Mars atmosphere, that black hole, and the missing mantle material

21 Jul 2013

At ... there is a report on two papers concerning the atmosphere of Mars as collated by NASAs Curiosity Rover - taking samples and measuring abundances of different gases and isotopes. Isotopes are variants of the same chemical element - such as carbon 12 and carbon 13. The instrument onboard looked at ratios of heavy to lighter isotopes of carbon and oxygen. This is said to confirm the atmosphere of Mars has largely been lost - it is thought it once had a much thicker atmosphere than at present (it is in fact pretty thin). This is necessary if liquid water was a feature of the past. More information is available at and

At ... the Herschel space telescope spotted a huge cloud of hot gas close to the black hole at the heart of the Milky Way. The data revealed the presence of carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen, as well as water, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen cyanide etc.

At ... the puzzle of missing bits in the mantle of the Earth may be on the verge of being solved. You might not have known there was a puzzle - but that is because they did not want you to know. It is definitely not the sort of thing fed to Joe Public. We get the theories - and the simulations (presented as facts) and they know about the problems that cause the puzzles. How many more puzzles are there that are being hidden away?

This particular puzzle appears to be that in the standard model the Earth was created out of the collision of asteroids. These went on to create bigger bodies, out of the rubble, eventually cooling to become the planets, but unfortunately the composition of the Earth nowhere resembles the composition of meteors (known to be the result of collisions and violent space events). Meteorites are in effect the small particles broken off after asteroid collisions - and some kind of agreement should exist between their composition and that of Earth's crust (but there is none).The problem actually appears to be the idea of uniformitarianism itself.

The puzzle appears to be the fact that when uranium decays naturally over uniformitarian timescales it should leave behind it rocks that are higher in lead than uranium - but mainstream has not been able to find them. It is assumed they have disappeared, swallowed by the mantle, which is where Plate Tectonics is seamlessly sown into the uniformitarian hypothesis. No proof that rocks high in lead and low in uranium (having decayed) exist - or so it was thought. The authors of a new paper have other ideas. They think they have an explanation - but is it smoke and mirrors produced by simulation techniques (clouding actual reality)?

Much of the crust is formed of rocks with a high ratio of uranium to lead (uranium naturally decays over time) but according to consensus planetary evolution this means that in the mantle somewhere there are rocks with a low ratio of uranium to lead (which has decayed over uniformitarian time). The problem appears to involve Plate Tectonics theory too - as in this theory the older rock is subducted into the mantle (and conveniently, all the uniformitarian rocks with decayed uranium). One cannot help but be suspicious - if you are that way inclined. However, researchers at MIT claim to have pinpointed exactly where this heavily loaded with lead rock exists - and it involves a hidden flux, hidden until now (and revealed by twiddling around with objects on a computer screen). These rocks crystallise beneath island arcs, those strings of volcanoes at the boundary of tectonic plates.

As tectonic plates push against each other, the consensus theory goes, one plate subducts, or slides under another plate - pushing material from the crust into the mantle. At the same time molten material from the mantle rises up to the crust and is ejected by volcanoes - which should include material heavy in lead. According to the MIT computer models a lot of the rock heavy in lead sinks back down again (it weighs too much apparently) and therefore does not emerge into daylight. They are able to assure the reader there is tons of this stuff in the mantle - fighting to come out but somehow forced to sink back down again. The problem of course is that no one can actually measure or peer at the material that makes up the mantle - it is below the crust. What we have, therefore, is an educated guess - but no doubt you will see this fully explained as fact in future text books on the subject.

The problem of course is that no one can actually see what the mantle looks like - or what it is composed of. Plate Tectonics here is rather convenient for the uniformitarian consensus as it has the ability to explain why rocks high in lead and low in uranium do not exist in the crust - having being removed by subduction. No wonder uniformitarians are suspicious of Inflating Earth people - their ideas might let the Creationists in. We may note here that the idea there are rocks high in lead and low in uranium is entirely conjecture, a sort of educated guess. They may well be right and the paper, in Earth and Planetary Science Letters, goes on to say that at least one of the authors conducted field research - to northern Pakistan, between 2000 and 2007. A team of people went there to look at some unusual rocks. These are said to be rocks high in lead (and therefore deficient in uranium, with the assumption being that the latter has decayed). The theory then developed from there - and is not solely driven by computer simulation (and therefore the inherent criticism above is not warranted).

The researchers also say they applied mathematical calculation and it was found that 70 per cent of the magma that rises out of the mantle will drop back down - especially any material heavy in lead. They apply this statistic to various volcanic hot spots such as the Andes chain, the Cascade Range, and so on, and they found the amount that dropped down equals the compsotion and quantity of the missing reservoir of decayed uranium rock. Magic. See also July 16th