I suppose you believe this article --
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110907132044.htm , and that the meteor was formed from dust in outer space? Before this you were saying gold was formed on earth when the planet was forming. Thus, I asked why isn't the gold spread out? You couldn't answer that. Now, you've found this meteor theory. The meteor theory is rampant throughout so called evolutionary thinking. For example, when evo thinking gets stuck, they use the meteor as another way that life can start on another planet. I used it once against atheists in stating that if any life exists outside of earth such as the moon, then it was brought from earth. For example, a meteor chunk from earth with microbes on it hit the moon. The evos said no that can't happen. Evo thinking says the moon was formed when a chunk of the earth was tossed into space. These people want their cake and eat it, too. Much of evo thinking is the same way. It's part of their imaginary beliefs.
I don't believe that I have to answer questions that are so easily explained by well-written and referenced articles. It would be a better use of everyone's time if those articles were actually read, as part of the flow of conversation, instead of constantly criticized for simply existing...
(Point of reference, I have been able to respond to sections of your links in previous engagements
because I have actually taken the time to read them before responding to you. You have linked them, afterall, meaning that they are part of your statement or argument. I am generally well aware of the creationist position on certain topics, and don't need much more than a few paragraphs before I'm certain that I won't be reading anything new. But I still open them and read them so I can understand where you're coming from or what you're trying to say.)
To briefly address this part directly - yes. All objects in a solar system are an accumulation of various materials that were left over in the protoplanetary disk before forming into whatever their current iterations are. The materials that make up the Earth, the Moon, all of the other planets, moons, and all of the other system debris that currently orbits the sun are localized accumulations of the "dust" that began coalescing around our Sun as its mass (and thus gravity) increased. There is no other method by which these materials and objects could possibly exist if not for a previous synthesis in the belly of a former star.
For reference, and to make it clear that I am directly linking my explanation here to an article that I want you to read for any clarification that you might need, please see the following articles from Britannica:
nucleosynthesis | chemical process
accretion disk | astronomy
asteroid | astronomy
When you ask why gold isn't evenly distrubuted - you're actually asking why isn't
anything evenly distributed or at least consistently accessible. To answer that question, you need to know a little bit about weights, densities, formation, and geology. It would take a bunch of links to make it all clear, so I'll simplify it as much as possible... Some stuff sank to the core. Some stuff couldn't because of barriers formed while cooling. Some stuff was converted to different substances due to geologic processes. And some other stuff we simply don't know about. (There are still places we haven't been and things we haven't found - meaning our map isn't complete.)
So there you go. In order for gold to have come to this planet by outside sources (solar objects like comets, meteorites, etc) they would have had to first been available for accumulation during the accretion process at the early stages of system formation - meaning the elements preexisted in the "dust" that would become everything we've ever known... (See how it all works together?)
What I said about my gold beliefs were that a supernova exploded and then the gold that had formed inside it plopped into several places on earth. That's it. Thus, gold isn't everywhere. Most of it is underneath the surface deep in the ground. And what do you mean by syntheisized? I assume you're lumping gold with the other heavy elements.
The first part of your belief is accurate - that same process applies to every other element heavier than hydrogen and helium.
Gold, and all other elements, were formed under the same processes, basically the same way, just using different ingredients, quantities, temperatures, and pressures...
Another helpful article:
http://www.haystack.mit.edu/edu/pcr/Astrochemistry/3 - MATTER/nuclear synthesis.pdf
That's my hypothesis. My friend says that's one theory. We didn't have time to get into what he thought. There's others like your meteorite theory. Another is the colliding of neuron stars. Here's a link discussing the various thinking. Some creationists believe God created it (gold is mentioned many times, but no origins). Mine is similar to the one on top.
One of those ideas is not like the others...
No, I don't understand the points you are trying to make because you've read several articles and I haven't. You expect me to read these evo thinking articles, accept it as truth and then discuss with you. I'm arguing creation science views, so why do I need to be educated on that? Besides, I have my own sources to look up evo thinking. Thus, make an argument first instead of letting wikipedia or some article make it for you. I'll usually ignore people who do that.
If you want to be taken seriously in conversation about these topics, then yes. I want you to read well-established scientific articles and discuss these topics with a basic level of proficiency. I would want that of anyone. If you have a like or fascination with space at all, then
please spend more time learning about it and growing in that capacity. Just don't interject magic or ignorance where it doesn't belong. The reason that you can suggest in previous responses, for example, that Hubble photos from deep space are somehow images of the future is a good example of what happens when a mind is trying to make sense of something it doesn't yet grasp. That's not a dig. It's simply a true statement.
I have a cousin who thinks he can build an antigravity device using plans he found on the internet. We would both agree that there are some thing about basic science that he's overlooking, right? Correcting our thought processes is important.
Where did I say that? Now, you're putting words in my mouth. I said to explain how all the water on earth came to be? I haven't heard any fine tuning water argument, but maybe there is. Doesn't the necessity for water to start life come from evolutionary thinking?
"Moreover, the amount of water we have on the planet is so much that no other planet has it. Hawking confirms this by his fine-tuning and multiverse argument which I posted already, so I post for the crowd here. To balance it out, I post the fine-tuning argument by Eric Metaxas."
Verifiable evidence for creationism?
The water on this planet, and all other bodies in the solar system, came from the same place that the gold did... from the "dust" of the accretion disk. It was all part of the dense grouping of particles that existed in our little corner of the Universe just before our Sun began it's life - a place already filled with ejected elements that were formed in the bellies of long-extinct stars.
, what causes the nuclear fusion in these massive clouds (what's holding the cloud together as it spins)? The nebula theory all seems like a nice system to create galaxies, but how can something like this make everything work like our Milky Way galaxy?
