You may note that heaven and Earth are both physical. (Not that that term would have any meaning to the authors of Genesis.)
Except at the point they were not. You are arguing a point with those who do not agree with me, so where does that put you? Who are these authors you are questioning, and how do you know they cannot tell the difference between what is or is not physical? Is what we call spiritual, physical?
You claim they did not understand what they wrote, and yet most creation stories, at the beginning. make the distinction that there was a named being before everything else existed. You make it sound like they were pretty good at putting their thought in some "printed" form, but had no idea what those thoughts were or even meant.
Well, for one, gas giants tend to be a whole lot bigger than the size of Earth or Mars.
At what point in the process do they get to pick their pre-determined size?
Well, luckily there are plenty of folks who do that for us. See picture below. (You may note that the rings of Saturn from no viewpoint anywhere point to Pluto, whose orbit is an ellipse. Although normally anyone might surmise that a circle does never 'point' to an ellipse, I thought a nice graphical representation might clarify it for you.)
Your example did not even include Pluto. And what is the deal with making the asteroid belt look like it has more mass than all the planets combined?
Pluto's orbit is unusual, and what is trying to be said is that the orbit falls inline with the rings of Saturn as if formed from there. Pluto was pulled away, allegedly in a way that kept it's same orbital plane as Saturn's rings, but now it orbits the sun in that plane. Now there is only one point in Saturn's orbit that aligns with this plane, but that is ok, because Pluto only left once, and one would have to plot back in time to prove if such an alignment happened in accord to the cycle of the 3600 year wandering planet. Unfortunately or Fortunately for some skeptics, we do not have a firm date on when this planet can be successfully "mapped". However if we started at the first point of impact and calculated out every 3600 year appearance we may get some indication as to what happens every 3600 years. The problem with that is we do not know what positions were, where they were, their speeds, nor interactions. We would have to map things back from this point to find the intersection(s), taking into consideration any rate of expansion going on. Assuming that the earth has been doing it's thing for 4.6 billion years there have been 1,277,777 encounters to map out. In fact it is at .77778 meaning that it is a little over .2222 from happening again. If my math is correct 800 years. So the last appearance was 784 BC. The one before that would be 4384 BC. The one before that would be 7984 BC. The one before that would be 11584 BC.
784 was supposed to be the start of the Olympic Games, but riots and unhappiness caused the games to be delayed then and again in 780. The first games were not until 776.
In 7000 BC the English Channel formed.
In 7640 BC theorized time for impact of Tollmann's hypothetical bolide with Earth and the associated global cataclysm...
What result did you get? Somebody already did the math and came up with 24.8 degrees, but they may not have measured the angle based on Saturn's position below the ecliptic. The axial tilt of Polaris would be the evidence, not Earth's...
According to the link from the Smithsonian, Pluto's plane is off 17 degrees from the plane of the rest of the planets. The 3600 year wanderer may also be in this plane with Pluto, and may have been influential in why Pluto has such a long orbit.
Gas giants didn't form this close to the sun, the solar wind pushed the gases out to the snow line and beyond.
Saying "this close" is hardly relative when the disc first formed around the sun. Everything was closer if we are going with the Nice Model. There was some expansion that happened, which is hinted in the metaphor of splitting Tiamat. Strictly speaking Tiamat is not just the earth, but the earth as forming at the "center" of the system. Tiamat being split was not the earth, but the disc as a whole. When in fact the asteroid belt splits the outer planets from the inner planets. Earth only swapped spots with Mars, probably because it gained more density than Mars, and the attraction to the sun could have pulled it in closer. The earth swapped after the combining impact, because that is when it gained mass and the result was a higher density. The first impact was the separation of the disc. That is why no planet formed there, but the earth was far enough to gain the attributes of a gas giant. However while it was forming, there was a "counter" forming denser planet with properties of the inner planets. For the first 3600 years, they may have been at opposite points from each other. Every 3600 years, they were effected by this visitor. The inner type planet would have started to be drawn in and it's speed would have been increasing in comparison with the earth, but because there were times this wandering planet was around it influenced their eventually combining impact. After the earth forming impact the earth was getting further from the zone this visitor travels through, and that may have been when it started to influence Pluto's orbit. Now when the account speaks of winds, that may be the number of times this wanderer came for a visit? The army that Tiamat was forming was the planets and moons. It was viewed as an "assembly" to stop this "invading" wanderer.
I read the link, I remember it from the past. You'll have to quote him, I dont know where he showed the Earth could not be the remains of a planet that formed at the asteroid belt. He knows Sitchin's theory claims the Earth is part of the junk and the relevant evidence depends on how much mass was there >4bya, not how much there is now.
