Strange Asteroids Baffle Scientists
Raver32 writes to mention that two nearby asteroids may be evidence of a new class of asteroid or long eroded mini-world. Mineral evidence gathered using photometric data shows these asteroids to contain basalt not normally found in asteroid belt objects. "The lack of basalt and another mineral, olivine, in asteroid belt objects has long puzzled scientists. These two minerals would have formed the crust and mantle, respectively, of belt objects the size of Vesta or larger; theory predicts that more than half of all asteroids should be composed of one or the other of these substances"
That's no asteroid....
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
I just wish people in other fields, politics, religion, law, philosophy, etc would admit when they are baffled as readily as the scientists do. For all the amount of explanations they offer and advance understanding of nature, these scientists seem to delight on admitting they are baffled at the drop of a hat.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
>> When the facts don't fit the theory of evolution, maybe it's time to look for new "facts." Well here we go again. Actually facts against the theory of evolution would be really interesting to most biologists. They would mean we don't know something. However, just because a piece of information is posted on a creationist web site doesn't make it a "fact". It's actually the creationists who are looking for new facts; they just haven't found them. Consider this: it's actually much easier to disprove a theory than to prove one. If creationism were true, it would be glaringly obvious. Historically, scientists were dragged kicking and screaming to the theory of evolution, because nothing else fit the facts.
"I see you're trying to start a flame war by inserting pseudo-religious dogma into a scientific discussion. Can I help you with that?"
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net