Wagoner- Lab 3 Part 1.docx - 1 Cynthia Wagoner Dr Weaver NSCI 110 6 March 2018 Lab#3 Part One The Origins of Life Section One Young Earth Creationist

Wagoner- Lab 3 Part 1.docx - 1 Cynthia Wagoner Dr Weaver...

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 8 pages.

1 Cynthia Wagoner Dr. Weaver NSCI 110 6 March 2018 Lab #3 Part One: The Origins of Life Section One: Young Earth Creationist Article: The moon: the light that rules the night by Jonathan Sarfati The scientific data presented in the article by Jonathan Sarfati relates to the various theories on the origins of the moon. The article describes the theories and research on the moons creation such as Fission theory, Capture theory, Condensation theory, and Impact theory. Fission Theory claims that the earth spun so fast that a chunk of the earth dislodged and became the moon. This theory, proposed by George Darwin, son of Charles Darwin, is and has been discredited for a long time because the “earth could never have spun fast enough to throw a moon into orbit, and the escaping moon would have been shattered while within the Roche Limit” (Sarfati). The Capture Theory claims that our moon was “wandering through the solar system, and was captured by Earth’s gravity” (Sarfati). This theory is discredited because it has too many unlikely factors. For example, the chances of the moon passing close enough for the earth’s gravity to capture the moon is “minute” and it would have more likely resulted in “slingshotted effect;” and even if the moon did happen to get captured in the Earth’s orbit it would’ve result in a more “elongated comet like orbit” (Sarfati). The Condensation Theory claims that the moon was created out of a dust cloud that was attracted by the earth’s gravity (Sarfati). This theory is discredited as implausible because “no such cloud could be dense
Image of page 1
2 enough, and it doesn’t account for the moon’s low iron content” (Sarfati). Finally, the theory that is most accepted by scientist today is the Impact Theory, which claims that “material was blasted off from the Earth by the impact of another object” (Sarfati). The author discredits this theory saying that the mass needed to impact the earth in order to blast off enough material to form the moon would have had to been “twice the size of Mars” and it doesn’t explain the “problem of losing the excess angular momentum” (Sarfati). Jonathan Sarfati discredits these four scientific theories saying that there is not enough evidence to prove any other theory besides the Genesis account of the moons creation. “Although there are many different ideas on how and when the moon formed, no scientist was there at the time. So we should rely on the witness of One who was, and who has revealed the truth in Genesis” (Sarfati). As supportive evidence of the Bibles account of the moons creation, citing the science of the lunar cycles and the necessary effects on the tides, as evidence that it was designed by God as the creator. This article uses the backing of evolutionists and scientists to support their claim. They quote lunar researcher S. Ross Taylor who says, “The best models of lunar origin are the testable ones, but the testable models for lunar origin are wrong,” while also
Image of page 2
Image of page 3

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 8 pages?

  • Summer '18
  • Dr. Marshall Bowles
  • The Bible, Intelligent design, intelligent designer, Young Earth creationism

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture