Mars Geology Has Some Interesting Data For Creationism

I have been very critical of exploring Mars, namely the hype of trying to find life while favoring more exploration on other planets and moons which seem to have information worth studying. There is only so much money that can go around which is another reason as well. But I must say, the recent data on Mars appears very interesting.

Planetary geologists are beginning  to find rapid geology processes in Mar’s history. Some of these processes resembles things that happened on earth, however these effects are different considering Mars is much colder with a different atmosphere.

Water eruptions that occurred sometime in Mar’s past from two channels known as Mangala Fossa and Cerberus Fossa. Scientists have estimated a volume flux around 107 –108 m3/s from Mangala Fossa which seemed to have hot mud carried with it. There is a fracture about 200 km long. Also, Cerberus Fossa  has a fracture about 35 km long. Both of these eruptions propelled material several kilometres laterally across the surface.

Volcanic flows were ruled out due to the nature of the channels and ridges.  These type of eruptions require water to be located about 3–4 km below the surface. The water eruptions are just one example of a variety of large-scale rapid catastrophic events that have shaped the surface of Mars in its past. There is also massive volcanoes and evidence of glaciation on Mars.

The question remains how could a Martian atmosphere support so much liquid water in the past? Mars’ current atmosphere is quite thin and if there were liquid water on the surface of Mars today it would quickly evaporate and/or freeze. There is quite a bit more study needed especially from a young-age creation perspective.

Could Mars have been designed with a thicker atmosphere than present that was partially lost as a result of large impacts? A large impact to blast gasses away is possible but keep in mind, this is all tentative, unlike evolutionists who declare these things as facts first if there is an agreement among the majority. But whatever happened in Mars’ past, it does appear it was dramatic and catastrophic. Martian geology will generally demand rapid catastrophic processes and thus will fit a young-age viewpoint nicely.


4 thoughts on “Mars Geology Has Some Interesting Data For Creationism

  1. @Michael: “I have been very critical of exploring Mars…. There is only so much money that can go around which is another reason as well.”

    So it seems that money is an exception to the rule that what goes up must come down.

  2. Eelco, the data in this post points toward Michael plagiarizing a British source, instead of the usual American screed. The most telling datum is the spelling of “kilometre.” And the metric distances given without English-unit conversions. But at least he may have typed it in himself; notice the mistaken “Mar’s” in the second graf. And the teleological fallacy in the first sentence of the last graf,: “Could Mars have been designed…” rather than “Could Mars have formed….” as a reporter would have written it.

    The howler, however, is the unintended irony in the last paragraph. First, Michael besmirches evolutionists[1] “who declare … things as facts first.” Then, without a backward glance at what he had just written, he does the same thing: “Martian geology will generally demand rapid catastrophic processes and thus will fit a young-age viewpoint nicely.”[2]

    Michael, has all your shame been washed away?

    [1] Evolutionists get blamed for everything, even when no life forms are involved at all..

    [2] Again, having apparently forgotten that the first sentence proposes a solution which would contradict a young-Mars hypothesis. Oh, sorry—that one, unlike the creationist fantasy, is dismissed as “tentative.”

  3. Michael’s post bothered me all day at my son’s hobby farm. Then it hit, while we were unloading a spare engine for his latest restoration project, a 1954 Hudson Hornet.

    Suppose everything that Michael has plagiarized from his British source is correct. Rapid, large-scale catastrophic geological processes on Mars. Resembling certain processes on Earth. Hot mud from large surface fissures. Subsurface water. An atmosphere that could not support large volumes of water. Let’s even throw in his suppositions. Sudden loss of a thicker atmosphere. Large volumes of subsurface water in the past.

    OK. Then how in God’s green earth does it follow that any of this is evidence for a young age for Mars, let alone for our planet, or for anything else? By what stretch of the imagination does any of this indicate that Mars has a history on the order of thousands of years rather than billions? Answer: There is no connection. Thus the conclusion that “Martian geology will generally demand rapid catastrophic processes and thus will fit a young-age viewpoint” is a non sequitur.

    Perhaps the question should be framed differently. Why are rapid catastrophic processes per se any evidence whatever of a young age for any planet? Real science posits a number of such events for Earth. An early impact that formed the Moon. Asteroid impacts that wiped out almost all life 250Mya and 65 Mya. The scablands in eastern Washington where thousands of cubic km of water were released from a frozen lake in a few days. The filling of the Black Sea when the Bosporus was breached. Farther down the block, two major planets seem to have suddenly swapped orbits, raining the inner solar system—including Earth and the Moon—with millions of asteroid impacts.

    Michael’s thesis is that any rapid geological processes must indicate a recent origin. We’d really like to hear some justification for that proposition. Why is it anything more than pure fantasy? Lack of response will be taken as an admission that your conclusion is a load of dingoes’ kidneys.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s