Moon theories out the window now too!

[dad]

Yep! Science is not perfect, and is constantly changing as more and more information is collected and analyzed.

The issue is what belief they use in analyzing the information and observations and evidence.

And yeah, science is people: you are asserting that scientists and those who have trust in science are incompetent, liars and easily fooled.

I was pointing out they are often wrong and base models on beliefs. You seem to be pointing out that they cannot get out of that rut and stop being duped?

Religion is also people: in your case, your "feeling" that scripture and God are infallible, not mistakes. And somehow, that seems to mean that YOU are not mistaken about anything...imagine that...

1Jo 5:20 - And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

 

[QuestioningMind]

As I see it, the truth is that God created the moon.

Thank you, oh wise and insightful dad for enlightening us to the TRUTH! Now we can stop wasting all of our time and energy on the silly scientific method to figure out how the universe works and instead turn to you to find out what your Magical Book has to say! You've doe mankind a GREAT service by starting this thread and awakening us all to our foolish and ignorant ways!

 

[dad]

Thank you, oh wise and insightful dad for enlightening us to the TRUTH! Now we can stop wasting all of our time and energy on the silly scientific method to figure out how the universe works and instead turn to you to find out what your Magical Book has to say! You've doe mankind a GREAT service by starting this thread and awakening us all to our foolish and ignorant ways!

I find that the demon Theia has more reality that the fantasy planet that made the moon you named after her.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I find that the demon Theia has more reality that the fantasy planet that made the moon you named after her.

MORE profound wisdom from the illustrious dad!

Now that you've convinced me that the scientific method is nothing but a fraud, I desperately need your help! My wife's idiot doctor bases all of his pretend 'knowledge' on the stupid scientific method and he claims that she has some 'disease' called diabetes and that the way to 'treat it' with injections of insulin. Now that I know that he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about I need to find out what your Magical Book says she should do to treat her condition. Is she actually possessed by a demon or evil spirit? If so, how does your Magic Book say we can cure her? Please, help.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

The issue is what belief they use in analyzing the information and observations and evidence.

I was pointing out they are often wrong and base models on beliefs. You seem to be pointing out that they cannot get out of that rut and stop being duped?



1Jo 5:20 - And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

 

[Native]

There is no reason to think that God making several similar moons means anything about imaginary hits actually.

I didn´t say "similar moons" but similar locked orbital motions of planetary moons:

"Several of the other planetary lunar motions shows a so called "locked orbit" as with the Moon which logically points towards a direct birth from their mother planets very early, "approximately 4.5 billion years ago" when the entire Solar System was made from a single molten hot sphere of "gas and dust" from where the planets divided from the coming Sun".

 

[dad]

MORE profound wisdom from the illustrious dad!

Now that you've convinced me that the scientific method is nothing but a fraud, I desperately need your help! My wife's idiot doctor bases all of his pretend 'knowledge' on the stupid scientific method and he claims that she has some 'disease' called diabetes and that the way to 'treat it' with injections of insulin. Now that I know that he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about I need to find out what your Magical Book says she should do to treat her condition. Is she actually possessed by a demon or evil spirit? If so, how does your Magic Book say we can cure her? Please, help.

Seeing your fable crumble must be traumatic. It shows.

 

[dad]

I didn´t say "similar moons" but similar locked orbital motions of planetary moons:

"Several of the other planetary lunar motions shows a so called "locked orbit" as with the Moon which logically points towards a direct birth from their mother planets very early, "approximately 4.5 billion years ago" when the entire Solar System was made from a single molten hot sphere of "gas and dust" from where the planets divided from the coming Sun".

Right, so we can tailor the reply to fit your understanding I guess. Having several moons with similar orbits does not mean God didn't make them. It may be a shock, but we do not need to imagine every possible scenario that could have resulted in such orbits. Concentrate on what you can prove. Is there some remains of Theia or other imaginary planets you can show us for example? Or is this ALL in your head?

 

[QuestioningMind]

Seeing your fable crumble must be traumatic. It shows.

Oh, I'm simply beside myself. You're profound insights have absolutely shattered the foundations upon which my entire concept of reality is based. Now that I realize that science is a complete fraud I have no alternative but to turn to you and your Magical Book for all of the answers.

So please, don't take too long in responding to my questions about my wife. I've kept her away from the evil insulin that idiotic 'science' promotes for her condition all day now, but I still need to know the TRUTH about how to properly treat her. Please give me proper direction ASAP.

 

[gnostic]

"The traditional hypothesis is that approximately 4.5 billion years ago there was a collision between Earth and a Mars-sized proto-planet (named Theia). Most scientists believe that that collision shot a large portion of Earth's metal-poor upper crust into orbit, eventually forming the Moon.

One puzzling aspect of this theory of the Moon's formation, has been that the Moon has a higher concentration of iron oxides than the Earth -- a fact well-known to scientists. This particular research contributes to the field in that it provides insights about a section of the moon that has not been frequently studied and posits that there may exist an even higher concentration of metal deeper below the surface. It is possible, say the researchers that the discrepancy between the amount of iron on the Earth's crust and the Moon could be even greater than scientists thought, which pulls into question the current understanding of how the Moon was formed."
Higher concentration of metal in Moon's craters provides new insights to its origin: New observations could challenge previous theories of how the Moon was formed

The article doesn’t debunk the Theia collision hypothesis, dad.

I don’t see anything in the article that discount the moon formation through collision. Much of the article pointed to that moon are more possibly metal-rich than they originally thought.

You do realise that the author (of the article) used the words “could be” or “may”.

When use these words like “may” or could be”, there is 50-50 probability that it “could be true” or “could be false”, so there is no finality to their investigation, yet.

MEANING, more investigation and researches are needed.

That’s what science should do - get more evidence, more data, more information - before any conclusion can be made with certainty.

All you are doing, is cherry picking article, without understanding what they are actually saying. But that’s typical habits coming from you, lazy scholarship and you being rabid anti-science.

 

[gnostic]

Right, so we can tailor the reply to fit your understanding I guess.

That’s exactly what you have been doing.

You cherrypicked articles to suit your biased agenda, without comprehending what the articles are actually saying, either to evaluate creationism or go on your usual anti-science tirade.

No one is taking you seriously, with your latest threads.

 

[dad]

Oh, I'm simply beside myself. You're profound insights have absolutely shattered the foundations upon which my entire concept of reality is based. Now that I realize that science is a complete fraud I have no alternative but to turn to you and your Magical Book for all of the answers.

So please, don't take too long in responding to my questions about my wife. I've kept her away from the evil insulin that idiotic 'science' promotes for her condition all day now, but I still need to know the TRUTH about how to properly treat her. Please give me proper direction ASAP.

Medicine has zero to do with origin fables.

 

[dad]

The article doesn’t debunk the Theia collision hypothesis, dad.

It shows the evidence doesn't fit the fable after all. Nothing could debunk the beliefs in some people.Remember, the beliefs of so called science cannot be falsified.

I don’t see anything in the article that discount the moon formation through collision. Much of the article pointed to that moon are more possibly metal-rich than they originally thought.

You do realise that the author (of the article) used the words “could be” or “may”.

What else can you use when talking about fables named after a Greek demon? The OP did say this though
"the discrepancy between the amount of iron on the Earth's crust and the Moon could be even greater than scientists thought, which pulls into question the current understanding of how the Moon was formed."

Consider your fable pulled into question.

MEANING, more investigation and researches are needed.

What could you investigate to find the imaginary planet? It was made up whole of cloth!

All you are doing, is cherry picking article, without understanding what they are actually saying. But that’s typical habits coming from you, lazy scholarship and you being rabid anti-science.

Fables are not science.

 

[dad]

That’s exactly what you have been doing.

You cherrypicked articles to suit your biased agenda, without comprehending what the articles are actually saying, either to evaluate creationism or go on your usual anti-science tirade.

No one is taking you seriously, with your latest threads.

You can take busted fables as seriously as you like. I don't see you debating what the articles say. Get off the high horse.

 

[gnostic]

Medicine has zero to do with origin fables.

Origin fables, like the 6-day creation, Adam and Eve, talking serpent and talking donkey, Noah and global Flood, Tower of Babel, the ten plagues, angel of death, raining manna, stopping the sun during battle, invasion of Canaan, David and Solomon, and so on. All myths.

 

[Native]

Native said: ↑
I didn´t say "similar moons" but similar locked orbital motions of planetary moons:

"Several of the other planetary lunar motions shows a so called "locked orbit" as with the Moon which logically points towards a direct birth from their mother planets very early, "approximately 4.5 billion years ago" when the entire Solar System was made from a single molten hot sphere of "gas and dust" from where the planets divided from the coming Sun".

Right, so we can tailor the reply to fit your understanding I guess. Having several moons with similar orbits does not mean God didn't make them. It may be a shock, but we do not need to imagine every possible scenario that could have resulted in such orbits. Concentrate on what you can prove. Is there some remains of Theia or other imaginary planets you can show us for example? Or is this ALL in your head?

I´m not tailoring anything here. I´m using scientific facts and logical analythic methods - and there is no "god" in my head to tell me anything.

I´m simply stating that planetary moons with a locked orbital motion, the so called tidal locking, are born directly from their mother planets. As such, there of course are no remains of a hypothesized "Theia" since such a collision never happen.

BTW: I don´t know why you´re opposing me - I´m in fact supporting your general OP in the linked article.

 

[dad]

Origin fables, like the 6-day creation, Adam and Eve, talking serpent and talking donkey, Noah and global Flood, Tower of Babel, the ten plagues, angel of death, raining manna, stopping the sun during battle, invasion of Canaan, David and Solomon, and so on. All myths.

You could never prove Adam was symbolic rather than real. Nor can you support your origin of the moon fables.

 

[dad]

Native said: ↑
I didn´t say "similar moons" but similar locked orbital motions of planetary moons:

"Several of the other planetary lunar motions shows a so called "locked orbit" as with the Moon which logically points towards a direct birth from their mother planets very early, "approximately 4.5 billion years ago" when the entire Solar System was made from a single molten hot sphere of "gas and dust" from where the planets divided from the coming Sun".

The similar locked orbits of moons do not mean they were not created.

I´m not tailoring anything here. I´m using scientific facts and logical analythic methods - and there is no "god" in my head to tell me anything.

What is analytic about noting orbits of moons in the solar system? There is nothing logical about looking at such orbits and attributing them to some direct birth in imaginary time.

I´m simply stating that planetary moons with a locked orbital motion, the so called tidal locking, are born directly from their mother planets.

In your dreams. There is no proof they were not created.

As such, there of course are no remains of a hypothesized "Theia" since such a collision never happen.

Through all this it seems you disagree with the commonly accepted moon formation theory?

BTW: I don´t know why you´re opposing me - I´m in fact supporting your general OP in the linked article.

I guess I got fooled by your citing imaginary time billions of years ago and some early solar system that never existed.

 

[Native]

I don’t see anything in the article that discount the moon formation through collision. Much of the article pointed to that moon are more possibly metal-rich than they originally thought.

Agreed, but the very idea of the Solar System Formation does discount this:

Quote:
"As the region that would become the Solar System, known as the pre-solar nebula, collapsed, conservation of angular momentum caused it to rotate faster. The centre, where most of the mass collected, became increasingly hotter than the surrounding disc. As the contracting nebula rotated faster, it began to flatten into a protoplanetary disc with a diameter of roughly 200 AU and a hot, dense protostar at the centre.

The planets formed by accretion from this disc, in which dust and gas gravitationally attracted each other, coalescing to form ever larger bodies. Hundreds of protoplanets may have existed in the early Solar System, but they either merged or were destroyed, leaving the planets, dwarf planets, and leftover minor bodies".
-------------
The Standard Model tries to explain the formation of the Moon with these similar principle motions "when planet "Theia" collided with the Earth", causing lots of debris which again accreted accordingly to this standard model.

If so, the Moon should ALSO have an "angular momentum rotation" of it´s own according to the entire theory, but it doesn´t as this is locked to the Earth, thus strongly suggesting the Moon to have been born directly out from the Earth when this still was "molten hot". And the same goes for other locked moons around other planets.

My conclusions:
Finding more lithium in the lunar meteor craters does not say anything about the formation of the Moon or its connection to the Earth.
The Moon is formed directly from the Earth.
The Standard Model "accretion explanation" of planetary formation doesn´t fit for the Moon. (If anywhere at all).

Relevant links here:
Lunar Theories - Lunar theory - Wikipedia
Orbit of the Moon - Orbit of the Moon - Wikipedia

 

[Native]

The similar locked orbits of moons do not mean they were not created.

What kind of argument is this? Oh, you´ll have your "god" to have created everything and ignore the term of "formation = creation" - and at the same time ignoring the factual motion in your "argument"?

What is analytic about noting orbits of moons in the solar system? There is nothing logical about looking at such orbits and attributing them to some direct birth in imaginary time.

Of course, when one just believe in "god", nothing is needed to be logically and scientifical analyzed.

In your dreams. There is no proof they were not created.

There you go again with your creation = formation.

Through all this it seems you disagree with the commonly accepted moon formation theory?

At least you got that right