Belive in evolution and belive a man never walked on the moon?

Question

Apollo 10 was the manned orbit of the moon preceding the Apollo 11 mission in which Neil Armstrong would be the first man to walk on the moon.

On Apollo 10 they were able to monitor with greater precision what they had monitored on previous flights: the gravitational field of the moon and the rate at which dust particles are landing on the moon's surface.

You see, the moon is being bombarded constantly with cosmic dust particles, and when the Apollo astronauts were able to determine precisely the gravitational pull of the moon, then the rate at which dust collects on its surface could be calculated.

Therefore, if the approximate age of the moon is known and the amount of dust covering its surface in a given time is also known, the approximate depth of the dust today on its surface can be determined mathematically; it's a simple matter of multiplication.

According to almost all evolutionary concepts, the earth and the moon are 4.5 BILLION years old and using this age to calculate the depth of dust on the moon, the NASA scientists were faced with a problem: even using the most conservative calculations, the very least amount of loosely consolidated dust on the surface of the moon would be 54 feet deep.

That meant when Neil Armstrong stepped onto the surface of the moon he would step into a loosely consolidated sea of cosmic dust as little as 54 feet deep and possibly much deeper according to NASA figures.

This presented a real concern to many NASA scientists and engineers. This is why they outfitted the lunar lander with those huge pods as many of you probably recall seeing in photographs of the lunar mission. This is also the reason that the lunar rover had those big balloon tires; it could even have been driven across a big body of water and since they expected a tremendous amount of dust they made it so it wouldn't sink into anything.

They even trained Neil Armstong to go down the ladder outside the lunar lander backwards and slowly, one step at a time, and when he came to the bottom rung to be sure not to jump off into all that dust because he might have a lot of trouble swimming out of it.

The man whose job it was to keep in communication with Neil Armstrong while he was walking on the moon relates that as Neil got to the last rung of the ladder he paused and spoke those famous words heard all around the world: "One small step for a man," then he paused again, and then stepping off the bottom rung and onto the moon he said: "one giant leap for mankind."

That's when the commentators went wild, breaking in to say: "That's the first statement on the moon!" and went on with their commentary. But they had cut off Neil Armstrong's next two words, which are probably more famous in faithful scientific circles than are his first eleven. Stan Stepanek, whose job it was to stay in touch with Neil Armstrong relates that after the commentators broke in on Neil after his famous first words on the moon, his next two words totally destroyed the concept of evolution.

After Neil said "One small step for a man, [pause while stepping down] one giant leap for mankind" and while the commentators were going wild, Neil said: "IT'S SOLID". It took only these two words to totally destroy the concept of evolution if you look at it scientifically, academically and faithfully because those two words showed that only a few thousand years of time have passed, at the rate cosmic dust is coming in, producing on the surface of the moon an average of under one-half of an inch of dust overall.

Do you understand what this means? It means that scientific evidence is piling up that the earth and the universe as we know it is young after all. Did you know that a majority of scholars studying Biblical chronologies have determined the age of the earth to be a little over 6000 years old? * Did you know that the actual amount on dust measured on the surface of the moon equals very close to 6000 years of accumulation of dust at the rate measured by the Apollo missions?

Answer 1

The moon is constantly being bombarded by meteors. So all the loose dust just stays put when that happens?

Answer 2

This argument dose not hold weigt. acording to Answers in genisis which is a young earth creationist webpage which has a vested interst in providing evidince for a young universe at
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp
“Moon-dust thickness proves a young moon.”

For a long time, creationists claimed that the dust layer on the moon was too thin if dust had truly been falling on it for billions of years. They based this claim on early estimates—by evolutionists—of the influx of moon dust, and worries that the moon landers would sink into this dust layer. But these early estimates were wrong, and by the time of the Apollo landings, NASA was not worried about sinking. So the dust layer thickness can’t be used as proof of a young moon (or of an old one, either). See Moon-dust argument no longer useful and Moon dust and the age of the solar system (Technical).
You can read more in depth articles at
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v15/i4/moondust.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v7/i1/moondust.asp
So you now have a simple choice either find a new argument
might lead to some one doing more research so they can be educated and make up their own mind or use a discredited argument that will only be used to fuel the other side by allowing them to say you don't know what you are talking about.

Answer 3

You're a genious! Don't get excited because you're not. Not really.

This is nonsense and has been refuted many times since the so-called creation scientists came up with it.

The sun is at least five billion years old. How do we know that for certain. Because we know the rate at which it burns fuel. Thus we know how much longer it will last. That will be another five billion years. The palnats and the moon came from the same acretion disk that the sun did so they are roughly the same age as the sun or a little bit younger.

edit: Listen to Dierdre she is telling you the truth.

Answer 4

Interesting hypothesis. There are many problems with the theory of evolution, but one needn't make this kind of stretch to illuminate them.

I don't believe that "a majority of biblical scholars" have determined that the earth is only 6ooo years old.

The Bible doesn't mention the age of the earth. Using the biblical geneaologies to determine the age of earth is not possible, since the geneaologies are incomplete.

Geneaologies were important in the ancient worrld, because they served as legal documents regarding land claims, taxation, inheritances, divorce decrees, etc.

Therefore, there are different types of geneologies found in the bible. Some trace different lines of descent - one interesting geneology in the New Testament is the family record of Christ himself. They differ in two of the gospels - one follows the line of Joseph, the other follows the line of Mary.

The geneologies were not meant to be an exhaustive record of one's family line.

They also skip generations in many cases, depending on the purpose of the family record in question. This is not to say they are flawed; it was common practice, and all depended on the type of family history and what its purpose at the moment was.

Love Jack

Answer 5

Your fallacies are very well made up, but that's not more than a propagandistic story forged by the Creacionists.
We don't have to go to the Moon to know the age of the Earth, since we have all the needed evidences here.
What about found human fossils more than 160000 years old? And what about the oldest fossils of organisms whose age rounds the 2'5 billion years? And if you ask me: "and how do you know that those are the ages of those fossils?" Well, maybe you know the Carbon-14 dating test, don't you?

But fossils aren't the only reason to think that Earth (and thus, life) is much older than mere 6000 years. We also have many geologic and astronomic evidences, but they are not in my field of actuation, so I don't know much about them, and thus I cannot explain them as I would like.

All these evidences lead scientists (much more prepared than either you and me) to think that the actual age of the Earth (not that of the Moon) is about 4'5 billion years.

Answer 6

Okay... that's rubbish. There's about as much corroboration for this claim as there is for the few Muslims out there that still think that Neil Armstrong converted to Islam because he saw Allah on the moon or something. The dust on the moon isn't all from outside extraterrestrial sources any more than the dust on Earth or the dust on Mars. Not only that, but evolution HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COSMOLOGY OR ASTRONOMY. It is a biological theory--why is that so hard for people to grasp?

Answer 7

You're misquoting Armstrong. He actually said,

"That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.

Yes, the surface is fine and powdery. I can kick it up loosely with my toe. It does adhere in fine layers, like powdered charcoal, to the sole and sides of my boots. I only go in a small fraction of an inch, maybe an eighth of an inch, but I can see the footprints of my boots and the treads in the fine, sandy particles."

He flubbed his line. I caught it when I heard it at age 10 in 1969. You can check the Snopes site.

Answer 8

What you don't learn in church is that the dust CAN'T be so deep BECAUSE it's not only dust striking the moon, but meteors, asteroids ad all sorts of things that AREN'T dust. These things will take dust and blast it out of the moon's orbit.

Do you understand what this means? Can you comprehend the repercussions? It means that your pastors and ministers lie to you. They repeat false statements. That's called "bearing false witness against one's neighbor". If you are going to stand in a pulpit and teach science, you need to know science.

Answer 9

Uhhh, that just went around in circles. I read the whole thing, and it didn't make any relevant statements at all. It didn't disprove any scientific theories, let alone evolution. Evolution is not connected to that in any way, so I'm sorry Mr. Intelligent Design, but Darwin still stands as the greatest man in history.

Answer 10

Not this old myth again. It's a good thing my physicist/aerospace engineer father is no longer around to roll his eyes at questions like this.

Yes, he spent 40 years of his life helping to 'fake' the moon landing. His secret hideout is the Michaud Complex of the Marshall Space Flight Center in New Orleans. I found it on google! (Oh, not to mention the Open Houses we attended every year)