Laird Scranton Wrote:

> In my view, a re-adjusted outlook would
> acknowledge that current theory overlaps
> increasingly with Velikovsky's outlook, and so
> should move it out of the realm of a lunatic's
> ravings and into the realm of a theory to be
> carefully considered. Likewise, it would agree
> that no currently-known fact about Venus precludes
> the possibility that it is a geologically young
> body.
>
> - Laird

And changed from a comet to a planet in that span of time (around 3,000 to 4,000 years ago)? Did it transform while being ejected from Jupiter? Or halfway to its current orbit? Or all the way to its current orbit?

Where did it pick up ALL those orders of magnitude extra mass? HOW did it overcome the ejection velocity's tendency to shed mass? What made it stop where it is, especially after having acquired all that extra mass?

And, most importantly, if this can happen, why hasn't it happened again? Why aren't we observing it happen regularly with other comets within the outer solar system?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03-Nov-15 18:34 by OCaptain.