Proof of God: Cosmology

Check out our memes largest collection on the net

809735e2cdfb01b245ae2b523f0a4f23 (1).jpg

When I debate Atheists sometimes the tragedy of facts builds up to over come their beliefs. It goes something like this. I lay out a case that is so solid that they begin to realize how ridiculously impossible life is without a creator. Simply put its impossible. No matter where you look. If you look into the heavens its impossible and if you look into the atoms its impossible. And so sometimes their exasperated response will be simply … well obviously its possible because we are here. That is not an answer. We know that life is possible because we are alive that is not the question. The question is how. Is it possible without an outside intelligent agent? As you will see in this section life is not improbable. Its impossible.


Unless ….


You have been told by the Atheists that everything is an accident or it happened on its own. If that were true we would expect to see certain things. If on the other hand there is a creator that created everything we would expect to see the evidence line up to that. In Astronomy it becomes very clear which argument is true and which one is false. In the atheist model there is nothing special about Earth, our Sun, the solar system or you. Everything is a series of accidents and you dear reader are the worst of all the accidents. But That is not true as you will see.


The universe from the lowly Atom and below to the most massive collections of Atoms and beyond was created very precisely. In fact there was no other way. The universe is so precise that I will make an Intelligent Design (ID) prediction right here and now:


If you were to take away a single atom or add a single atom the universe would not work!


That is a bold claim and one that no atheist would like but is it even possible? Of course because the Universe was crafted by the master scientist. The ultimate Mathmetician. And once again we find this in Astronomy as we do through all the scientific disciplines.


To start with we know that in all of the universe we have never seen nothing give rise to something. While it is true that small particles pop into existence they do not remain in existence. And we don’t know enough about them to rule out that they aren’t in the universe already. Nothing is here that wasn’t here before and nothing here can leave. There are no machines, loops or systems that can create themselves and then jump start the engine. We can also observe that the universe is winding down and that useful energy is being reduced every second. The universe itself is not evolving but rather winding down as all life does.


Lets start with this place we live on. The one that many Atheists think is an insignificant speck:


“Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark.” But even the make up, size, atomosphere and every other detail of our “lonely speck” is exactly as it must be for you and I to exist. The odds of such a feat are pretty astronomical:


Everything about the Earth is so perfect that we may never find another planet like it in the universe. It was once thought that there would be millions of planets like it but we are finding each year how special our home really is.

Now it this is a fascinating list and I will give several examples. I can’t argue with any of it in that I am not an astronomer but if you look at the bottom there are more references then the actual points. The references are from science journals by scientists and astrophisicists so I wouldn’t doubt any of it. But there are some that are more interesting to me then others so lets go over some of those.


153. heat flow through the planet’s mantle from radiometric decay in planet’s core

if too low: mantle will be too viscous and, thus, mantle convection will not be vigorous enough to drive plate tectonics at the precise level to compensate for changes in star’s luminosity

if too high: mantle will not be viscous enough and, thus, mantle convection will be too vigorous resulting in too high of a level of plate tectonic activity to perfectly compensate for changes in star’s luminosity

154. water absorption by planet’s mantle

if too low: mantle will be too viscous and, thus, mantle convection will not be vigorous enough to drive plate tectonics at the precise level to compensate for changes in star’s luminosity

if too high: mantle will not be viscous enough and, thus, mantle convection will be too vigorous resulting in too high of a level of plate tectonic activity to perfectly compensate for changes in star’s luminosity.

Do you see where this is going. There are of course 150 other parameters that you would never think about and yet they are crucial like: The triggering of El Nino events being just right or:

143. Quantity of volatiles on and in Earth.

141. Ratio of dual water molecules to single water molecules.

137. Size of the carbon sink in the deep mantle of the earth.

It used to be thought that as long as your in the habitible zone you had a great chance for life. The goldilock zone was pretty much what you needed because life was thought to be so common … so ordinary. As it turns out that is not the case. Consider the moon. Its as close to zone as we are and yet life on it is impossible. And not just because of its size but because of many of the factors above and below.

A planet that is too small cannot hold much atmosphere, making surface temperature low and variable and oceans impossible. A small planet will also tend to have a rough surface, with large mountains and deep canyons. The core will cool faster, and plate tectonics may be brief or entirely absent. A planet that is too large will retain too dense an atmosphere like Venus. Although Venus is similar in size and mass to Earth, its surface atmospheric pressure is 92 times that of Earth, and surface temperature of 735 K (462 °C; 863 °F). Earth had a similar early atmosphere to Venus, but may have lost it in the giant impact event.



Earth's magnetic field-magnetosphere is necessary to protect Earth's life from solar radiation. 1) Bow shock. 2) Magnetosheath. 3) Magnetopause. 4) Magnetosphere. 5) Northern tail lobe. 6) Southern tail lobe. 7) Plasmasphere.

Plate tectonics and a strong magnetic field are essential for biodiversity, global temperature regulation, and the carbon cycle. The lack of mountain chains elsewhere in the Solar System is direct evidence that Earth is the only body with plate tectonics, and thus the only nearby body capable of supporting life.


Plate tectonics depend on the right chemical composition and a long-lasting source of heat from radioactive decay. Continents must be made of less dense felsic rocks that "float" on underlying denser mafic rock. Taylor emphasizes that tectonic subduction zones require the lubrication of oceans of water. Plate tectonics also provides a means of biochemical cycling.

Plate tectonics and as a result continental drift and the creation of separate land masses would create diversified ecosystems and biodiversity, one of the strongest defences against extinction.


There are many other factors that make life on earth possible but not on other planets like the iron content or the right balance of other elements or atmosphere but lets get into some real astronomy:

As scientists learn more and more about the world around us and the universe, they are learning how incredibly synchronized, interconnected, and interdependent every little aspect is.


In fact, some are saying that according to the laws of physics and chemistry, we shouldn’t even be here.


In 1966, astronomer and famous promoter of science, Carl Sagan announced that there were two requirements for life to be possible on a planet. He said you had to have a certain type of star like our Sun and you had to have your planet a certain distance from the star. Given there were 10(exp 27) stars in the universe that would mean there were about 10(exp 24) planets where life could exist. Surely we were not the only life. Our planet was just a “pale blue dot”, tiny, and insignificant. Humans were insignificant in any scheme of things.




But since that time, scientists have kept discovering more and more parameters that are requirements for life to come into existence. The number of parameters required went up to 10, then 20, then 50. One Christian apologist, Dr. Hugh Ross, an astrophysicist, has compiled 200 parameters [1] that must be met by any planet that could possibly support life such as us. That was over 10 years ago.


What started out as 10(exp24) possible planets for life, kept shrinking and shrinking and shrinking until it hit zero, zip, nada. Then it kept right on going! In other words, the probability that any planet at all, even ours, could exist and support life became more and more impossible. We shouldn’t even be here!


Check out these two links for long lists of the necessary parameters along with detailed explanations.


Does Life Exist On Any Other Planet In The Universe? Another Look At SETI


Fine-Tuning For Life On Earth (Updated June 2004). (Lists 154 parameters necessary.)


Let me give you some examples. It turns out that not any old galaxy could allow life to exist. Actually it will have to be a spiral galaxy. It will have to be a certain size, not too big, and not too small. It will have to be a certain age, not too old and not too young. These facts would eliminate an estimated 90% of galaxies as candidates for a planet that could support life.




Next, some more parameters about the necessary star were discovered for life to be supported. It would have to be situated in the right location in the galaxy. It has to be located in a narrow region between the spiral arms of the spiral galaxy. If it is too close to the center, it will be destroyed because it will travel too fast and run into one of the spiral arms. If it is too far away, it will travel too slow and be destroyed as well. It can’t be in one of the spiral arms either.


There is a nice name given to all these amazing coincidences: the “Goldilocks” parameters, as in “not too hot, and not too cold, just right.”


The star has to be a single star. 75% of the stars in our galaxy are double stars or multiples. So they get eliminated. A planet can’t exist for long unless the star is single due to the irregular gravity. Also, the star has to be the right size, and the right mass, and the right age. It can’t be too hot or too cold. It can’t burn erratically and send off varying amounts of energy. The star has to be formed at just the right time in the history of the galaxy or the right chemicals for life won’t exist.


The planet that can support life must be in a very narrow zone around the star. It can’t be too close or it will get sucked in or burned up. It can’t be too far away or it will be too cold. It also has to be tipped on its axis approximately 23 degrees to allow for seasons and the right climate for life to grow in a large habitable zone.


Since life first began on earth, the sun’s luminosity has increased about 15%. Normally this would destroy all living things, but because life was growing and absorbing CO2 and other greenhouse gases, it was perfectly synchronized. Life was able to flourish. A very life supporting temperature has been maintained as life developed and exactly because that life was developing. It never got too cold or too hot. Going too far in either direction would have started a chain reaction leading to destruction of life.




Most stars as they revolve around the center of their galaxy also oscillate up and down. This is bad for life because the center of a galaxy sends off lots of radiation. It is extremely fortunate for us that there are lots of cosmic dust clouds to shield our sun from the radiation coming from the center of the Milky Way and also that our sun does not oscillate up and down too much. If it did, we’d die from radiation.


Obviously we need lots of water for life. If the earth moved just 2% closer or farther from the sun, there would be no more water.


The gravitational pull of the earth is exactly right for keeping water vapor trapped, but also amazingly and precisely right for letting methane and ammonia escape from the earth. These gases would be deadly. A few percentage points change in that and we all die.


The earth rotates on its axis every 24 hours. This is perfect. Any slower and we would be frozen or toasted, depending on which side you were on. Any faster and the winds would blow us away.


The earth is tilted on its axis 23.4 degrees. This is again perfect. More tilt and the climate would go crazy. Less tilt and the amount of livable space would be very small.



Did you know that you owe your life to the planet Jupiter? It is estimated that Earth would be struck by large meteors 1,000 times more often if not for Jupiter, obviously resulting in huge catastrophes and death. Jupiter is just the right size and in the right position to protect the Earth. If it were bigger, it would suck us away from the sun. If it were smaller, it would not shield us as well. Jupiter and Saturn have very nice smooth orbits which is to our benefit. If their orbits were a little more erratic, they’d pull us out of our orbit and you guessed it, we’d die.


All the gases in our atmosphere, oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, etc. seem to be in exactly the right proportions to sustain life. A little more oxygen and we could never put out all the fires.




The Earth has so many “Goldilocks” parameters that it is really mind boggling. The tectonic plates are necessary. The molten core is necessary for life. The earthquakes are necessary. The correct ratio between oceans and land masses is necessary.




This goes on and on and on. Up to 200 parameters have been identified already and that was 10 years ago. I’d be willing to bet that in the future even more parameters are going to be discovered, thus making it more impossible that we are alive by accident. If you want to get into more of the details, I highly encourage you to go to the two webpages I have referenced above or other resources that exist. Here is a third from the Wall Street Journal in December, 2014: Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God. [3]


So you can decide for yourself of course what you are going to believe, but you certainly have to admit that the odds of all these factors occurring so that life could emerge are almost infinitesimally small. Dr. Hugh Ross put the odds at 1 in 10(exp 42). There are an estimated 10(exp 27) stars in the whole universe. Let me write those odds out for you; 1 chance in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. He also said that was an optimistic estimate because he was generous when assigning the odds to each parameter.


Could we really be that lucky? Here’s my conclusion.


There must be God.



[1] Hugh Ross, PhD., Fine-Tuning For Life On Earth (Updated June 2004),


[2] Jim Stephens, Proof for God #49, The Moon.


[3] Eric Metaxas, Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God, Wall Street Journal,





The right location in the right kind of galaxy

Rare Earth suggests that much of the known universe, including large parts of our galaxy, are "dead zones" unable to support complex life. Those parts of a galaxy where complex life is possible make up the galactic habitable zone, primarily characterized by distance from the Galactic Center. As that distance increases:

Star metallicity declines. Metals (which in astronomy means all elements other than hydrogen and helium) are necessary to the formation of terrestrial planets.

The X-ray and gamma ray radiation from the black hole at the galactic center, and from nearby neutron stars, becomes less intense. Thus the early universe, and present-day galactic regions where stellar density is high and supernovae are common, will be dead zones.[2]

Gravitational perturbation of planets and planetesimals by nearby stars becomes less likely as the density of stars decreases. Hence the further a planet lies from the Galactic Center or a spiral arm, the less likely it is to be struck by a large bolide which could extinguish all complex life on a planet.


Dense center of galaxies such as NGC 7331 (often referred to as a "twin" of the Milky Way[3]) have high radiation levels toxic to complex life.


According to Rare Earth, globular clusters are unlikely to support life.

Item #1 rules out the outer reaches of a galaxy; #2 and #3 rule out galactic inner regions. Hence a galaxy's habitable zone may be a ring sandwiched between its uninhabitable center and outer reaches.

Also, a habitable planetary system must maintain its favorable location long enough for complex life to evolve. A star with an eccentric (elliptic or hyperbolic) galactic orbit will pass through some spiral arms, unfavorable regions of high star density; thus a life-bearing star must have a galactic orbit that is nearly circular, with a close synchronization between the orbital velocity of the star and of the spiral arms. This further restricts the galactic habitable zone within a fairly narrow range of distances from the Galactic Center. Lineweaver et al.[4] calculate this zone to be a ring 7 to 9 kiloparsecs in radius, including no more than 10% of the stars in the Milky Way,[5] about 20 to 40 billion stars. Gonzalez, et al.[6] would halve these numbers; they estimate that at most 5% of stars in the Milky Way fall in the galactic habitable zone.

Approximately 77% of observed galaxies are spiral,[7] two-thirds of all spiral galaxies are barred, and more than half, like the Milky Way, exhibit multiple arms.[8] According to Rare Earth, our own galaxy is unusually quiet and dim (see below), representing just 7% of its kind.[9] Even so, this would still represent more than 200 billion galaxies in the known universe.

Our galaxy also appears unusually favorable in suffering fewer collisions with other galaxies over the last 10 billion years, which can cause more supernovae and other disturbances.[10] Also, the Milky Way's central black hole seems to have neither too much nor too little activity.[11]

The orbit of the Sun around the center of the Milky Way is indeed almost perfectly circular, with a period of 226 Ma (million years), closely matching the rotational period of the galaxy. However, the majority of stars in barred spiral galaxies populate the spiral arms rather than the halo and tend to move in gravitationally aligned orbits, so there is little that is unusual about the Sun's orbit. While the Rare Earth hypothesis predicts that the Sun should rarely, if ever, have passed through a spiral arm since its formation, astronomer Karen Masters has calculated that the orbit of the Sun takes it through a major spiral arm approximately every 100 million years.[12] Some researchers have suggested that several mass extinctions do correspond with previous crossings of the spiral arms.[13]

Orbiting at the right distance from the right type of star[edit]



According to the hypothesis, Earth has an improbable orbit in the very narrow habitable zone (dark green) around the Sun.

The terrestrial example suggests that complex life requires liquid water, requiring an orbital distance neither too close nor too far from the central star, another scale of habitable zone or Goldilocks Principle:[14] The habitable zone varies with the star's type and age.

For advanced life, the star must also be highly stable, which is typical of middle star life, about 4.6 billion years old. Proper metallicity and size are also important to stability. The Sun has a low 0.1% luminosity variation. To date no solar twin star, with an exact match of the sun's luminosity variation, has been found, though some come close. The star must have no stellar companions, as in binary systems, which would disrupt the orbits of planets. Estimates suggest 50% or more of all star systems are binary.[15][16][17][18] The habitable zone for a main sequence star very gradually moves out over its lifespan until it becomes a white dwarf and the habitable zone vanishes.

The liquid water and other gases available in the habitable zone bring the benefit of greenhouse warming. Even though the Earth's atmosphere contains a water vapor concentration from 0% (in arid regions) to 4% (in rain forest and ocean regions) and – as of February 2018 – only 408.05[citation needed] parts per million of CO2, these small amounts suffice to raise the average surface temperature by about 40 °C,[19] with the dominant contribution being due to water vapor, which together with clouds makes up between 66% and 85% of Earth's greenhouse effect, with CO2 contributing between 9% and 26% of the effect.[20]

Rocky planets must orbit within the habitable zone for life to form. Although the habitable zone of such hot stars as Sirius or Vega is wide, hot stars also emit much more ultraviolet radiation that ionizes any planetary atmosphere. They may become red giants before advanced life evolves on their planets. These considerations rule out the massive and powerful stars of type F6 to O (see stellar classification) as homes to evolved metazoan life.

Small red dwarf stars conversely have small habitable zones wherein planets are in tidal lock, with one very hot side always facing the star and another very cold side; and they are also at increased risk of solar flares (see Aurelia). Life therefore cannot arise in such systems. Rare Earth proponents claim that only stars from F7 to K1 types are hospitable. Such stars are rare: G type stars such as the Sun (between the hotter F and cooler K) comprise only 9%[21] of the hydrogen-burning stars in the Milky Way.

Such aged stars as red giants and white dwarfs are also unlikely to support life. Red giants are common in globular clusters and elliptical galaxies. White dwarfs are mostly dying stars that have already completed their red giant phase. Stars that become red giants expand into or overheat the habitable zones of their youth and middle age (though theoretically planets at a much greater distance may become habitable).

An energy output that varies with the lifetime of the star will likely prevent life (e.g., as Cepheid variables). A sudden decrease, even if brief, may freeze the water of orbiting planets, and a significant increase may evaporate it and cause a greenhouse effect that prevents the oceans from reforming.

All known life requires the complex chemistry of metallic elements. The absorption spectrum of a star reveals the presence of metals within, and studies of stellar spectra reveal that many, perhaps most, stars are poor in metals. Because heavy metals originate in supernova explosions, metallicity increases in the universe over time. Low metallicity characterizes the early universe: globular clusters and other stars that formed when the universe was young, stars in most galaxies other than large spirals, and stars in the outer regions of all galaxies. Metal-rich central stars capable of supporting complex life are therefore believed to be most common in the quiet suburbs[vague] of the larger spiral galaxies—where radiation also happens to be weak.[22]

With the right arrangement of planets[edit]




Earth's atmosphere


The development of an ozone layer formed protection from ultraviolet (UV) sunlight. Nitrogen and carbon dioxide are needed in a correct ratio for life to form. Lightning is needed for nitrogen fixation. The carbon dioxide gas needed for life comes from sources such as volcanoes and geysers.



Then there is the timing of life and how its been a miracle. Remember in the evolution/atheist religion this is all by chance. If life is not designed if there is no designer then life can not choose to exist at the right moment in time. At a time when we just happen to be floating between two spiral arms or at a time when we are not experiencing extinction level events and yet ...



Timeline of evolution; human writings exists for only 0.000218% of Earth's history.

While life on Earth is regarded to have spawned relatively early in the planet's history, the evolution from multicellular to intelligent organisms took around 800 million years. Civilizations on Earth have existed for about 12,000 years and radio communication reaching space has existed for less than 100 years. Relative to the age of the Solar System (~4.57 Ga) this is a short time, in which extreme climatic variations, super volcanoes, and large meteorite impacts were absent. These events would severely harm intelligent life, as well as life in general. For example, the Permian-Triassic mass extinction, caused by widespread and continuous volcanic eruptions in an area the size of Western Europe, led to the extinction of 95% of known species around 251.2 Ma ago. About 65 million years ago, the Chicxulub impact at the Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary (~65.5 Ma) on the Yucatán peninsula in Mexico led to a mass extinction of the most advanced species at that time.

If there were intelligent extraterrestrial civilizations able to make contact with distant Earth, they would have to live in the same 12Ka period of the 800Ma evolution of life.


Our planets location gives us the ability to find out more about the universe. It gives us the best possability for viewing the universe and discovering more of the awesome nature of the Universe. Because we are inbetween spiral arms of the galaxy we can view things that would not be possible otherwise. We were given a front row seat in a theater that has very very few front seats. Its as if we were placed in a particular place at a particular time to be able to see the greatest movie in the universe = The Universe. By the greatest director in history = God.



But lets bring it back home a bit to the Moon:



Everybody likes the Moon, right? Have you ever met anyone who had bad things to say about the Moon?





The Moon is associated with love and romance. Songs, poems, and art describe it all the time. We think of it as our friend. Sometimes after a really struggling time or when we are feeling especially lonely, we look up in the sky and are surprised by a full Moon. Then the feeling comes over us, “At least God loves me.”


All throughout history the Moon has provided light in the night. It has been of incalculable value to our ancestors. Even today many peoples of the world have to depend on the light of the Moon at night. If it were just an average moon in our Solar System it would be 10 times smaller and give off only 1/20th the light, virtually worthless. [1]





How many wonderful memories do you have over your lifetime that include the Moon?


The cycles of the Moon help us tell time and the passing of months and seasons. Many cultures celebrate festivals centered on the Moon. Our own bodies have emotional cycles that correspond to 28 - 29 days, known as biorhythms. Women of course have a fertility cycle of similar length.





No other known planet in the whole Universe has a moon like it.


That’s all really wonderful stuff. That is almost enough proof for God by itself. Such a truly sentimental rock existing up in the sky that moves our hearts so much is very, very unlikely to happen by accident.





However, I need to tell you more about the Moon. Without it, we would all be dead. We could not survive on the Earth if there were no Moon.


The Moon stabilizes the Earth on its axis. If not for the Moon, the Earth would swing back and forth on its axis up to about 90 degrees [2] instead of just the few degrees it varies now. This would cause unbelievable chaos in the temperatures, climate conditions, volcanoes, oceans and more. Nothing would be stable and we could not live here.


The Moon is primarily responsible for the ocean tides. This constant churning, up and down twice a day, is what cleans and refreshes the oceans and shorelines keeping them from getting stagnant. It stirs up the nutrients in the oceans providing the food sources needed by the tiniest of sea creatures, algaes, and oxygen-providing microbes. [3] All life in the sea depends on them. [4] So we depend on them too. Ocean tides are now also being studied as a potential source for clean renewable energy.





The Moon plays a role as a protector in the sky shielding us from such things as asteroids and cosmic dust. Look at all the pock marks on the Moon from collisions. One crater is 8 miles deep and 1,500 miles across, the largest known in the Solar System. [5]


Scientists have been able to learn a lot about the Sun and the Universe only because of the Moon. It is exactly 400 times smaller than the Sun and 400 times closer. What a coincidence! It also revolves around the Earth in the same plane as the Earth revolves around the Sun. This is very unusual and not one of the 150 other moons in the Solar System does it. [6]


Because of all this, the Moon is able to eclipse the Sun. Especially valuable to scientists is the total solar eclipse which allows them the only time they can possibly view the Sun’s Corona and take measurements on it. This has led to untold leaps in knowledge in fields such as astronomy.





Gravity is another amazing fact of nature that we learn more about with the aid of the Moon. Sir Isaac Newton was trying to understand the Moon’s rotation when he discovered gravity. Here is an amazing fact. If you had to replace the strength of gravity between the Earth and Moon with a long steel pole, you would have to get a pole that is 531 miles in diameter. Think about that! It’s hard to even imagine an invisible force that strong. It is estimated at 70 million trillion pounds.


OK. Here comes the best part of all. Scientists don’t know where the Moon came from! [7] That’s right. As long as they exclude God, they have no viable theory for the origin of the Moon.


There have been a number of theories over the years, but we have sent 12 men to walk on the Moon and they've brought back 842 pounds [8] of rock and dust samples. All those theories fell apart. Known laws of physics and geology would have to be violated if they were true.





Godless theories for the source of the Moon fit into three areas: (1) formation from the earth (or fission, somehow a chunk of earth broke off), (2) formation independent of the earth (capture, the moon was passing by), and (3) formation simultaneously with the earth (condensation, from a dust cloud). For a brief consideration of each and how it fails to explain the origin, see the sources in the footnotes. [9] [10] [11]


The latest theory which is what they will try to tell you in textbooks and on websites is about how a Mars-sized planet slammed into the Earth and ended up creating the Moon. But if you read all the way down the page you can find where they mention the arguments against this theory. For example, it’s almost impossible that such a collision could happen. Secondly, even if it did, the Moon would certainly NOT be made of the material that is in the rocks that were brought back.


Think that over.


Here’s my simplification of what those texts are saying. “Here’s the truth about the origin of the Moon. We know that the odds that this is the truth are about 1 in a million, but believe us because we’re scientists. It’s the truth.”


I’m sorry, but in my world, the real world, that is not the definition of truth. And it’s not scientific either. If the odds are only 1 in a million that it is true, I would simply call it false, and not lie about it. Scientists who promote lies should have their funding cut off.


Here’s a funny description of their state of affairs by one scientist. “The best explanation [for the existence of the Moon] was observational error — the Moon does not exist.” [12]


The Moon was created by God. There aren't any other options. There has to be God.




Speed of light between Earth and Moon



[1] Donald B. DeYoung, "The Moon: A Faithful Witness in the Sky",


[2] Danny Faulkner, "A Perfect Partner",


[3] Brian Thomas, "Water in Rocks May Support Moon's Bible Origins",


[4] Donald B. DeYoung, "The Moon: A Faithful Witness in the Sky",


[5] The Institute for Creation Research, "Earth Was Created in a Wonderful Location".


[6] Donald B. DeYoung, "The Moon: A Faithful Witness in the Sky",


[7] David W. Hughes, “The Open Question in Selenology,” Nature, Vol. 327, 28 May 1987, p. 291.

“In astronomical terms, therefore, the Moon must be classed as a well-known object, but astronomers still have to admit shamefacedly that they have little idea as to where it came from. This is particularly embarrassing, because the solution of the mystery was billed as one of the main goals of the US lunar exploration program.”


[8] Wikipedia, “Moon Rock”, During the six Apollo surface excursions, 2,415 samples weighing 382 kg (842 lb) were collected, the majority by Apollo 15, 16, and 17.


[9] Voy Forums, The Origin of the Moon”.


“Evolutionary theories for the origin of the Moon are highly speculative and completely inadequate. The Moon could not have spun off from Earth, because its orbital plane is too highly inclined. Nor could it have formed from the same material as Earth, because the relative abundances of its elements are too dissimilar from those of Earth. The Moon’s nearly circular orbit is also strong evidence that it was never torn from nor captured by Earth. If the Moon formed from particles orbiting Earth, other particles should be easily visible inside the Moon’s orbit; none are.”

"Some claim that the Moon formed from debris splashed from Earth by a Mars-size impactor. If so, many small moons should have formed. The impactor’s glancing blow would either be too slight to form our large Moon, or so violent that Earth would end up spinning too fast. Besides, part of Earth’s surface and mantle would have melted, but none of the indicators of that melting have been found. Also, small particles splashed from Earth would have completely melted, allowing any water inside them to escape into the vacuum of space. However, Apollo astronauts found on the Moon tiny glass beads that had erupted as molten material from inside the Moon but had dissolved water inside! The total amount of water that was once inside the moon probably equaled that in the Caribbean Sea.”


[10] Evolution News & Views, "How the Moon Supports the Privileged Planet Hypothesis", December 5, 2013,


[11] Donald B. DeYoung, "The Moon: A Faithful Witness in the Sky",


[12] . Jack J. Lissauer, “It’s Not Easy to Make the Moon,” Nature, Vol. 389, 25 September 1997, pp. 327–328.


All of this is just scratching the surface and yet it is a lot to take in. I would like to have others or team up with others to make an even better section on this as well as some pages that are for quick reference. In the end I will go through all the sections myself to make them the best I can make on the web but it will take time. Please be patient or … just jump in and start helping :)