Every New Solution Breeds New Problems

When it comes to theorizing origins in an evolution framework, it’s on going project which never gets resolved. And every time a new solution is added to fix old ones, it is always treated like a major break through in the mainstream media. But it reality, their new solutions breed new problems. Take the moon for example, last time we heard the mystery of the moon had been solved and gave us a whole bunch of speculation which was layered with a whole bunch of jargon to prove it, this year we hear the new view has fixed the one. Confusing isn’t it?

In Astrobiology Magazine, the new theory goes like this…

“For almost 30 years, planetary scientists have been quite happy with this explanation–with one major exception. Although this scenario makes sense when you look at the size of the moon and the physics of its orbit around Earth, things start to break down a little when you compare their isotopic compositions–the geological equivalent of a DNA “fingerprint.” Specifically, Earth and the moon are too much alike.”

“The expectation has long been that the moon should carry the isotopic “fingerprint” of the foreign body, which scientists have named Theia. Because Theia came from elsewhere in the solar system, it probably had a much different isotopic fingerprint than early Earth.

“Now, a team of scientists at the University of Maryland has generated a new isotopic fingerprint of the moon that could provide the missing piece of the puzzle. By zeroing in on an isotope of Tungsten present in both the moon and Earth, the UMD team is the first to reconcile the accepted model of the moon’s formation with the unexpectedly similar isotopic fingerprints of both bodies. The results suggest that the impact of Theia into early Earth was so violent, the resulting debris cloud mixed thoroughly before settling down and forming the moon.”

Questions: What are the ramifications of the Earth being so violent? How long will this model last before another is invented? All this is based on speculation because nobody saw the moon supposedly evolve. The Bible is the only witness for that. So do you call the ever-changing speculation science? Space exploration is science, we can and have learned a great deal from it. This is when you can build unmanned spaceship to explore planets and moons in our solar system and it’s not uncommon for direct evidence to falsify popular theories of evolutionary scientists. It will be fun once an unmanned spacecraft reaches Pluto! Because that will reveal a lot of direct science. So why are countries like the United States spending millions on speculation rather than focusing on direct science? Why are we not focusing more on space exploration rather than materialistic origins that goes around in circles?

Let’s bring more science into our theories rather than using massive amounts of speculation that does science no good.

Moon Exploration Has Finally Arrived

The moon remains intriguing, it’s specialized designed role on maintaining life on earth is quite remarkable.  It has the correct size and exact distance required.  Scientists lack a lot of data on how much uniqueness there is in regards with the  moon’s relationship with the earth compared to the rest of the universe.

Scientists also discovered the earth’s moon is being hit with “a massive cloud of plasma strikes”  which removes material from the moon’s surface.  These plasma strikes comes from solar flares that are ejected from the sun. Now Space.com reported that research created a model to learn the effect it had on the moon’s surface.

“The model predicts 100 to 200 tons of lunar material — the equivalent of 10 dump truck loads — could be stripped off the lunar surface during the typical two-day passage of a CME.”

 What this study like about the moon is the consequences of this phenomena happening over the faulty assumed age of the moon which is 4.5 billion years. One would think that with all that sandblasting going on over that time that the surface would have undergone a considerable amount of rework.

It would be a great way to demonstrate the real age of the moon, wouldn’t you say?  One could do this by calculating the mass loss and change of appearance expected of the lunar surface experiencing CMEs, and see whether the calculation matches what was observed by the Apollo astronauts while taking into account the average frequency of CMEs striking the moon in 4.5 billion year time frame.

So what moon exploration has finally arrived? China’s probe that mapped the lunar surface last October? No, but that probe continues to study the sun and Earth’s magnetic field. What has arrived are two NASA probes with a mission to map the lunar surface like never before.  In order to accomplish such a specialized and history making task, the two probes must position themselves in an optimal orbit in order to “measure the pushes and pulls of the moon’s gravity, data that scientists can use to model what is inside the moon.”

But what they mean by “model” is to speculate rather than observe what is inside the moon. One article suggested the mission was to understand the moon’s mysterious evolution. However this is not the case, we will learn from the exploration of the moon which is great science, but learning nothing about interpreting it into how it supposedly evolved, only more questions with more invented speculation within that man-made story telling framework.

Creationists should be excited about explorations in space like the moon, there is much to learn out there, no mystery about who or what created it.

Jupiter’s Volcanic Moon Continues To Put On A Show

One of the most remarkable phenomena happening in our solar system today, is Io where it continues to show massive volcanic activity. Io is only slightly bigger than Earth’s moon and is the third largest among moons orbiting around Jupiter. Planetary scientists are busy mapping its surface and are in the process of coming up with new ideas about what drives its activity.

In the highlights in the paper, “Volcanism on Io: New Insights from Global Geologic Mapping”  it says…

“We produced the first complete, 1:15M-scale global geologic map of Jupiter’s moon Io

► Io was mapped into 19 material units: plains (65.8% of surface), lava flow fields (28.5%), mountains (3.2%), and patera floors (2.5%) ► The distribution of plains units is geographically constrained: White plains (dominated by SO2 + contaminants) occur mostly in the equatorial antijovian region (±30o, 90o-230oW), possibly indicative of a regional cold trap.

“► Bright (presumably sulfur-rich) flow fields make up 30% more lava flow fields than dark (presumably silicate) flows (56.5% vs. 43.5%), and only 18% of bright flow fields occur within 10 km of dark flow fields ► These results suggest that primary sulfur-rich effusions are an important component of Io’s recent volcanism.”

“► We mapped 425 paterae (volcano-tectonic depressions), which cover only 2.5% of Io’s surface, but correspond to 64% of all detected hot spots ► The freshest bright and dark flows make up about 29% of all of Io’s flow fields, suggesting active emplacement is occurring in less than a third of Io’s visible lava fields.”

“► The greater areal extent of gas-derived diffuse deposits (red + white, 85%) compared to presumably pyroclast-bearing diffuse deposits (dark (silicate ash) + yellow (sulfur-rich ash), 15%) indicates that there is effective separation between the transport of pyroclasts and gas in many Ionian explosive eruptions…”

The research produces good evidence for creationism, which advocates a young universe which is not billions of years old. Not surprising that evolutionary Planetary scientists are forcing the data into the old-age framework rather than exploring questions like how does molten material erupt onto the surface without plate tectonics? And why are heavy elements seen in the ultramafic lavas remain near the surface rather than submerging deep into the interior billions of years ago? How would Io really look with all this massive volcanic activity on this small moon happening for billions of years? Is their answer, “stuff happens” because it happens?

Learning About The Moon Has Challenged Theories

Walking along the lakeshore at night listening to the sounds of the water gently hitting the shoreline, then looking up to gaze at the moon. It dominates the night-time sky, controlling the tides, admired for its design from God, sparking curiosity on what it holds. As a young man, I dreamed of what it would be like to live on the moon and looking at the earth from there while exploring the utter most parts of it!

NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), now past its first year of operation, has revealed some interesting things, our moon is more complex than previously thought. Secular science outlets deem it’s age (4.5 billion years) as a foregone conclusion while creating a story about a late heavy bombardment 3.9 billion years ago from the asteroid belt, formulating the maria (seas) of lava, smaller craters from near-Earth impactors, and ongoing space weathering and regolith formation as the moon cooled down into the body we see today.

New discoveries have challenged the story. This is evident with three papers that were published on September 17 (here, here and here), “For the first time we’re actually detecting how complex the lunar surface is,” one of the authors said, Benjamin Greenhagen of JPL, remarked.  “It’s a bit of a paradigm shift.”

A popular science site contained headlines like “NASA’s LRO Exposes Moon’s Complex, Turbulent Youth” while others like National Geographic contained “New Type of Moon Volcano Discovered” and science daily with it’s usual take, “Moon’s Craters Give New Clues to Early Solar System Bombardment.” All the reports agreed that these finding makes their story about the moon’s past more complex.

As the data continues to get better, are planetary scientists headed in the right direction in learning about the moon’s origin? Are they getting any closer to a real explanation about the moon’s origin? Scientists in play now are at the stage of admitting more anomalies in the current paradigm which is considered routine in science.  Only when these anomalies accumulate to the point of unwieldiness, or younger scientists enter the field with different ideas, can the paradigm get replaced.

The current paradigm includes a time framework and numerous unproveable assumptions.  Entrenched assumptions currently include the Age of the Solar System (4.5 billion years).  However, the new data points to a youthful moon rather it’s assumed billions of years range. In that old age framework, the moon was suppose to be frozen, producing no activity or in other words, geologically dead. But Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter showed scientists evidence to the contrary. The moon is still forming new surface features with incredible shrinking activity!

Also, the moon contains young-looking lava flows!  Volcanism was assumed to have stopped billions of years ago on  the moon. Crater-count dating estimates the lava flows to be only 2.5 million years – far younger than the ancient times when volcanism was supposed to have stopped.

Some critics are quick to point out, this particular estimate is not 6,000 years and their old age framework just needs the data to be tweaked into it because at 2.5 million years with or without the possibility of it being younger, the old age story unravels and becomes useless to go by.  Evolution of the moon (and everything else we see today) requires vast amounts of time! The fact of the matter is, the estimate is closer to what the Bible gives than what the story on how long it took to evolve!

Why isn’t the moon dead if it’s billions of years old as predicted by evolutionary theory?  How could gas and lava get to the surface if it’s suppose to be frozen out? Why does the surface differ so much from one area to the next? A host of many specialized conditions are then dreamed up to explain the anomalies.

Scientists are often oblivious with their assumptions while spending time on paradigms. Faith without evidence is invoked with the anomalies which are mere puzzles to them that will be solved within a approved consensus. “Our Created Moon” by Whitcomb is an excellent book which explores the moon’s purposeful design.

So when you walk outside at night and look up to the stars and observe the moon, not only think of it’s rarity and beauty but this reality, without God’s design, we couldn’t exist on earth!