Jupiter’s Volcanic Moon Continues To Put On A Show

One of the most remarkable phenomena happening in our solar system today, is Io where it continues to show massive volcanic activity. Io is only slightly bigger than Earth’s moon and is the third largest among moons orbiting around Jupiter. Planetary scientists are busy mapping its surface and are in the process of coming up with new ideas about what drives its activity.

In the highlights in the paper, “Volcanism on Io: New Insights from Global Geologic Mapping”  it says…

“We produced the first complete, 1:15M-scale global geologic map of Jupiter’s moon Io

► Io was mapped into 19 material units: plains (65.8% of surface), lava flow fields (28.5%), mountains (3.2%), and patera floors (2.5%) ► The distribution of plains units is geographically constrained: White plains (dominated by SO2 + contaminants) occur mostly in the equatorial antijovian region (±30o, 90o-230oW), possibly indicative of a regional cold trap.

“► Bright (presumably sulfur-rich) flow fields make up 30% more lava flow fields than dark (presumably silicate) flows (56.5% vs. 43.5%), and only 18% of bright flow fields occur within 10 km of dark flow fields ► These results suggest that primary sulfur-rich effusions are an important component of Io’s recent volcanism.”

“► We mapped 425 paterae (volcano-tectonic depressions), which cover only 2.5% of Io’s surface, but correspond to 64% of all detected hot spots ► The freshest bright and dark flows make up about 29% of all of Io’s flow fields, suggesting active emplacement is occurring in less than a third of Io’s visible lava fields.”

“► The greater areal extent of gas-derived diffuse deposits (red + white, 85%) compared to presumably pyroclast-bearing diffuse deposits (dark (silicate ash) + yellow (sulfur-rich ash), 15%) indicates that there is effective separation between the transport of pyroclasts and gas in many Ionian explosive eruptions…”

The research produces good evidence for creationism, which advocates a young universe which is not billions of years old. Not surprising that evolutionary Planetary scientists are forcing the data into the old-age framework rather than exploring questions like how does molten material erupt onto the surface without plate tectonics? And why are heavy elements seen in the ultramafic lavas remain near the surface rather than submerging deep into the interior billions of years ago? How would Io really look with all this massive volcanic activity on this small moon happening for billions of years? Is their answer, “stuff happens” because it happens?

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Jupiter’s Volcanic Moon Continues To Put On A Show

  1. Same creationist song, 384th verse—

    The universe is young because whatever is happening now must have happened since the beginning of the universe. So, for example, the Earth is less than 600 years old, because the Jordan River would have filled the Dead Sea to overflowing in that amount of time.

    Lame, Michael. Lame.

    .

    Question and answer session—

    > “Planetary scientists are forcing the data into the old-age framework rather than exploring questions like how does molten material erupt onto the surface without plate tectonics?”

    Michael has never heard of tidal heating. Of course he hasn’t; MIchael is illiterate in geology and astronomy.<

    > “why are [sic] heavy elements seen in the ultramafic lavas remain near the surface rather than submerging deep into the interior billions of years ago?”

    Because they just got there and have not yet had time to sink Also, if you think that heavy things always sink, put a bunch of marbles and BBs together in a jar, shake it, and find out what every farmer already knows about large and small rocks in a field. Michael has no knowledge of geology. or physics

    > “How would Io really look with all this massive volcanic activity on this small moon happening for billions of years?”

    Volcanic matter doesn’t leave Io; it gets recycled. Tidal friction provides heat continually, over millions and billions of years. Michael can’t think through a simple progression, because his faith blinds him.

    Stupid, Michael. Your “evidence” for a young Io is founded upon ignorance and an inability to think logically.

    No wonder people laugh at creationists.

  2. Why am I not bothering to go into a refutation of this drivel? — Oh yes, because it’s not worth it.

  3. Hi, Tim. Long time no key.

    It does get tedious. Same looney themes over and over.

    > What is happening now has always happened.
    > Nobody know how this works; ergo, God did it as an after-dinner trick.
    > Scientists are always wrong. (Except when they appear to support creation; they they are not to be questioned.)
    > Dictionary definitions of terms define the real world.
    > The whole theory is wrong when any detail of it is disproven.
    > Anything that is “consistent with” creation is evidence for creation.
    > If theory A is in error, then theory B is automatically true.
    > I can’t believe this, therefore it’s not true. (Personal incredulit5y).
    > A theory is disproven if its founder `says it might be wrong.

    Hey! Perhaps we should compile a list of the “themes” that creationists/IDiots employ. Not the detailed arguments, but the tools that are employed in constructing those arguments.

  4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . EVOLUTION ALERT

    Michael reads only the popular press, and tries to trim and squeeze and tug new discoveries into his creationist framework.

    Yet he ignores the sources that would give him what he desires, from the viewpoint he desires. For example, a recent paper in the Discovery Institute’s BIO-Complexity” journal describes experiments to show an impossibly low probability that one protein can evolve into another one having a different function.

    Let’s hear your comments, Michael. The paper is at Gauger AK, Axe DD, “The evolutionary accessibility of new enzyme functions: a case study from the biotin pathway,” BIO-Complexity 2011(1):1-17 We’d like to hear why you think their conclusions are justified. Wouldn’t we?

    Don’t disappoint us yet again, Michael.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s