing on walls and statues etc. This events were recorded in various cultures around the world at the same time. Cultures whom would have never known about each other.

Does that mean about 1500 years before "christ" a large Comet hit Mars and knocked it out of orbit? What effects would the gravity of such an event affect the world and the moon?

Finally the God of all Gods was Jupiter, the mother god suggests that Venus was born from Jupiter. Perhaps it explains the 800 year storm and also that 800 years is actually an incorrect figure. If the earth is like Neptune then could we have come from Jupiter also?

And I'm out...

euser1984

endacl wrote: »

And I'm out...

What I meant was that Orthodox science refuses to acknowledge that these ancient recordings could be in any way related to such a thing.

Not even worth an investigation. You want to leave all the fairy stuff behind? I can do that and still offer further type of investigations possible that would be more suited to scientists. Like unexplained natural resources such as petroleum being found in unexpected places.

For the record Einstein was convinced enough that he warranted more investigation in the sense of doing it himself...he never got to do it though.

euser1984

endacl wrote: »

And I'm out...

Who are you talking to anyway? Let people make up their own mind.

nokia69

euser1984 wrote: »

The books of exodus from about 3500 years ago talks about a comet and a red planet having being hit by this comet. It also talks about blood everywhere which suggests that possibly the earth was heated up by this near miss and they were referring to lava.....then Moses apparently moved the sea to one side so they could cross (gravitational effect) - thus they became the chosen people. It's all documented in Ancient ways of writing on walls and statues etc. This events were recorded in various cultures around the world at the same time. Cultures whom would have never known about each other.

Does that mean about 1500 years before "christ" a large Comet hit Mars and knocked it out of orbit? What effects would the gravity of such an event affect the world and the moon?

there are plenty of astrological events recorded by different ancient cultures but it can be had to figure out exactly what they really observed

something happening on Mars will have almost no gravitational effect on the earth or the Moon, also I don't think there has ever been a comet large enough to knock Mars or any other planet off its orbit

euser1984 wrote: »

Finally the God of all Gods was Jupiter, the mother god suggests that Venus was born from Jupiter. Perhaps it explains the 800 year storm and also that 800 years is actually an incorrect figure. If the earth is like Neptune then could we have come from Jupiter also?

thats just Roman or maybe Greek religion/mythology, its not science

you should read some Zecharia Sitchin or Erich Von Danikin but keep in mind that its not science

euser1984

nokia69 wrote: »

there are plenty of astrological events recorded by different ancient cultures but it can be had to figure out exactly what they really observed

something happening on Mars will have almost no gravitational effect on the earth or the Moon, also I don't think there has ever been a comet large enough to knock Mars or any other planet off its orbit



thats just Roman or maybe Greek religion/mythology, its not science

you should read some Zecharia Sitchin or Erich Von Danikin but keep in mind that its not science

I know it's not science but predictions were made that turned out to be true from this....in fact I think it was 6 out of 7 that came to be true.....surely that would warrant a look into for possible evidence. Scientists talk about all the planets differently as if they are 100% sure. Einstein was convinced of it's Merit to be worthwhile to look at further but he did say it wasn't science too. I'm beginning to think I don't understand the scientific field.

Are they that 100% sure about what they say about the planets, to give them the authority to speak like they do? Is it a case that only what they are saying now is what has been proven and other possibilities could exist?

It's not Roman or Greek originally, it comes from all the ancient civilizations such as the Mayans and chinese, indians etc. They all have record of these things that happened and all around the same time, yet they were all at different parts of the world.

Well, what if Venus was initially a comet? Venus spins differently to other planets and this offers an explanation.

endacl

Yep. Still out.

euser1984

endacl wrote: »

Yep. Still out.

Why?

euser1984

Scientists say that comets are leftovers after the creation of the solar system....says who?

endacl

euser1984 wrote: »

Scientists say that comets are leftovers after the creation of the solar system....says who?

OK. Back in for the craic.

Which scientists? Not biologists.

Planetary scientists do. They build on an existing body of evidence, hypothesise, test those hypotheses, and evaluate their results. Which can't be done with the examples you put forward.

Tl;dr: people who know an awful lot about the solar system.

euser1984

endacl wrote: »

OK. Back in for the craic.

Which scientists? Not biologists.

Planetary scientists do. They build on an existing body of evidence, hypothesise, test those hypotheses, and evaluate their results. Which can't be done with the examples you put forward.

Tl;dr: people who know an awful lot about the solar system.

Why do we have to believe the scientists? I'm sure you have experienced that when it comes to food for example. There is compelling evidence for what I'm saying - I urge you to investigate it further simply because the're not always right and it is a possibility. Your interested in space, right?

What other authorities can we not trust that we would have before?

euser1984

I can give you a link to a documentary aired in 1972 on the bbc. After the documentary was aired the bbc people involved in letting it air were fired.

endacl

euser1984 wrote: »

Why do we have to believe the scientists? I'm sure you have experienced that when it comes to food for example. There is compelling evidence for what I'm saying - I urge you to investigate it further simply because the're not always right and it is a possibility. Your interested in space, right?

I am indeed. I've been a keen amateur observational astronomer since my early teens. I'm not interested in fluffy thinking, though. To the best of my knowledge, nothing you have put forward potentially answers any question that has been asked by anybody.

Perhaps a different forum? Astronomy, perhaps even more than many other sciences, depends almost exclusively on what can be observed, and what can be measured. A speculation that can't be verified or dismissed by observation and/or measurement can't become a hypothesis, and therefore can't be discussed in scientific terms.

euser1984

A planet is made from the same components a comet is made from. There is no reason to believe that Venus was made at the start of the solar system and there couldn't be any scientific evidence, so that's out the window straight away if you want to have a discussion in scientific terms. If it was then why does it go backwards to every other planet?

euser1984

Continuing on - given that Jupiter and Saturn are gas giants they also would have the ability to create a planet. If they got hit by something fast enough it could spit out a comet. One which would be so different to earth that carbon dioxide is a main feature of the atmosphere....accounting for the greenhouse effect on Venus.

euser1984

Here we go: This is what orthodox science has on the subject of Comets.

"Comets are regular members of the solar system family, gravitationally bound to the Sun. They are generally believed to be made of material, originally in the outer part of the solar system, that didn't get incorporated into the planets -- leftover debris, if you will. It is the very fact that they are thought to be composed of such unchanged primitive material that makes them extremely interesting to scientists who wish to learn about conditions during the earliest period of the solar system."

Generally believed?

So, believe in everything orthodox science has to say if you want. They could very well be right; but there is just as much a chance that orthodox science could be wrong...and I think the odds stack in the unorthodox view.

How much will string theory change everything we think we know? Well our scientists think and convince everyone else with authority that they know what there talking about already. Nobody ever could have imagined everything being made of strings though. Vibrating strings. Vibrating to what?

How quickly will orthodox science get something believable together that they can all agree on - that will be a tough one for them, an if they do manage it will be hyperbole more than likely. Astronomy is not a hard science like Physics; we don't have answers to some physics questions yet like an equation for describing everything. This string theory is even turning Physics on it's head.

How can you say that this is what happened in the universe, when we don't even know how the physics of the universe work, to understand it right now, at this given time....who knows what's going on in the universe with the string theory idea of 11 dimensions and the head scratching regarding dark matter.

nokia69

euser1984 wrote: »

I know it's not science but predictions were made that turned out to be true from this....in fact I think it was 6 out of 7 that came to be true.....surely that would warrant a look into for possible evidence. Scientists talk about all the planets differently as if they are 100% sure. Einstein was convinced of it's Merit to be worthwhile to look at further but he did say it wasn't science too. I'm beginning to think I don't understand the scientific field.

what are you saying about Einstein ?

he was right about a lot of things but no one thinks he was right about everything

euser1984 wrote: »

Are they that 100% sure about what they say about the planets, to give them the authority to speak like they do? Is it a case that only what they are saying now is what has been proven and other possibilities could exist?

the other possibilities need evidence, right now the model fits the theory

euser1984 wrote: »

It's not Roman or Greek originally, it comes from all the ancient civilizations such as the Mayans and chinese, indians etc. They all have record of these things that happened and all around the same time, yet they were all at different parts of the world.

yes but they don't record the thing you are talking about

euser1984 wrote: »

Well, what if Venus was initially a comet? Venus spins differently to other planets and this offers an explanation.

Venus was never a comet, we can be sure of that much

Maximus Alexander

euser1984 wrote: »

I'm beginning to think I don't understand the scientific field.

On this, at least, we can all agree.

euser1984

Leaving aside the scientific field entirely then....

Ancient civilizations do record the things I'm talking about, and it was they, that had the names for the planets long before the scientific fields came along.....that's where I'm coming from, leaving aside the scientific field entirely. I'm not sure why nobody is even curious by this that they wouldn't try and imagine other ways that things may have developed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjEC1vOIuxY

Knifey Spoony

euser1984 wrote: »

Continuing on - given that Jupiter and Saturn are gas giants they also would have the ability to create a planet. If they got hit by something fast enough it could spit out a comet. One which would be so different to earth that carbon dioxide is a main feature of the atmosphere....accounting for the greenhouse effect on Venus.

This is Immanuel Velikovsky's argument which Carl Sagan dealt with in an episode of Cosmos:

Direct link to when he starts talking about Velikovsky's argument: https://youtu.be/xGV1GvHa6Nw?t=1787

But, he's arguments are all based on science and observation, so since you are leaving them behind....

animaal

The thing is, we can all come up with our own explanations for the natural phenomena we see. In a lot of cases, these explanations will sound reasonable. But all it takes is a more knowledgeable person to say "how does your explanation account for this..." to knock the explanation.

When we knew less about the universe around us, it seemed reasonable to assume that the stars were little holes in the sky, letting in the light from behind. That explanation fitted the facts as were known at the time. Now we know more, and a better explanation fits the facts. Ultimately, that's what science does. It weighs up all the competing explanations, and favours the one that best fits the observed facts. It also gains currency when it makes predictions that prove to be true.

I'm far from an expert, but I'd bet our current understanding of physics would rule out this Venus proposal. In order for it to be true, we'd need the rules of physics as we know them to be changed. It's just far more likely that Venus was created in the way commonly understood. The accepted theory may change in the future, but it will be in response to newly observed facts, and the theory will have to take account of those facts.

euser1984

Knifey Spoony wrote: »

Direct link to when he starts talking about Velikovsky's argument: https://youtu.be/xGV1GvHa6Nw?t=1787

But, he's arguments are all based on science and observation, so since you are leaving them behind....

He leaves out the part of Velikovsky's argument where he suggested Venus hit Mars.....doesn't mention it at all. That's a huge part of his argument!

Maybe science can't explain it but they didn't even look for any clues. 6 out of 7 of Velikovsky's predictions were accurate...In the 50's (by mistake) they found there was loads of electromagnetic energy waves coming from Jupiter (as Velikovsky predicted) suggesting something big happened. That's what convinced Einstein because the hard evidence was there....something did happen with Jupiter - full stop.

Also, Carl Sagan talks about clouds in Venus and says the only thing that forms clouds is water....that's not correct. It's completely false in fact. The clouds on Venus are actually made of Sulphur dioxide. As he continues on in the talk, that's changed (he talks about the sulphur dioxide) but not as clearly as he originally stated that clouds are only made of water. Like an apology in a newspaper always being small and almost hidden. Odd.

In ancient history pictures, Venus is not in any of the images in the sky....we can agree on that - as scientific proof in the sense that it's either on the history or not....whether right or not.

euser1984

It's also hard science that the moon is moving away (and fast)....slowing down the speed of earths rotation. That accounts for huge weather changes....whether carbon levels are higher or not. Can people agree with that and realize that it's affecting the climate changes...

Greenmachine

Religious forum that way ---->