Further Depletion of Accretion Hypothesis

Secular scientists have several suggestions supposedly explaining the start of the planets. None of them work. Every naturalistic explanation for the origin of the universe and the planets has serious flaws. Interestingly, even though what is observed in our own solar system baffles evolutionary cosmogonists and cosmologists, they seem to think that the accretion speculation (the most popular) will hold together.

Artist's concept of Kepler in the distant solar system.
Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech

So the absurdity is extrapolated to exoplanets. However, the exoplanets are making things worse, not better, for evolutionary ideas about the universe. Really, the evidence supports recent creation by the Designer.
Astrophysicists, are being ‘knocked into a cocked hat’ by the results from the planet-finding Kepler space observatory. Almost a thousand new ‘exo-planets’ have been confirmed and another four thousand candidates are waiting to be assessed.

So what’s the problem? Well, the original theory of planet formation was derived to explain the only system we knew of at the time—our own. When others were being discovered astronomers expected them to be at least somewhat like our own. That hope has been dashed. The more planetary systems we find, the more our own world stands out as the exception rather than the rule. Naturalism is no great friend of novelty—it likes to see one theory explain all. Weird worlds require weird explanations, and the more the weirdness mounts up the less and less explanatory power remains in the conventional theory. They now have a “mess of models, which have grown almost as exotic and plentiful as the planets they seek to explain.”
You can read the rest of the article by clicking on "Planetary formation theory in chaos".