Moon dust?

Share this page!

This is an old creationist argument. Most think that it is debunked, I don’t. In fact my approach to this will be different because I will be using known facts about this, and a different approach. And yes this will resurrect a evolutionist nightmare argument. Their first attempt to discredit this will be to call everyone stupid for even discussing it. Which basically means, they cannot really debunk it. Basic rule of thumb in debates with evolutionist is: When they start calling you names, it means they have nothing left to debate against your argument. It also means: The creationist just won the debate. It used to bother me, until I figured this out. So now I laugh when it happens. But let’s get down to business with discussing the resurrection of the Moon Dust Theory.

The earth just orbits the sun. The moon on the other hand, orbits our planet while “following” the earth’s orbit around the sun. As shown in the picture below:

The moon has gravity, which will attract dust. And the earth has gravity which attracts dust. And while dust is being pulled towards the earth, the moon travels through it as it orbits. But there is more. As the earth orbits the sun, the moon follows it and every orbit is in a new path full of dust. So basically, the moon is like a windshield wiper on a car. What your windshield collects, the wiper bunches it up and wipes it off. Now imagine that all the water your wiper wiped off actually stuck to your wiper, like dust sticks to the moon because of gravity. How long would it be, as you drive through a storm, that there would be so much water on your windshield that you could no longer drive?

Another example: You go and buy a duster. The dust on your furniture represents dust in space. Now does you duster collect more dust “moving” across your furniture (like the moon orbits the earth), or if it stays in one place and waits for the dust to come to it?

You see the moon traveling through space that is full of dust, where every orbit is like passing through a rain storm of dust that “never” quits. The dust is attracted to it because of it’s gravity. Then even more is pulled into it’s path because of the earth’s gravity. But that’s not all. The sun’s gravity pulls even more dust from further away, And that dust also gets pulled into the moon’s path as it orbits our planet. And because the moon acts like a dust wiper as it orbits the planet, not as much dust is going to reach earth because of that. Why? The earth travels through the path of each orbit of the moon where the moon just cleared a path of dust.

Now because the moon takes a little over 27 days to make one complete orbit, and you take that and divide into four points (quarters) of the moons orbit. It would mean that it takes roughly 7 days to move 1/4 of it’s orbit. Which means that for 3-7 days the moon is directly in the path of the earth’s orbit of the sun. While there it would be collecting dust that would usually end up on the earth if the moon were not there. So for 3-7 days, the dust flow to the earth, from it’s orbit around the sun, is disrupted by the moon. And you times that times the supposed age of the moon (4.5 billion years) and you get 13.5-31.5 billion days of dust the moon blocks from our planet. Divide that by 365 and you get how many years of dust were block from our planet.

But there is more. While the earth is in between the sun and moon (moon being on the dark side of the earth), you have two objects pulling dust in the same direction of the moon. And the moons gravity, in this instance for 3-7 days, will collect even more dust. This is because dust caught in gravity from “3” different objects (earth, sun and moon) all pulling in one direction, would move the dust much faster then normal to the surface of the moon.

And there is more. If we go back in time, as far back as the old earthers say (4 billion years ago). Our solar system would have been full of even more dust. Why? Think about it. Everything in this system is just forming, and becoming orderly. So chaos would dictate collisions, explosions, etc… Which equals more debris within our system. More for the moon to catch as it orbits.

So can we calculate the dust on the moon by the dust that reaches earth? Nope. To many variables and factors to add in. All pointing to more dust not less for the claimed age of the moon and earth. But there’s more… To make the math easy, we will say the moon orbits the earth once a month. That’s 12 times a year. 12 billion times in 1 billion years. 48 billion times in 4 billion years. And 54 billion times in 4.5 billion years (the claimed age of the moon). Now do you think with 54,000,000,000 (54 billion) orbits that there is only going to be less than 4 inches of dust?

Some examples of the old arguments:

Was NASA expecting a lot of dust when they landed for the first time on the moon? See what you think.

Why make the ladder to short unless you are expecting some sinking because of dust? Need more? Why make the feet on the ends of the legs on the module wide?

You make them wide when you expect to sink in the dust, and you don’t want to sink to much. Example: When there has been several feet of snow, do you where regular shoes and sink, or snow shoes and stay on top?

And I could go on and on with things where NASA thought there was several feet of dust, where this was actually written in a school text book at one time. So basically all of this effort was to save face on what the old earthers were wrong about then, and in my opinion, still wrong about now.

Side note: Even with all the tests NASA did, none of their tests can be done while simulating the difference between an object that has gravity, and collects dust. And one that does not have gravity and collects dust. Neither can they simulate objects caught in the gravity area of other objects and how that effects dust collection. Basically, NASA did tests that could not simulate all the variables that exist. So their conclusions are off by those variables by several degrees.

Example: Let’s say dust travels through space at one mile per hour. Getting caught in a planet or star’s gravity it’s speed can increase to 3 MPH. What that means is that dust collection on the moon could different as much as a factor of 3. And when caught in 3 different gravity sources, the speed of travel could increase even more.

To say that NASA’s test were accurate is to say that gravity has no effect on how dust moves through space. And if you try to gauge that on a planet that has an atmosphere, then you are adding a variable that does not exist in space. Also, if there was not that much dust being collected, this much damage would not have been done to one of the windows of the shuttle.

It is severely scratched from all of the dust in space. How does it become scratched by dust? The shuttle travels at over a thousand miles per hour to maintain an orbit. At that speed, dust can do this to glass. This is to also illustrate just how much dust is out in space. Just think how much worse that damage could be if the shuttle had simulated gravity pulling more dust to it as it orbits.

The difference of one object having gravity pulling dust to it, and one that does not. Is illustrated for better understanding with this picture:

To sum it up:
1) We have test collections of dust on earth that adds variables that do not exist in space.
2) We have tests using satellites, that cannot simulate gravity that would make it a real world test.
3) We have a moon that follows our planet as it orbits the sun, insuring that each orbit is in a “new” path of dust. Making the dust collection a constant feed.
4) When the moon is in the right position, where the earth is between it and the sun. The gravity of three objects (earth sun and moon) are now pulling more dust to the moon because in this position, the three objects are pulling dust in the same direction as our sun (the strongest gravity pull in our solar system). If this did not make a difference, then the orbits of the earth and moon would be a perfect circle. But because gravity of other objects aligned creates more pull, the orbits of the earth and moon are anything but a perfect circle. So the speed of dust being pulled to the moon increases.
5) We have 54 billion orbits through new paths of dust with every orbit, yet only a few inches of dust exist?
6) And then we have the moon’s gravity which makes it like a dust magnet, always pulling more dust to itself as it orbits.

Share this page!
...9

 

 

 

YouTube

 

 

 

FaceBook Feed
Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
Good Fight Ministries
Good Fight Ministries

Joe Schimmel’s Testimony

Blessed Hope Chapel
Wed. May 22, 2019 – Wednesday Night Bible Study led by Pastor Joe Schimmel.
... See MoreSee Less

Comment on Facebook

Thank you for sharing Pastor Joe!!

Ark Encounter
Ark Encounter
Veterans receive free admission on Memorial Day (May 27)!

Veterans receive free admission on Memorial Day (May 27)! ... See MoreSee Less

Comment on Facebook

Ruthann Blizzard Michael Blizzard

Uh, that's not nearly enough manpower for a ship that size.

See ya'll next weekend! Can't wait!

Creation Research Society
Creation Research Society
The Role of Epigenetics in Adaptation, Part 1

The following Matters of Fact column by CRS board member Dr. Jean Lightner appeared in Creation Matters, Vol. 23, No. 3, May/June 2018.

Q.  Does epigenetics play a role in adaptation? 
A.  Physiologist: YES! Evolutionary biologist: Maybe…. 

Adaptation, in the sense that we will discuss, can be defined as changes which help an organism become better suited to its environment. It is related to one of the foundational characteristics of life: the ability to respond to the environment. Physiological adaptation relies on epigenetics, or modifications that can affect gene expression. This does not change the sequence of DNA, but allows genes to be up or down regulated to suit the needs of the organism (see Lightner, 2013). 

There are several known mechanisms of epigenetic regulation (Figure 1): 

1) histone modification (including acetylation, phosphorylation, and methylation) 

2) cytosine methylation in DNA 

3) various non-coding RNA molecules (miRNA, siRNA, piRNA, and lncRNA) 

These mechanisms vary in the timeframe over which they typically act, allowing for both rapid changes and more stable, long-term changes. 

Scientists had assumed that these types of changes could not be inherited by offspring. The basis for this was largely philosophical: the Modern Synthesis (aka Neo-Darwinism) was predicated on the idea that the environment could not direct phenotypic change. Instead, the source of phenotypic variation is claimed to be from random genetic mutations; natural selection then reduces or eliminates less fit variants. To support the conjecture that epigenetic changes are not heritable, some scientists pointed to the observation that DNA methylation patterns are reset in pathways leading to offspring (i.e., germ cell formation and fertilization). However, it is now recognized that the reset of DNA methylation isn’t always complete, and it is not the only mechanism involved in trans-generational epigenetic inheritance (Morgan et al., 1999; Rassoulzadegan et al., 2006). 

For several decades now, it has been known that epigenetic inheritance can provide a source of heritable variation. However, it is not yet clear how often it does so, and what role it plays in adaptation of populations. Research has increased on this important topic, but much remains to be learned. One recent review article identified a web of potential interactions. It also pointed out that understanding patterns of natural epigenetic variation, the causes of that variation, and the consequences of it are necessary to adequately address the role it may have in adaptation (Richards et al., 2017). 

Factors influencing epigenetic variation 

In some studies it appears that DNA methylation differences are associated with underlying genetic differences. This raises the possibility of genetic control of epigenetic variability. It is also possible that a stable epimutation (heritable epigenetic change) could be inherited along with the underlying genetic sequence, thus causing the correlation. It has also been noted that epigenetic changes can influence genetic variation, specifically as it relates to silencing transposable elements, whose movement can change the sequence of a gene or its promoter (Richards et al., 2017). 

Some epimutations appear to arise stochastically. If these are stable over multiple generations, then natural selection may affect the pattern of variation. It is also known that environmental factors can effect heritable epigenetic changes, but the pattern and extent of this is not well known. Significant work needs to be done across different species, especially wild plants and animals, before reasonable generalizations can be made (Balao et al. 2018; Richards et al., 2017). 

FIGURE 1. A chromosome is made up of DNA coiled around proteins, called histones. There are three basic mechanisms by which epigenetic changes can be made. First, the tail of the histone proteins can undergo several types of modification (A), including phosphorylation (Ph), methylation (Me), and acetylation (Ac), that can affect accessibility of specific genes. Secondly, cytosine residues in DNA can be methylated (red dot) or un– methylated (green dot), the details of which are represented in section B of the figure. This affects gene transcription (the copying of DNA to make mRNA). Finally, various microRNAs (C) can bind mRNA to prevent synthesis into proteins. All of these mechanisms play a role in changing gene expression without affecting the DNA sequence. (Illustration is from Gómez-Díaz et al., 2012, and is used herein according to the CC BY license. )

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org

The Role of Epigenetics in Adaptation, Part 1

The following Matters of Fact column by CRS board member Dr. Jean Lightner appeared in Creation Matters, Vol. 23, No. 3, May/June 2018.

Q. Does epigenetics play a role in adaptation?
A. Physiologist: YES! Evolutionary biologist: Maybe….

Adaptation, in the sense that we will discuss, can be defined as changes which help an organism become better suited to its environment. It is related to one of the foundational characteristics of life: the ability to respond to the environment. Physiological adaptation relies on epigenetics, or modifications that can affect gene expression. This does not change the sequence of DNA, but allows genes to be up or down regulated to suit the needs of the organism (see Lightner, 2013).

There are several known mechanisms of epigenetic regulation (Figure 1):

1) histone modification (including acetylation, phosphorylation, and methylation)

2) cytosine methylation in DNA

3) various non-coding RNA molecules (miRNA, siRNA, piRNA, and lncRNA)

These mechanisms vary in the timeframe over which they typically act, allowing for both rapid changes and more stable, long-term changes.

Scientists had assumed that these types of changes could not be inherited by offspring. The basis for this was largely philosophical: the Modern Synthesis (aka Neo-Darwinism) was predicated on the idea that the environment could not direct phenotypic change. Instead, the source of phenotypic variation is claimed to be from random genetic mutations; natural selection then reduces or eliminates less fit variants. To support the conjecture that epigenetic changes are not heritable, some scientists pointed to the observation that DNA methylation patterns are reset in pathways leading to offspring (i.e., germ cell formation and fertilization). However, it is now recognized that the reset of DNA methylation isn’t always complete, and it is not the only mechanism involved in trans-generational epigenetic inheritance (Morgan et al., 1999; Rassoulzadegan et al., 2006).

For several decades now, it has been known that epigenetic inheritance can provide a source of heritable variation. However, it is not yet clear how often it does so, and what role it plays in adaptation of populations. Research has increased on this important topic, but much remains to be learned. One recent review article identified a web of potential interactions. It also pointed out that understanding patterns of natural epigenetic variation, the causes of that variation, and the consequences of it are necessary to adequately address the role it may have in adaptation (Richards et al., 2017).

Factors influencing epigenetic variation

In some studies it appears that DNA methylation differences are associated with underlying genetic differences. This raises the possibility of genetic control of epigenetic variability. It is also possible that a stable epimutation (heritable epigenetic change) could be inherited along with the underlying genetic sequence, thus causing the correlation. It has also been noted that epigenetic changes can influence genetic variation, specifically as it relates to silencing transposable elements, whose movement can change the sequence of a gene or its promoter (Richards et al., 2017).

Some epimutations appear to arise stochastically. If these are stable over multiple generations, then natural selection may affect the pattern of variation. It is also known that environmental factors can effect heritable epigenetic changes, but the pattern and extent of this is not well known. Significant work needs to be done across different species, especially wild plants and animals, before reasonable generalizations can be made (Balao et al. 2018; Richards et al., 2017).

FIGURE 1. A chromosome is made up of DNA coiled around proteins, called histones. There are three basic mechanisms by which epigenetic changes can be made. First, the tail of the histone proteins can undergo several types of modification (A), including phosphorylation (Ph), methylation (Me), and acetylation (Ac), that can affect accessibility of specific genes. Secondly, cytosine residues in DNA can be methylated (red dot) or un– methylated (green dot), the details of which are represented in section B of the figure. This affects gene transcription (the copying of DNA to make mRNA). Finally, various microRNAs (C) can bind mRNA to prevent synthesis into proteins. All of these mechanisms play a role in changing gene expression without affecting the DNA sequence. (Illustration is from Gómez-Díaz et al., 2012, and is used herein according to the CC BY license. )

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org
... See MoreSee Less

Hidden History of Evolution
Hidden History of Evolution
~ Issac

~ Issac ... See MoreSee Less

Comment on Facebook

Evolution is a lie, based on unsupported assumptions.

Science leads to God
Science leads to God
Had to stop the test, cant have evolution proven wrong. ~ Issac

Had to stop the test, can't have evolution proven wrong. ~ Issac ... See MoreSee Less

180 Movie
180 Movie

Are you one of the over 49,500 views who’s watched “7 Reasons” on YouTube since its release a week ago?

We’ve been so encouraged to read the many online comments, such as this one from YouTube:

"This is THE first time I’ve ever cried (quietly flowing down my cheeks and dripping off my chin kinda tears), regarding the abortion I had 9 years ago. I’ve LITERALLY NEVER felt convicted, not once before…And after watching this.. well, yeh.. I’ve just sat here frowning, now my eyes have dried, and thinking to myself, “Wow, what IS happening to me?!”…I’m a feminist, pro-choice (I thought), equality, love and peace to all kinda person. I guess I better think again................. Mind = blown. Thank you for this video."

If you haven't watched and shared it yet, watch "7 Reasons" free on YouTube at 7ReasonsMovie.com
... See MoreSee Less

Ray Comfort has mental retardation ... See MoreSee Less

Pray for Militant Atheist Page.
Pray for Militant Atheist Page.
n case you did not know this. ~ Issac

n case you did not know this. ~ IssacIn case you did not know this. ~ Issac ... See MoreSee Less

Where is the evolution?
Where is the evolution?
Name: Monito del Monte
Status: Thought to be extinct until its rediscovery.
Information: A remarkable, diminutive marsupial thought to have been extinct until one was discovered in a thicket of Chilean bamboo in the southern Andes.
Thought to exist: 55 million years ago.
Reference: http://historysevidenceofdinosaursandmen.weebly.com/living-fossils.html
The fossilised ankle and ear bones are those of Australias earliest known marsupial, Djarthia, a primitive mouse-like creature that lived 55 million years ago. ..a new study in the journal PLoS ONE [http://www.plosone.org/] has confirmed that Djarthia is also a primitive relative of the small marsupial known as the Monito del Monte - or little mountain monkey - from the dense humid forests of Chile and Argentina.
Reference: http://www.create.unsw.edu.au/news/2008-03-25_monito.html
The monito del monte, Spanish for ‘little bush monkey’, named after its monkey-like partially prehensile tail, is a diminutive marsupial native to South America in the Valdivian temperate rain forests of the southern Andes (Chile and Argentina). It is the only extant species in the ancient order of Microbiotheria. ...Genetic studies show that this species retains the most primitive characteristics of its group, and thus is regarded as a “living fossil.”
reference: http://www.eartharchives.org/articles/scientists-uncover-two-new-species-of-elusive-south-american-marsupial/

Name: Monito del Monte
Status: Thought to be extinct until it's rediscovery.
Information: A remarkable, diminutive marsupial thought to have been extinct until one was discovered in a thicket of Chilean bamboo in the southern Andes.
Thought to exist: 55 million years ago.
Reference: http://historysevidenceofdinosaursandmen.weebly.com/…
"The fossilised ankle and ear bones are those of Australia's earliest known marsupial, Djarthia, a primitive mouse-like creature that lived 55 million years ago. ..a new study in the journal PLoS ONE [http://www.plosone.org/] has confirmed that Djarthia is also a primitive relative of the small marsupial known as the Monito del Monte - or "little mountain monkey" - from the dense humid forests of Chile and Argentina."
Reference: http://create.unsw.edu.au/news/…
"The monito del monte, Spanish for ‘little bush monkey’, named after its monkey-like partially prehensile tail, is a diminutive marsupial native to South America in the Valdivian temperate rain forests of the southern Andes (Chile and Argentina). It is the only extant species in the ancient order of Microbiotheria. ...Genetic studies show that this species retains the most primitive characteristics of its group, and thus is regarded as a “living fossil.”"
reference: http://eartharchives.org/articles/…
... See MoreSee Less

Comment on Facebook

Your picture makes it seem like the two species shown are found 55 Ma apart even though they are both modern species. Rather, it was the genus Djarthia (whose exact taxonomic position is uncertain) that occurs in the Paleocene, as noted in the PLOS paper you provided. This graphic is either a misunderstanding or diliberate misrepresentation of the references cited. May I ask what formal training in paleontology the admin of this page has had?

We didn't claim the skulls were from a 55 million year old fossil, it is the references that claim Monito del Monte is regarded as a living fossil and thought to exist: 55 million years ago.

Colby, please stop spamming the contrasts. There is no need to post the same link multiple times, Thank you.

I was just doing a one shot on each post. I didnt even think anyone even looked at this page anymore. I apologize.

Looks like the Colbinator deleted his post 😭

View more comments

Load more