ecco
Veteran Member
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."
Did you bother to read the entire article? Would you have understood it if you had?
Why did you omit this portion of the article?
It may be possible that the collision with Theia was more devastating to our early Earth, with much deeper sections being launched into orbit, or that the collision could have occurred when Earth was still young and covered by a magma ocean. Alternatively, more metal could hint at a complicated cool-down of an early molten Moon surface, as suggested by several scientists.
Does the article say that there was no collision? No.
Does the article say maybe God created the moon when He created the heavens? No.
So, really, what is your point? You became aware of a headline that seemingly fit your mindset that SCIENCE IS ALWAYS WRONG THEREFORE SCIENCE IS BAD and you couldn't resist trying to throw a dart. So sad.