Astronomer Robin Canup has spent fifteen years developing models that seem to demonstrate that, whether it is a desired finding or not:
Such fine-tuning was not lost on Canup, who remarked in a recent Nature review article, “Current theories on the formation of the Moon owe too much to cosmic coincidences.”4 Indeed, the required “coincidences” continue to pile up… In yet another article in the same issue as Canup’s review, earth scientist Tim Elliott observes that the degree and kinds of complexity and fine-tuning required by lunar origin models appear to be increasing at an exponential rate. Among lunar origin researchers, he notes, “the sequence of conditions that currently seems necessary in these revised versions of lunar formation have led to philosophical disquiet.”
What is this philosophical disquiet? The moon-forming impact event presents astronomers and all humanity with one of the most dramatic sets of evidence for supernatural, super-intelligent design for the specific benefit of humanity. Hugh Ross, “Moon Strike: Lunar Origin Causes “Philosophical Disquiet”” at Salvo
But to think that is to risk banishment from the field, surely, irrespective of the pattern of evidence.
Was it yesterday that we noted particle physicist Sabine Hossenfelder’s view that fine-tuning is “a waste of time”? Not so fast. If the evidence points to fine-tuning and the only alternative is the crackpot cosmology she deplores, it’s not so much a waste of time as a philosophically unacceptable conclusion. Put another way, it comes down to fine-tuning, nonsense, or nothing.
Also: Planetary trivia question to stump the lunch table:Mercury, Not Venus, Is the Closest Planet to Earth ““Further, Mercury is the closest neighbor, on average, to each of the other seven planets in the solar system,” they write. Wait—what?” Ryan F. Mandelbaum at Gizmodo
Follow UD News at Twitter!
See also: Moon formed from smashed moonlets?
Scientists finally know how old Moon is What’s surprising, really, is how little we know about the moon in general.
And various current theories:
Another moon origin theory: Epic crash
How the Moon Formed: 5 Wild Lunar Theories (Mike Wall at Space.com, 2014)
Our moon formed in collision with embryo planet?
Origin of the moon still shrouded in mystery
One Reply to “Hugh Ross: The fine-tuning that enabled our life-friendly moon creates discomfort”
Peace & joy, Happy Friday.
YES! The Moon is extremely unlikely and was ABSOLUTELY necessary in the formation of Earth, as a home for Life.
There is a scene in “Red Dwarf”, the English Sci-Fi comedy, wherein Lister, the last Human in the universe, needs to eliminate some star for being naughty. And the “aiming mechanism” he comes up with to cause the series of collisions that will explode the star in exactly the right way is a POOL CUE rigged to transfer 3 dimensional movement. Lister hits his object “ball” just right, a series of other “balls” bounce around the “table”, and the naughty star explodes.
I keep thinking of The Designer, perhaps with his baseball cap on backwards, leaning over the table to line up the shot to make Luna strike Terra, in EXACTLY the right way. The difference of course is that The Designer lined up the shot 30 million years before the collision. And yet people insist this wasn’t PLANNED.