You probably have never heard of the giant impact hypothesis that is the evolutionary teaching of how the moon got here. It’s called the Big Splash. Like the Big Bang, it is quite an understatement. Evolutionists believe that “an astronomical body” the size of Mars had a collision with the Earth and all the dust and debris from that then ‘accreted’ to make the moon in a similar way they say dust and gas accreted to make the earth. They believe in core accretion as the way the moon was formed just like the way planets were formed, even though there are at least the nine unsolved problems with the core accretion theory. Even with all the problems, there is no other possible explanation for them, so they just continue to teach it even though it cannot explain what we see in the universe. If core accretion cannot make a planet, it cannot make a moon either. But the existence of the moon is an even bigger problem for them.
Evolutionists say the formation of a moon starts with a massive collision. After that, core accretion makes a moon out of all the dust from the collision because of the gravity between all of the dust molecules becoming bigger and bigger until there is the moon. But think about the collision to make enough dust from a planet to make a moon that orbits the planet. For Earth’s moon, the collision would have had to have been from something the size of Mars and that hit earth and kept on going. That must have been quite the collision to make that much dust to make earth’s moon. Somehow the moon ended up in a perfect synchronous orbit around the Earth such that the same side of the moon is always facing the Earth (that’s why there is the ‘dark side of the moon’). Equally amazing is that somehow this collision did not take the Earth out of its orbit.
If Earth had a collision with the ‘Mars sized object’ there should be a difference in our planet on the side of the collision. Geologists have looked for this evidence, but none can be found. This should have caused changes that we could see in the mantle of the earth. This was expected to be found, so scientists looked for it, but it is not there. There is no evidence in the Earth that the Earth was ever hit by another “object” the size of Mars.
The term the Big Splash is meant for us to envision a rock hitting a pond with the water splashing up. In the Big Splash the dirt of the Earth is “splashed” up into space and there is so much of it that it gathers together by gravity to make the moon. This seems impossible but there is no other explanation for the existence of our Moon given by evolutionists.
Another ‘problem’ with the Big Splash is that the only objects that are the size of Mars are other planets. Why is another planet flying around the universe and not in orbit around another sun? How would another planet get there to even hit the earth? What are the chances that a rogue planet floating in the universe would hit us? But even if the earth was hit by another planet (and left no trace that we can find), and even if this did not knock earth out of orbit, and even if enough dirt was blown into space, there would still have to be core accretion to make the moon.
However, core accretion has too many problems and inconsistencies for this to be the way planets are formed, and now this is also the way that we are told by evolutionists that our moon was formed. There were other previous theories about how our moon formed but once we got rocks off the moon and compared them to the rocks of Earth the other theories became impossible because they did not explain what was found. Now evolutionists are ‘stuck’ with the core accretion theory where rock and boulders ‘stick’ together. All of the other possible explanations have been proven to be false as our technology has gotten better, so the leading theory is the colossal impact of the Big Splash.
This cannot possibly have happened unless there was a rogue planet wandering around the universe to happen to hit the earth just right. But there is also no clear explanation of how these rogue planets even exist. Since they are known to exist evolutionists have come up with even more theories of how they could have formed, but none of these are agreed upon. This is just like the multiple many areas of evolution that are “theories” and not proven and is not agreed upon, even among the evolutionists.
Further, how many of them would there be to make all the moons? Do you know how many moons there are? Mars has 2 moons. Did it get hit by other planets twice? Obviously it did not. Neptune has 13 moons, Uranus has 27, Saturn has a whopping 62, and Jupiter has 63. No one believes these are all from planets hitting planets. Some believe these planets that have so many moons developed in the same way that our sun got its planets. But evolutionists cannot explain how the planets formed around the sun, so saying the moons of planets formed in the same way is meaningless. Evolutionists cannot explain planets or moons.
For the earth’s moon to exist through evolution the first level of impossibility is that the earth was hit by another planet. The second level of impossibility is that the ‘splash’ of dirt then formed the moon through core accretion, where we have already discussed nine separateproblems that make core accretion not the reason. Any of these nine reasons by themselves make core accretion not an explanation for the formation of celestial bodies. Unless evolutionists can explain each and every one of these nine, it is not logical to believe in core accretion, and therefore not logical to believe in evolution. Further still, even if you believe in core accretion you would have to also believe that another planet collided with Earth to make the Big Splash. Of course all of this would have to be true for evolution to be true.
The formation of moons is a necessary condition for evolution to be true.
You do not need to be a lunar scientist or a member of the Royal Society to reason:
If the moon could not form after the Big Bang, then evolution logically cannot be possible.
FURTHER STUDY
The controversies, concerns and conflicting data about the origin of the moon are regularly discussed by the Royal Society of Great Britain. Following the most recent meeting the article “The Origin of the Moon” was published in the journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. They are working on “elucidating the origin of the Moon” and at this time state “we do not have a clear idea of the manner in which the Moon first developed.” One of the problems they are having is that the “Giant Impact simulations has been the hardest to reconcile with geochemical data”. They cannot get any model of an impact to match what we know is true from the facts of geochemical data. When they discuss possible solutions to their problems they find that “Each of these suggested resolutions has its difficulties”. When the world’s experts on the moon get together to discuss the moon, we see that there is no lunar scientist on earth can explain the origin of the moon.
It is a published fact in peer reviewed scientific journals that the experts of the moon “do not have a clear idea” of the origin of the moon.