December 11, 2014 | David F. Coppedge

Comet Ocean Theory Debunked

Data from the Rosetta mission debunk the notion that comets brought Earth’s ocean water.  Now they’re hoping asteroids could have.

The news media seem disappointed that comets are apparently ruled out as sources of water for Earth’s oceans.  Some are looking to asteroids—dry as they are—as a source.

  • Rosetta results: Comets ‘did not bring water to Earth’ (BBC News); “Scientists have dealt a blow to the theory that most water on Earth came from comets.”
  • #RosettaWatch: Comet water is not like Earth’s (New Scientist); “The comet’s water has around three times as much deuterium as water on Earth, the researchers found.”
  • Rosetta Spacecraft Suggests Asteroids, Not Comets, Birthed Earth’s Oceans (National Geographic); Ice on comet 67P displays chemistry unlike seawater, the spacecraft circling overhead reveals.
  • Mystery of where Earth’s water came from deepens (PhysOrg); “The mystery of where Earth’s water came from got murkier Wednesday when some astronomers essentially eliminated one of the chief suspects: comets.”
  • Most of Earth’s Water Came from Asteroids, Not Comets (Charles Q. Choi on; “Today’s asteroids have very little water — that’s clear,” Altwegg added. “But that was probably not always the case. During the Late Heavy Bombardment 3.8 billion years ago, at that time, asteroids could have had much more water than they could now.”

Because the early Earth probably lost most of its atmosphere when the moon formed (via an impact, according to popular theory), many planetary scientists have looked to comets, with all their volatiles, as possible delivery storks to birth the oceans.  It was known to be a problem that the deuterium ratios didn’t match, but perhaps that was due to sampling error.  Now, the Rosetta orbiter shows that the ratio is even worse than thought.

But could dry asteroids replace them as water balloons? (see 11/03/09).  That seems even less likely, unless one imagines that they “could” have had more water in an unobservable period of the past.  Why, though, would asteroids’ deuterium ratios be any different from those in comets?

Whatever happened, evolutionists are sure that comets and asteroids and other “impactors” could have brought something better: the building blocks of life.

  • Giant impacts, planet formation and the search for life elsewhere (PhysOrg)
  • Asteroid impacts may have formed life’s building blocks (Science Magazine)

The further removed from empirical testing, the easier it is to speculate without fear of falsification.

Here’s another case of “wrong again” in planetary science.  The secularists should be weeping over this falsification of their decades-long speculation, not trying to paper it over with even more speculation.  They have no shame.  Do materialists know how the solar system formed, with the blue-jewel of Earth blessed with water?  Short answer: No.



(Visited 245 times, 1 visits today)


  • tjguy says:

    Choi says in his bold headlines: “Most of Earth’s Water Came from Asteroids, Not Comets”.

    This is terrible reporting – taking a hypothesis or guess and reporting it as fact!

    Who are these guys accountable to for their deceptive reporting? Their own news organizations should reign them in and teach them how to write.

    But then the thought crosses one’s mind that Choi has already been taught how to write and he is only doing as he was taught – to play footloose and fancy free with the facts and report beliefs and ideas as facts!

    And then they wonder why people are not willing to bow down and receive their writing as truth!

  • John C says:

    I do seriously believe that the best thing we can do at times is laugh in the evo-scientist’s face. The data from comets cannot tell us ANYTHING about asteroids. Asteroids are rockier than comets, so wouldn’t that require a heavier and longer bombardment of Earth, also a longer time for Earth to cool, than what even the evos will allow?

  • John C says:

    The Nat Geo article had a direct link to the ESA report. I like their cautious logic better: “Rosetta fuels debate over origin of Earth’s oceans.” (paraphrased). They also, however, hop on the asteroid water-source bandwagon.

    Addendum to my previous comment: And wouldn’t a bombardment period for asteroids that brought the volume of water they’re speaking of, essentially EVAPORATE the water they brought?

Leave a Reply