The atmospheres are most notable for what they lack: "We find no evidence for water in the spectrum, and all the theorists will tell you that there should be water (in the form of vapor) in the atmosphere[s] of these planets,"
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?cha...0F154D9C9A7D67

Cosmo-evolutionists sure do have a lot of work ahead of them don't they?

not as much as your local mental health care workers you dumbass motherfucker.

Cosmo-evolutionists? Give me a fucking break.

You're right though, scientists do have work ahead of them, but don't think they won't be able to do it.

You sure are a master at not reading the entire article:

But for the sake of argument, let's take the data at face value and say that these two planets really do contain absolutely no water. All that would mean is that the current theory of planet formation is wrong and needs to be modified to account for all of the data. What does this have to do with creationism?

And this is why creationists make poor scientists.

also why scientists make poor creationists

:lol::lol: I pity the fool!

You must mean "cosmologists." As in the group of scientists who diligently try to understand the formation of cosmic objects.

Because that has nothing to do with the evolutionary model.

Just sayin.

As to missing water: well, I'm sure you'll keep up-to-date on the development of this story, waiting for the annoucement of a perfectly naturalistic explanation. After all, you're really just reporting a story-in-progress.

Like when the police say: "we have no tenable leads at this time in our murder investigation." You obviously wouldn't take that to mean, "No one committed this homicide." You would expect further investigation that would, eventually, lead to the discovery of the killer. Even if the killer was never identified -- like the Zodiac, or Jack the Ripper -- you still understand that a human person did, in fact, commit a physical murder.

Or do you think that the victims of the Zodiac and JtR were actually killed by angels/demons/ghosts/leprechauns simply because a human perpetrator was never conclusive identified?

how about the simple fact that science allows us to determine what is in the atmosphere of planets in other fucking solar systems that are free of christologists. jesus H khrist!. That is a step in the right direction.

Theists should not be allowed to post in the Science forum until they have actually demonstrated that they know something about science.

"This" has less to do with creationism and more to do with Cosmo-evolutionist predictions being wrong. And yes water "may" be hiding at HD 209458 but so could the Easter bunny.

Let's see, the very first instances of information about extra-solar planet atmospheres is unexpected and, like all information, tentative. So we will jump on it as scientifically proven that there is no water on any planet outside the solar system and we will demand an explanation how life could evolve anywhere when there are places in the universe without water.

Yes, it will be difficult for cosmologists to explain how a planet that may have formed in a region of space without water would not have any in its atmosphere. Or maybe not...

This kind of stupidity proves that Adam and Eve did NOT eat of any fruit of knowledge and therefore God doesn't exist.

Call them what you wish, I call them Cosmo-evolutionists because they assume the universe formed/evolved and wasn't created by God.

I have no doubt there will be a naturalistic explanation to this story. Both creationism and cosmo-evolution deal with the universe and because of that either are a natural explanation. I look forward to further investigation.

p.s.
I think all murder victims are killed by human beings. Do you actually think our universe always exists or that it somehow brought itself into existence just because God has never been conclusively identified?

You would think since the universe formed/evolved, planets with a crap load of hydrogen and oxygen in em would have water... silly me. Or maybe not...

Kate, oh, Kate....where's a nice troll piccy for "xans", this lump of excrement posing as a psuedo-intellectual rebuker of standard science?