Phaeton, The Lost Planet: Chapter Two, by J. Timothy Unruh


The theory that a planet once existed in the present asteroid belt, sometimes called the disruption theory, addresses certain peculiarities inherent in the planetoids themselves and their realm as well as some important external presuppositions as they bear on astronomy as a science. With the fact of the planetesimal filled anomalous gap between Mars and Jupiter already established as evidence for the existence of a former planet in that realm we take the grounds for this consensus in order as follows:

a. The planetoids are much smaller than any of the other primary planets.

b. They are irregular-shaped, fragment-like bodies.

c. The bulk of them are at the same distance from the Sun.

d. The orbits of the planetoids are distributed throughout the entire volume of space at their distance from the Sun being stable against planetary perturbations, and evidence themselves as being remnants of a much larger original population from which the escaping and unstable orbits have been eliminated.

e. Their periodic revolutions are accomplished in a reasonably similar time.

f. The orbits of the planetoids are "ultra-zodiacal," in other words they exhibit a departure from the plane of the ecliptic to a degree not matched by any of the major solar system bodies, save possibly Pluto, which itself might possibly represent a pair of surviving satellites of Neptune or an extinct planet beyond. The indication is that an applied force has thrown many of the planetoids out of the plane of the original orbit of their singular parent body.

g. The orbits of many planetoids are more eccentric than those of the other primaries,

h. The orbits of many of the planetoids cross each other which, save for some of the comets, is a perfect anomaly in the solar system.

i. The asteroids exhibit "explosion signatures" in the distribution of and relationship between their orbital elements, an effect first discovered to hold among fragments of artificial satellites circling the earth which exploded in orbit. j. There are still some 1000 or so planetoids larger than one-half mile in diameter moving in Earth-crossing orbits despite the fact of the inevitable elimination of such objects by the Earth through collisions given enough time. Such a circumstance would indicate a recent source or the necessity of a continuous production of these objects, the latter being untenable.

k. The mere presence of zodiacal dust in the solar system today is indicative of a recent major dust producing event which poured enormous amounts of material into the same regions.

l. The extremely elongated orbits of comets which themselves are volatile planetoids visible from Earth as the "great comets" is indicative of fragments raining back for the first time onto the site of the breakup. They are kept in deep freeze for most of their orbits thus conserving their volatiles.

Realistically it can be interpreted that "long period" comets, those with slightly open or "hyperbolic" orbits, in reality never quite escaped the gravitational field of the Sun while the "short period" comets, typified by Halley's comet, were fixed in more of an interplanetary periodicity. Many of the short period comets approach the Sun often enough to "burn off" their frozen gas or ice, ultimately reducing them to meteoroid streams of which many exist in the vicinity of the inner solar system. Some of these often intercept the Earth. The exploded planet theory is the only dynamically viable alternative to the "Oort" cloud, the latter requiring the existence of an implausible realm of comets orbiting the Sun at unimaginable distances. Only a recent catastrophic origin for comets systematically explains their present existence. m. The composition of much of the asteroidal debris between Mars and Jupiter is now known to be heavy dense metallic material indicating an origin within a parent body of considerable size. Many other exhibits, such as these, in the cosmos and in the solar system clearly indicate a recent planetary catastrophe within our midst. The total estimated united mass of the asteroids presently known to exist is rather small, being equivalent to only about one tenth the mass of the Moon, which would be understandable in terms of an explosion.

The orbits of two well known short period comets are shown in this exhibit; Famous Halley's which returns every 76 years, and Encke which has the shortest known period of any comet at three and a half years. The open ended orbit of the great comet of 1811 which has been seen only once is also shown. The approximate orbits of several asteroids with cornet like orbits are also shown as well.

Given its prominence in current theories, the causality of Jupiter as an explanation for the asteroid belt is an issue that deserves to be addressed by itself. The premise, which is quite popular among scientists today, is that the asteroids represent the residue of a planet that never formed because of the powerful gravitational interference of massive Jupiter just beyond the asteroid belt which prevented the planet from forming. In reality, Jupiter is not really "just beyond," but far beyond the asteroid belt. A circle with a diameter twice the Earth-Sun distance could fit between the asteroids and Jupiter with a generous portion of space to spare on either side. Thus the distance is so great that the asteroids are actually considerably closer to Earth than they are to Jupiter. Secondly, the bulk of the asteroids circulate in relatively stable orbits at around 2.8 A.U. from the Sun, not showing any significant perturbations induced by the giant planet after all. (A.U. = astronomical unit, which is the average distance between the Earth and Sun, or 93,000,000 miles) To bring the matter closer to home, there would seem to be a far greater potential for a gravitational affect on Venus by the Earth than by Jupiter on the asteroids, yet the orbit of Venus is one of the most stable and perfectly symmetrical of any planetary circulation in the solar system. In fact the planet itself is found within a relatively crowded sector of the solar system where the potential for orbital perturbations would seem to be significantly greater than anywhere else. According to the "laws" of Isaac Newton (1643-1727) gravity functions along an inverse square law principle.

Although a very large planet, Jupiter is not the likely cause of a planetary malformation or disruption. Jupiter's gravity is known to be something less than three times that of Earth, yet the distance between Jupiter and the asteroid belt is nearly ten times the distance between Venus and Earth. Insofar as pulling in comets from a supposed Oort cloud or effecting the zone where the asteroids now exist, calculations show that Jupiter never "profoundly influenced" the belt in any manner and is incapable of the celestial gyrations that are often assigned to it in order to make the hypothesis work. Even if the original planet was gradually pulled close to Jupiter and torn apart by the latter this would still not explain the stable circular orbit of the strewn bits and pieces still neatly located at the asteroid belt, again, a fact that stands out against the argument that the incident could have occurred near Jupiter. The association of Jupiter in any event is very tenuous at best. As for the nebular hypothesis it turns out to be not only poor science but poor deduction, not to mention poor theology, as we will see. The continued success of the nebular theory is bound up in nothing less than a long term historic bias in the scientific(?) establishment. The accretion concept of solar system formation is not only wholly out of step with the Biblical concept of creation, but mutually exclusive with it. The profound spacing of the planets can only be seen in context of Divine design. As well, the subsequent destruction of one planetary member can be viewed as an inevitable consequence of the entrance of ethical I discord, with physical results, into a once perfect universe.

Since his debut in Eden man has been called to subdue the world, not abuse it, carefully tending to it in terms of God's word as His vice regent. Science or knowledge, gained by thinking God's thoughts after Him, was the means by which man was to transform a wilderness into a vibrant inhabited world. This process was to involve an intimate knowledge of the nature, character, and attributes of God Himself. With man in intimate fellowship with God in the beginning this was no problem until his fall. The serpent in the garden was, of course, functioning under a different agenda, an agenda which had devastating historical consequences. It is these qualities of God that vitally come into play when regenerate man studies the sciences in general, and astronomy in particular. During the wilderness wanderings of the Israelites, recorded in the book of Exodus, God imparted a special administration of His spirit upon the workmen of the tabernacle. These were craftsmen, artificers, and other construction workers who received a special measure of ability, intelligence, and knowledge, from the Spirit of God, in order to finish an important building project. (Exodus 31:1-7) Likewise the Biblical Christian who possesses a permanent continual inner presence of God's life giving spirit has a special dispensation of divine ennoblement and wisdom (James 1:5) to extend God's kingdom on Earth through his or her own particular calling. This is no less true with the God revering astronomer who explores and diagnoses the physical heavens in terms of Divine revelation. This is what God first called Adam to do at Eden in the beginning and this is the quality that breaks the stalemate in fallen man's double minded gropings for knowledge, of which the battle between the adherents of special creation and evolution is but one example.

A catastrophic hypothesis has a profound affinity to the special creation account which in turn is integrally related to the Biblical ethic. It follows that the ultimate outcome of a catastrophic thesis is a personal realization of the Almighty. In other words the inevitable conclusion that oneself is indeed a creature of God is to recognize his own accountability. The latter is totally unacceptable to the infidel who today suppresses true science at an unprecedented degree by supplanting it with his own vain philosophy. The astronomer who gazes at the beauty, wonder, and majesty of what he sees in the heaven and who dares admit a possible divine origin of the cosmos is immediately confronted in his own personal conscience and must wrestle with the patient ethical issue for as long as he lives, or unless he finds himself able, by God's grace, to repent and believe thereby finding rest unto his soul as he turns his life over to the calling of Christ. It is only then that the door is open to a life giving rebirth in his own life, and a whole new dimension added in his world and life view, and his labors. The secular world at large wants nothing of this. The scientific, educational, and media establishments all have made this fact abundantly clear by their decidedly anti-Christian posture. Yet this is the eternal message of astronomy.

We must look at the Earth, the asteroids, and the stars in the overall context of a cosmos which has been tainted by the entrance of iniquity since the time of creation. The word cosmos comes from the Greek kosmos which refers to the orderly arrangement of the whole of creation and its inhabitant host of which all exist under the personal superintendence, provision, and care of the Almighty. He alone, and in His own time, is able to intercede in judgment as well as in the restoration of that order. The word astronomy itself comes from two Greek words joined together which means "star law," or the law of the stars. The word science means "knowledge" and therefore includes only that which we actually know, by direct observation and experience. Science is the organized body of factual knowledge and relationships. Beyond that we should not limit our source of knowledge to reason or logic alone, but extend our sources of information to include Divine revelation. It is in the process of true science and in the context of Divine revelation that we ought to look at the minor planets and their circumstances, history, and destiny. It is man's prerogative to bring all this knowledge together in his own collective superintendence as God's vice regents upon the Earth.

It had been argued by Galileo several centuries ago that the Sun was the center of the universe not the Earth. In spite of the lack of evidence to support the heliocentric system the humanists adopted it and heralded the death of the Bible as the word of God and, as a result, the death of Christianity as a reasonable faith. Contributing to the defeat of the Bible as the authority in nature were many names which have since become famous. Among the most notable are Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo. The latter had said "the Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go." This is the kind of thinking that has left modern science ethically, methodically, and systematically destitute. The Copernican Revolution, as this change of view is called, was not just a revolution in astronomy, but it also spread into politics and theology. It ultimately lead to the rise of uniformitarianism in geology, evolution in biology, and relativity in philosophy, physics, and mathematics. All of this is the background of what is served up for public consumption by the scientific and educational establishments and the controlled media today. The stage was set for the age of Bible criticism. Thus the Bible is no longer widely accepted as the framework for a vital world and life view.

Nevertheless, the argument that "the Bible is not a textbook of science" is a fallacy of false observation. The implication is that the Bible contains scientific errors. Obviously the Bible is not a textbook on quantum mechanics or biochemistry. It is obvious too that the Bible is not a scientific textbook in the sense of giving detailed technical descriptions and mathematical formulations of natural phenomena. But this is not an adequate reason for questioning the objective accuracy of the numerous portions of Scripture which do deal with natural phenomena and historic events. Even though the Bible is not a textbook on mathematics per se, we can, although, for instance, expect that Daniel understands sixty-nine weeks by the phrase, "seven weeks and sixty-two weeks" (Daniel 9:25). The Bible is not, strictly speaking, a historical textbook either, but we expect that when it alludes to things which can be historically verified, it should be accurate. Likewise, the Bible is not technically a textbook of modern science, but when it refers to things which can be measured or checked by modern science, it should be accurate. The Bible is the inerrant, authoritative Word of God Himself; therefore it can be depended upon to provide the starting presuppositions for the scientist to perform his work investigating the ancient Earth and the physical heaven. The Bible with its perfect claim to authority based on the authority of Jesus Christ (Matthew 5:17-18; John 10:34-35) clearly establishes a framework of interpretation within which men are expected to formulate their understanding of the data of science. It is most reasonable and gracious of God to do so, since it would be impossible for man by the study of present processes to know anything for certain either about the ancient past, or the distant future, for that matter. Only God can know these things for He alone was a witness present at the beginning. We are able to know the truth about these matters only through faith in God's statements concerning them. Therefore, the believing Christian who has come to know God finds that He is indeed trustworthy. Just as faith in a reliable human friend comes from getting to know him, or her, faith in God comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. Thus "faith" is not just positive thinking or speculative optimism, it is a vital substance of a personal relationship between the creature and his Creator. Therefore, the believing Christian goes to the Bible, God's Word, for his basic orientation in all departments of truth. The Bible, in that context, is indeed a textbook for science as well as the guide to spiritual truth. In the course of things, when the Bible does touch upon matters of physical processes it can be counted upon as being reliable as an important source of data for the scientist. The tragedy of the scientific revolution, so called, is that through its fallacious reasoning we consequently live in a decidedly post Christian, hence non-Christian, world. This is why most scientists, like bad marksmen, keep missing the "target," that distinction between falsehood and ultimate truth. Thus, they continue to grope among themselves, as the blind leading the blind.



This engraving which appeared in a prestigious London journal in 1814 illustrates a well authenticated discovery widely reported in the scientific journals of the early nineteenth century.

The fossil, discovered in 1812 on the coast of the French Caribbean island of Guadaloupe, consists of a skeleton, fully human in every respect and complete except for the feet and head. It was identified as that of a healthy woman about five feet two inches tall. Although many of the bones were somewhat twisted and the joints dislocated, the skeleton was fully articulate - every bone in its proper position. The limestone in which the skeleton was embedded was extremely hard and part of a formation, according to modern day geology, dated at 28 million years old.

The vitally important feature of this fossil, that it is obviously human, is undoubtedly the reason why it is not presently on display at the museum or even mentioned in textbooks today. This fossil of a perfectly modern human being presents a very difficult problem for evolutionary theorists to explain because, in their context, it places man 25 million years earlier than he was supposed to have evolved from a monkey like creature. Not only that, but according to Charles Darwin, man originated from old world, not new world, monkeys. Modern looking man was not supposed to have migrated to the Americas until some 20,000 years ago. Hence this specimen has been explained away as an "intrusive burial."

The fossil lady has spent much time collecting dust in the basement of the British Museum, in seclusion with the fraudulent Piltdown fossils, as relics of embarrassment to conventional dogma. When this two ton limestone block was originally placed on display it was regarded as evidence of the great Genesis Flood and a reminder of past divine judgment on Earth. In that day when men still had freedom to publish their discoveries, Lyell and Darwin with their demand for millions of years were yet decades in the future. A "rediscovery" of the Lady from Guadaloupe has been made late in our own century by a breed of archaeologists untrammeled by "formal" teachings, who recently had opportunity to reexamine the slab.

Copyright © 1995, 1996. All Rights Reserved. Published by RUHE COMPANY, P.O. Box 1034, Rocklin, California 95677-1034. No portion of this book may be reproduced in any form whatsoever without written permission from the publisher. Internet edition, January 17, .1997

Book order form
Table of Contents
Proceed to Chapter Three
Back to Lambert Dolphin's Library