A couple of weeks ago we wrote about a new discovery supporting the theory that the Moon was created when the Earth collided with a now-vanished Mars-sized planet named Theia — see Two Noteworthy Astronomical Discoveries. At the end of that post we advised you to “be prepared for some squawking from the creationists.”
Our prophesy has come to pass. At the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), described in the Cast of Characters section of our Intro page, AIG is whining about the Giant Impact Theory.
You can find this in AIG’s News to Note, November 3, 2012 — “A weekly feature examining news from the biblical viewpoint.” It’s the third item at their news summary, titled “Giant impact hypothesis” makes a comeback. (Yes, we noticed that they downgraded it to hypothesis status.) Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us and their scripture references omitted:
Shining down night after night, defying a series of evolutionary hypotheses to explain its origin, is the moon. Evolutionary astronomers have suggested many possibilities over the years, but each has significant problems, such as geochemical discrepancies or failure to measure up in computer simulations. Of course, in a determined effort to come up with a naturalistic explanation for the satellite that reflects sunlight into our night sky, the starting conditions in simulations (which conveniently cannot be verified) can be adjusted until a mathematical model finally works.
Foolish scientists — they’re all headed for the Lake of Fire! AIG then spends a few paragraphs discussing the Impact Theory and the latest evidence which supports it, after which they say:
In the course of investigating a crime, forensic scientists may discover evidence consistent with many possible scenarios, but they ultimately seek for witnesses to validate what really happened. Building a convincing story without corroborating witnesses is a good way to convict the innocent.
Huh? Let’s read on:
Analogously, finding an isotopic ratio that fits a desired story for the moon’s origins does not make that story true. Even beyond the other problems with the giant impact hypothesis, the greatest problem remains: its lack of a corroborating witness. In fact, the only eyewitness account attesting to the origin of the moon is provided by God in [Genesis reference].
Lordy, lordy. Let’s be sure we understand this. Suppose ol’ Hambo’s creation museum were broken into and some of his creationist exhibits were stolen. And then suppose that the cops find your Curmudgeon’s fingerprints at the scene of the crime, and a search of our humble abode reveals their missing Adam & Eve statues and dinosaur saddles in our bedroom, and they examine our computer to find that we made loads of visits to several “How to Break into a Museum” websites. But even with all that evidence, they still don’t know who might have committed the crime because they have no eyewitness!
Before we continue with AIG’s article, we want to be sure you don’t think we’ve gone soft in the head. Please be assured that in the next excerpt, the translation of their Latin expression was supplied by AIG for their readers. We know you don’t need it. Okay, let’s get to it:
The biblical idea, that God created the moon ex nihilo (from nothing) about 6,000 years ago along with the rest of our solar system and the stars, does not seek to “explain” why the moon has a different proportion of zinc isotopes, but it does not have to.
Right. Creation science doesn’t have to explain anything. Explanations are for unbelievers! Here’s the last of it:
Any models describing the history of the solar system must be consistent with this historical fact revealed in the Bible to have the possibility of being valid. Evolutionary astronomers, by ignoring the biblical account, ignore their one completely reliable Eyewitness.
So there you are. You may think you’re really smart, but you don’t know nuthin’ about the Moon!
Copyright © 2012. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.