05-12-2012, 02:00 AM
A quote from what the current theory that the main stream is touting(the BBC):
"The researchers believe Vesta formed within two million years of the first solids coming together in the Solar System, before the planets we know today were assembled."
So this object they call Vesta supposedly formed a couple million years before the rest of the planets started forming. But then why didn't all those asteroids collect into a planet if they had a big head start on the rest of the planets?? Do they even hear themselves? They just haven't thought of reversing it, and realizing it was a planet. Or they have heard that "theory" and are specifically avoiding any theory on it being the core of a blown up planet.
"The researchers believe Vesta formed within two million years of the first solids coming together in the Solar System, before the planets we know today were assembled."
So this object they call Vesta supposedly formed a couple million years before the rest of the planets started forming. But then why didn't all those asteroids collect into a planet if they had a big head start on the rest of the planets?? Do they even hear themselves? They just haven't thought of reversing it, and realizing it was a planet. Or they have heard that "theory" and are specifically avoiding any theory on it being the core of a blown up planet.