Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Moon Not Billions Years Old!
Pravda ^ | October 9, 2009 | Babu G. Ranganathan

Posted on 10/10/2009 9:34:02 AM PDT by bogusname

According to evolutionists, our moon is nearly as old as the Earth and, from the rate of unimpeded meteors hitting the moon's surface over billions of years, there should be many feet of lunar dust on the moon's surface.

(Excerpt) Read more at english.pravda.ru ...


TOPICS: Apologetics; General Discusssion; Religion & Science; Theology
KEYWORDS: creationists; evolutionists; geologists; moon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

1 posted on 10/10/2009 9:34:02 AM PDT by bogusname
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bogusname

Pravda being Pravda I see.. I’m surprised they didn’t bring aliens into the mix.. oh wait..never mind..


2 posted on 10/10/2009 9:39:51 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bogusname

It’s an argument that goes back 50 years, and is still valid.

They made the moon lander’s ladder too short and gave the lander “duck feet” as they expected it to sink into a few feet of dust. The following day’s newspapers had articles like “Where was the dust?”

That said, Pravda is ALWAYS looking for a way to make the USA look bad, so I’m not even going to bother with the article. There are other sources which expound this point.


3 posted on 10/10/2009 9:42:32 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

I feel that same way about anything coming from Russia but it’s actually a good article.


4 posted on 10/10/2009 9:43:43 AM PDT by bogusname (Banish All Lliberals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bogusname

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080924191552.htm


5 posted on 10/10/2009 9:44:02 AM PDT by wolfcreek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsd7DGqVSIc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bogusname

What! No green cheese?


6 posted on 10/10/2009 9:44:14 AM PDT by reg45 (Be calm everyone. The idiot children are in charge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bogusname

I’ll venture a guess: maybe when the moon gets struck by meteor that some of the dust is ejected at such velocity so as to escape lunar gravity? Hey, it’s a theory!


7 posted on 10/10/2009 9:45:52 AM PDT by Tallguy ("The sh- t's chess, it ain't checkers!" -- Alonzo (Denzel Washington) in "Training Day")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

Yeah, but all the calculations for “billions of years” say it should be over 20 feet deep.


8 posted on 10/10/2009 9:46:38 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

I know just what you’re talking about and I agree. No, this is a long article that debunks quite a bit of the evolutionist doctrine.


9 posted on 10/10/2009 9:47:37 AM PDT by bogusname (Banish All Lliberals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy
I’ll venture a guess: maybe when the moon gets struck by meteor that some of the dust is ejected at such velocity so as to escape lunar gravity? Hey, it’s a theory!

Or, there's an "equilibrium point" at which subsequent impacts start fusing as much of the existing dust back into solid crust at the center as they create at the periphery.

10 posted on 10/10/2009 9:48:31 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out
Yeah, but all the calculations for “billions of years” say it should be over 20 feet deep.

Actually not. Calculations that have the moon in a closed environment say this, but one thing that early calculations didn't take into account were solar winds which are stronger than the gravitational forces holding 'moon dust' down. We didn't know much about these at the time as space flight was new.

11 posted on 10/10/2009 9:49:08 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

The cleaning lady comes every Wednesday.


12 posted on 10/10/2009 9:49:29 AM PDT by humblegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

escape velocity = sqrt(2gR), g = GM/R^2 so escape velocity = sqrt(2GM/R) where M is the mass in kg, R the radius in m, G the gravitational constant in SI units, and the velocity comes out in m/s.

I’m guessing 2 or 3 miles per second for the moon. It’s about 8 miles/second for Earth.

Very, very little gets that kind of speed.


13 posted on 10/10/2009 9:49:59 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

“solar winds which are stronger than the gravitational forces holding ‘moon dust’ down”

lol. whatever you say mac.


14 posted on 10/10/2009 9:51:01 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: bogusname
..but it’s actually a good article.

Not really. For example, the Hawaiian lava dating. Any scientist worth his salt knows to account for 'old carbon' coming up from the deep oceans (water mass age) which can flaw readings if you look at the lava on its own. Pretty much every place that is tested has this variable accounted for. This article makes the same false assumptions as several I've read on the subject, not taking into account the scientists know about the variable they have to put into the calculation based on the location for existing carbon. http://www.divediscover.whoi.edu/hottopics/dating.html

15 posted on 10/10/2009 9:53:40 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind


16 posted on 10/10/2009 9:54:06 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

What about solar winds or the draft from colliding objects?

The Moon had 83% less gravity than Earth so, the dust might not necessarily all come back to the surface.


17 posted on 10/10/2009 9:54:36 AM PDT by wolfcreek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsd7DGqVSIc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

OK, I gotchya. I understand where you’re coming from. I believe the Biblical account. Sorry to bother you.


18 posted on 10/10/2009 9:58:05 AM PDT by bogusname (Banish All Lliberals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek
dust might not necessarily all come back to the surface.

Most of it has ended up in my house......

19 posted on 10/10/2009 9:58:22 AM PDT by Hot Tabasco (Who's your Long Legged MacDaddy?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bogusname
This is just silly. Honest and informed people can and do still debate about the origin of the Moon. There's evidence in the conservation of momentum, for example, pointing away from the "Mar-sized Impact with Proto-Earth" theory to the "capture" theory, for example.

Wild-eyed claims based on ignorance about the dynamics of lunar dust are entertaining but not helpful, and are probably less than useless.

20 posted on 10/10/2009 10:01:12 AM PDT by Prospero (non est ad astra mollis e terris via)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson