The energy given to the moon comes from Earth's rotation—and to compensate, our planet is slowing down. In other words, days are getting longer. Geologists believe that an Earth day was originally five to six hours long. If the moon had been less massive, thereby creating less drag on Earth, our planet wouldn't have slowed down as much. The day would be, perhaps, 15 hours long.
Weaker tides (of a half moon) would also have caused less erosion of Earth's landmasses over the past few billion years—and the continents' shorelines would likely look quite different for it. Less soil and minerals from land leaching into the ocean might have had profound effects on the origin of life, too. Some organic (carbon-based) compounds thought to have seeded life may not have made it into the primordial soup of the early oceans, which would also have mixed less thanks to the reduced tides.
Assuming life had still arisen, it would have had to contend with more frequent ice ages as well more extreme warm snaps. Large moons stabilize planets. Mars, which sports only two tiny moons, wobbles a lot on its axis, and as a result it has bigger climatic swings and seasonal temperature changes than Earth does. Without the full-mass moon to hold us steady, life on Earth might have experienced greater seasonal fluctuations.
The outlook for life would have been dim—literally. A smaller moon means less scattered sunlight at night—that's all moonlight is—which would mean darker nighttimes. Whatever life forms did evolve on this altered Earth would have had to develop bigger or more sensitive eyes to help them navigate, forage and spawn at night under this diminished glow.
Neil F. Comins is the author of several books, including What If the Moon Didn't Exist?: Voyages to Earths that Might Have Been; Heavenly Errors: Misconceptions About the Real Nature of the Universe; and The Hazards of Space Travel: A Tourist's Guide. He teaches astronomy at the University of Maine, Orono, and despite his lunar fascination, he swears he isn't a lunatic.
See what we're tweeting about
66 Comments
Add CommentIsn't it just incredible that extremely educated people take in all this wonder of everything being perfectly balanced in this universe within just inches and then can definitively state without reservation or batting an eye that it was all just an accident.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBaffles the mind, doesn't it?
great read. but an even bigger question..what if the moon was made out of cheese?!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ oops I pwnd U
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm assuming Woolfy is insinuating that god created the world.
Everything fits perfectly together.
Take a biology class sometime and learn about DNA. It's like a programming language.
Biology should rock your world apart if you're an athiest, and so should pretty much every aspect of life.
"Isn't it just incredible that extremely educated people ... without reservation or batting an eye that it was all just an accident. Baffles the mind, doesn't it?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt might baffle your clearly unevolved mind, but it doesn't baffle mine or any of the 'extremely educated people' you try to cite. Statistics whos that as IQ increases, theism decreases. Aspire to be smart by following in their footsteps and stop believing in these stupid, foolish fairy tales.
Make the best you can of THIS life, because it's the only one you can be sure of having.
Stupid bluetooth! Sometimes it cuts out unexpectedly for a few seconds and when it recovers itself, throws any typed characters during that 'silence' out, in random order. Hence the previous comment of mine, 3rd sentence: "Statistics SHOW that as IQ increases, theism decreases." Look it up. I'll wait.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe responses after your comment answer your question.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPhillydrifter's vocabulary indicates a lack of the unique qualities an intelligent creator would endow upon the created beings. Rejecting the gift of the image of God can be harmful to your future.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPhillydrifter, very well spoken! The question is why such non-scientific beliefs ever become beliefs in the first place - sciam explains it well. We are hard-wired to seek explanations for occurrences, and there is no biological penalty if we assign a connection which COULD be true (praying for rain, sometimes it rains, maybe a celestial homo sapien heard my prayer!) vs. assigning a connection which is observably false. If you never question your assumptions (faith) you automatically preclude the scientific method. For me, If my belief causes me to act irrationally i drop the belief rather than dropping rationality. By the way, do serpents still talk to people or was that only in the days when 99% of the population was illiterate?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course "God" was created in the image of man. Funny how every god in every society looks just like a member of that society. Every facet of Christian faith was borrowed from the existing myths/religions of that time and place - from the Gilgamesh epic for Noah, to the Apollo cult of the resurrected redeemer for Jesus. The Bible is a hodgepodge of writings over a 1200 yr period, in many different languages, by at least 60 discernable authors, ccovering a vast array of social conditions, tribes, locations, reasons for the story. Every writer had an intended audience, with a specific intended message and they told the story to achieve an end, be it control of the population or whatever.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe "Santa Claus in the sky" belief won't change even when we get definitive proof of life on other earths, which should be within the next 10 yrs or so. More education = less war, less poverty, less religion. Religion = death and destruction and eventually mushroom clouds over our planet's major cities. Never stop questioning!
great investigations������. just thanks god for this is no real, yes god is exist
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisand be with us for him we are here,the earth is only one in the universe,
are much things than make we are here, one, the moon, the oxigen, the light sun,the water, than in other places,other planets is no exist this things
than make the life possible.
@ Phillydrifter:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe way you describe the people who introduced the concept of god to the world is skewed by your thought of the world as without a god. A world without a god would definitely have those types of people introducing the concept of god. But a world with a god wouldn't have those people introducing the concept.
So your logic is circular, in that you have to assume there's no god in order to prove there's no god.
And god didn't give free will so that we can choose him or not choose him and still be ok with him. That's not what it's about. He gave us free will so that we would truly choose him as opposed to being forced to choose him. If we don't choose him, we choose the opposite of him, which is death after death.
We are better than the other animals on this planet because we can love, we can feel, we think, learn, and wonder.
And just because in a few billion years (that's ~2 or 3,000,000,000) the world won't be balanced or suitable for life doesn't mean it isn't absolutely and amazingly perfectly balanced for life right now. Your argument was a very silly one.
"Statistics whos that as IQ increases, theism decreases."
Yes, because the more you go to school and are taught atheism and evolution, the more you think theism is stupid, when in reality, it's not.
This next part is very important. If you only take this away from this conversation, I will be happy.
The theory of Evolution is based on the assumption that there is no god. Thus, you CANNOT use it to try and prove that there is no god, or you are again using circular reasoning. Evolution cannot disprove god, because "god/the supernatural doesn't exist" is an assumption from the very start, just as creationism cannot disprove the idea that god doesn't exist, because the idea that "god exists" is an assumption from the very start.
This goes for biogenesis as well.
NOTHING science says disproves god.
And also, insulting another person just makes you look like you're unsure of your own argument.
@commonsense77, if you're getting your facts from Zeitgeist, I suggest you watch one of the debunking videos. The creator of Zeitgeist seriously is either inept or is lying to the world. It's a shame how many languages this BS is being translated into.
And I don't see why finding life on other planets (intelligent life even) would make people lose faith in Christianity or other religions, nor do I see how Christianity today is such a terrible thing (unless you look at the extremists who kill the sinful, which is the MINORITY). Care to fill us in?
@pablogarcia97: If you truly believe in god, then please phrase your words more carefully so that we can understand what you are saying.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you are just posing as someone who believes in god and acting stupid to try to "show how stupid theists are", then you sir, have lost your atheistic argument. Once you try to make your opponent look bad, it means your argument is over, and that you have nothing else to argue with.
(unless you look at the extremists who kill/hate the sinful or rejoice at the death of the sinful, which are the EXTREME MINORITY.) *
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisfix'd
Do you think in some alternative reality, some bugged-eyed intelligent creature wrote an article about the results if the moon was twice as massive? And then some bugged-eye dumbass said thanks to the infinite wisdom of bugged-eyed flying spaghetti monster that everything is in perfect balance, for if the day was 24 hours long instead of 15, every bugged-eyed body would be tired all the time. Of course, thats only the bug-eyes on the west side of Pangaea; those of east have a totally different mythology.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think people who get their science education from Ben Steins web site shouldnt be surprised if they are belittled on this one.
@TiredOfBS
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisno, I don't think that.
But you're assuming our idea of "perfect" isn't so. Can you come up with another "perfect" arrangement with the moon being half as massive? I can assure you that any scenario you bring up would be less "perfect" than the one we have now (in regards to life and biology).
You don't get it do you. The earth moon arrangement is "perfect" only because that was what life evolved under. If the moon was half as massive, it would be "perfect" for the life that evolved for that environment.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNever try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ TiredOfBS: No, you don't understand my argument. I believe that there is no other way for life to be than the way it is right now. Show me a biological system that is just as good as today's biological system that would work well under the "half-moon" scenario, because I don't think one could exist.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Show me a biological system that is just as good as today's biological system that would work well under the "half-moon" scenario, because I don't think one could exist."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOh, well then, you must be right. If *you* can't imagine it, then surely such a thing could not be possible.
@ KY_Prof
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDo not twist my words.
Of course if I just can't imagine something, that doesn't mean it can't exist.
I'm saying that it can't exist because it can't exist. I believe the way life is right now is the only way it can be, or at least very specific, and can't be altered with minor tweaks. I believe that living systems are not as easily tweaked as you make it seem.
What effect does interaction between Earth's magnetic field with the Moon's have upon life on earth?. Might this be responsible for our ability to generate electric power (rotating magnetic fields,etc) the way we presently do? Might a smaller moon mean weaker magnetic interactions, and thus a different concept, and efficiency levels and principles of power generation ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMight the interactions between Earth and Moon's magnetic fields have any influence on the way we generate electricity? What might be the effects of the interactions of Earth's magnetic field with the moon's if we had a half-size moon in this regard?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisno woolfy it doesn't, and maybe if you had any brain cells at all in that head of yours you would see it the same way you twit. im wondering if this complete moron even read the whole dam article and if he did he probably has no idea what any of it means. Im with phillydriver on this one!!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSome of you 'theists' need to research the anthropomorphic principle sometime. Simply put: Everything seems perfect for us and our kind of life quite simply because if it wasn't we wouldn't be here to marvel at how perfect it is. It doesn't need any level of 'design' to have come about.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAdditionally, we have a very small sample set to understand the conditions that life can arise from and exists under. With a sample of just ONE (i.e. Earth), you can draw NO conclusions as to what could work and what couldn't.
What happened to simply searching for the truth? What does attempting to demean everyone else have to do with anything? And, as an agnostic, isn't it just as much a matter of faith to say with certitude that a creator did not create the world as it operates?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAfter reading the article, I took the time to read all of the comments.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am losing faith in humanity.
Personally, I question religion. I question religion because of how easy it is to misinterpret.
But I respect religion. Religion in itself is an institution that has been around for thousands of years. I respect those who are religious.
Now, having said that, I ask: What does that have to do with anything? I mean really, what is wrong with people nowadays? How do we let an article that is speculating on a "what if" turn into a debate about religion?
This is completely ridiculous.
basicsense and abimbola are the only two who seemed to care about the article itself, and Joe H's comment made the most sense.
@ Slugsie that's true. You can't know whether or not other types of "life" can crop up with just earth to look at. But the same goes in the other direction--you can't say that there MUST be other types of life systems, and try to use that to disprove theism.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ the infinite pet, I found the article interesting myself. But I remember already coming across something similar to it, so it wasn't new. Also, I didn't have an account here until I wanted to reply to some of the things people saying and harassing others with. =/
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI totally agree with you. And religion too was a pretext for some people who didn't want to work to still have food and shelter saying things like "I was chosen by some incredible being to rule this land so you will work and I'll do nothing". And I'm not sure about everything being so "perfectly balanced"; even our genetic code wich seems to be the perfect way to store information is full of errors, just take a look to all those horrible genetic diseases and what can they do to you.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf moon was only half , what would be its effect on earth's orbit?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf moon was only half , What would be its effect on Earth's Orbit?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the Moon had only half the size of the present, then professor Snimoc F. Lein would be wondering how strange life would be, if the Moon had twice the mass it had.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLife on Earth is as it is because conditions are what they are - how extraordinary.
As for Ice ages, they occur with intervals of app. 250 mio. years.
As for the continents' shorelines, they do look quite different today than they did 100 mio. years ago.
Re. the question " What effect does interaction between Earth's magnetic field with the Moon's have".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe Moon does not have a magnetic field, so the magnetic interaction is nill.
Re. pjmumbai's question "If moon was only half , What would be its effect on Earth's Orbit?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEarth's mass: 5.9736E+27 g; Moon's mass: 7.349E+25 g; ½ Moon's mass: 3.6745E+25 g
If the Moon's mass was only half of what it is now, the combined mass of the Earth+Moon system would be 0.993924 x present mass.
Earth's Orbit around the Sun would be slightly closer to the Sun, as a first approximation about 2.7 km closer, so instead of 149,600,000 km the average distance should become 149,599,997.3 km (149,600,000 km in round figures).
Nickster at 9:41 PM on 7/29/08 you're a fuckin' idiot and i'm not gonna waste my time either reading your post or writing any kind of intelligent response. I have faith in myself. That's all i need.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow come you never see news stories on a Hindu or a Buddhist who found a slice of toast with the image of jebus on it?
Educate yourselves on occam's razor. You fucking retards are presuming there's a god, when it's an unnecessary addition. We don't need a 'god' to explain the universe, we have science.
Back in the 1600s Galileo (whom I was born exactly 413 years after) suggested a heliocentric universe and was imprisoned by the roman catholic retards until he recanted, and he was under house arrest until his death. Pope john paul II (a fellow pole of mine) finally 'forgave' him in 1982.
I've argued with thiests who've said 'imagine if the earth was just 1000 miles further or closer to the sun; if they were, it would be either too hot or cold to sustain human life! NO SHIT! that's why we've EVOLVED into our environments. If the planet HAD formed 1000 miles closer or further (and still presented the same life-supporting features it did in real life) then we'd grow in THOSE environments.
You people are pre-supposing god when there is not a shred of evidence for supernatural deities. Man created god, god didn't create man cuz there wasn't one until we made one; to 'PUT THE FEAR OF GOD' into someone! "If you dont listen to me god will be very upset with you and you'll burn in hell forever!' that's a pretty strong argument when the priests during the middle ages were the only ones who were allowed to learn to read or write. The church wanted to keep people stupid.
@Pavel:"And I'm not sure about everything being so "perfectly balanced"; even our genetic code wich seems to be the perfect way to store information is full of errors, just take a look to all those horrible genetic diseases and what can they do to you. "
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThose 'mutations' are what 'separate the men (who survive) from the boys (who fall prey to aggressors). Those mutations are why some are taller, faster, than others. Those mutations are the key to our evolution.
Religion was a tool of the smart to reign over the weak. And it's working perfectly. Look how many citizens fell in line behind GWB when he said 'god spoke to me and told me to invade iraq, that it was the right thing to do.' Anyone else who says that and declares war on another country and starts bombing and killing would be wrapped in a straight jacket bouncin' off the interior walls of an insane asylum. But you people just ate it all up, and look where's it's gotten us. Smart people use 'religion' to control you fucking idiots.
waynee: what? do you even understand what you just wrote? my vocab indicates a lack of unique qualities an intelligent creator would have endowed me with? you just pwn3d urself, n00b. unless you're trying to pull some entirely juvenile joke that i'm somehow not human? (What would i be then, an ape? Which we share something like 99.6% of our dna with? and you'd still rather believe some super-powered figment of your imagination beats cold hard science?)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe world will only truly be free when the last politician is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. That's a famous quote but I don't remember who to credit for it.
"pablogarcia97 at 8:05 PM on 7/29/08
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisgreat investigations??????. just thanks god for this is no real, yes god is exist and be with us for him we are here,the earth is only one in the universe, are much things than make we are here, one, the moon, the oxigen, the light sun,the water, than in other places,other planets is no exist this things than make the life possible. "
Go back to ESL. You fail. Sorry.
you are very correct and are the only person that shares my opinion to the tee
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthen we could eat the poofter
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisspot on champ give me an e mail and we can talk
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisof what degree of homosexuallity are you at ????????
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisspot on waynee im on grbreedon@optusnet.com.au for an intelligent conversation
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis was a great post, great logic. I love logic, which rules the universe. There are universal laws of the universe we're only just now beginning to discover, science is the key and religion is the enemy. I'm pretty much done with this conversation, I may check it again to see if there are any more intelligent comments like the one referenced above by jstahle at 8:02 AM on 7/31/08.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI've just recently learned that the year 2009 will be designated International Year of Astronomy in Honor of Galileo, whom I was born 413 years after, to the day (feb. 15th). They're honoring him because 400 years ago he invented the telescope and turned it towards the sky.
There is no god. get over it. Stop blaming someone else for your failures or thanking them for your successes. It's you that makes your life happen, along with random other factors, that's survival of the fittest.
If ancient myhts of the nations were permeated by superstitious beliefs, an ancient, yet reliable record dually existed : the Bible. Concerning celestial wonders, the Bible foretold in the book of Acts of Apostles, chapter 2, verse 20 : ‘The sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the great and illustrious day of Jehovah arrives.’ Recent studies show the sun is not totally immobile. Better, it is turning left and right with an angle less than 30 degrees. In that way, the small dark region in the sun is often exposed, thus allowing complete darkness in the night. As sun thermonuclear energy is running out, this dark region will become sizable, at the appointed time of the reaction. The sun will thus be turned into darkness, and the moon, not receiving enough light from the sun, will rather display infrared light from the nearer planet (Earth), thus being turned into a bloodlike aspect. Similarly, Joshua of old asked for the smaller dark face of the sun to be hidden. Since the moon could step in the miraculous longer day and thus create a disturbing eclipse, Joshua equally asked for the moon to be halted. Another instance of the sun being set to its darker position is when Jesus Christ expired. Darkness covered the region for about one hour.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe article is interesting speculation working from basic assumptions to conclusions via laws of physics. But one assumption I did not expect was contained in the last statement of this sentence:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this-----------------------------------------
Assuming our half-size moon was composed of rock as dense as that of the actual moon, it would still be 80 percent as large across as the full-size version (based on the relationship between a sphere's volume and radius that you learned in grade school).
-----------------------------------------
I went all the way through high school in Los Angeles City School system and was never taught the relationship between the volume and radius of a sphere. My experience was very common and I am sure that it is working the same way now in many schools. I have fortunately come across a two-book set to educate my daughter at home:
Mathematics, Structure and Function, Course 1 and 2
by Mary P. Dolciani, Robert H. Sorgenfrey, Joh A. Graham.
Published by McDougal Littell/Houghton Mifflin 1992-2001
In Course 2 the text gives this formula: Volume = 4/3 pi X (radius)^2
Presumably the schools where I live (Hawthorne. CA) are supplying similar material. But I have learned that the teachers do not have time to go through the whole book and in many cases do not have enough copies of their texts to send one home with every student. My wife and I obtained one last semester for sixth grade by signing for it and returning it at the end of the semester. (We had to buy own Ancient History text and signed for a book on CD for Earth Science.)
I am always surprised to learn that someone received Math and Science education in grade school in a manner that they can remember learning these things at a young age, so I would ask the author, when and where did you learn the geometry?
Fabrice LOTY's comment is one of the most beautiful examples of insanity I have seen in more than 50 years.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnyone who has spent the summer north of the northern or south of the southern polar circles will have observed,
that no small dark region in the sun is ever exposed, and there are never any complete darkness in the night
- au contraire, as the man said, when on board a ship in a gale, he was asked whether he had had lunch.
During the summer in the polar regions there is eternal daylight.
According to the best, most recent models for the Sun, we shall have to wait, first for an expansion of the Sun
(in 2-3 billion years) that will vaporize the oceans on Earth, next for the expulsion of the Sun's atmosphere and the diffuse
red giant stage, then the planetary nebula stage when the Sun turns into a white dwarf (in about 6-7 billion years from now),
then finally for the immensely long period of time while the remainder of the Sun cools from 100,000 Kelvin to darkness (say, 50 or more billion years to wait for the darkness).
Some of these arguments remind me of Voltaire's Candide in which Dr.Pangloss teaches that this is the most perfect of all possible worlds because God created it and God is perfect. Unfortunately, the anthropomorphic principle doesn't fair much better arguing that everything is how it is because were it not, it wouldn't be. We might consider that in Newton's day, men marveled at how ignorant the ancients were. No doubt we will share a similiar eulogy a thousand years from now. Our best present day conjecture on the nature of the universe is doomed to be supplanted by the genius of the coming millenium. So temper your pride and maintain an open mind.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPhillydrifter, you make me laugh.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPhillydrifter, you are an unfortunate person with apparently more hatred than intelligence. Spewing rancor like you were there personally when everything came into existence simply makes you look like an idiot. Anyone in the world can read a textbook and throw out what you call "logical" arguments. But that's ok, nobody in the world is perfect, nor better, than anyone else. So to humor your logic, perhaps you can stand up to the challenge of answering a few simple questions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1: What is the last number that we can count to?
2: If evolution exists in the extremity that most evolutionists describe it, how do you explain us being here, apparently very advanced through evolution, and apes are still running around flinging crap? Are they just slow to evolve? Very, very, very slow?
3: Where exactly is the end of the universe?
4: Lets say, for humors sake, that evolution and the big bang theory are the actual reasons for the existence of the universe and everything in it. So, people came from apes, those apes came from a lower form of crawling creatures, those crawling creatures from half aquatic ones, and blah blah blah all the way to single celled organisms that came from a primordial soup. And the planets (including our own) and all the stars followed a similar path, right? Ok, so, where'd all that astral dust come from? Other planets being blown away by stars, right? Ok, where'd those planets come from? Just random floating dust collected over billions and billions of years, right? Ok, where'd the dust come from? The big bang? Ok, where'd the big bang come from? Oh, that's right, it supposedly came from a massive compression of all the energy that exists in the universe, right? And then it exploded and poof, everything was made (after trillions and trillions of years), right? Ok, where'd the energy come from to make the big bang? And where'd the next previous thing come from? And the next? And the next?
It doesn't matter what you believe in, the logic here cannot be denied legitimately. No matter where you come from or what explanation you can come up with, at some point you have to face the fact that infinity does exist. And if infinity exists, so can infinite power. Everything had to come from somewhere. You can either believe that there is intelligence that organized the mathematics that govern the universe, or you can just say I don't want to believe simply because I don't want to.
As for believers-in-God trying to explain how the end of the world is going to happen, save it. Trying to convince people by predicting the future with your own interpretations of science isn't going to work. Proverbs 3:5-6 says, “Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding, and he will make your paths straight.” That doesn't mean don't think for yourself. In other words it's saying, don't use religion or science (or any other form of understanding) as a means of living/preaching, because both of those belief systems are man made. Jesus didn't come to bring religion, but redemption, right?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSorry for the double post everybody, my internet is a little buggy :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA few simple questions and some answers. --
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisQ01: What is the last number that we can count to?
A01: There is no end to the numbers we can count to. --
Q02: If evolution exists in the extremity that most evolutionists describe it, how do you explain us being here, apparently very advanced through evolution, and apes are still running around flinging crap?
A02: If children exists, how do you explain that their parents exist? --
Q03: Where exactly is the end of the universe?
A03: We don't know. Possibly som 36 billion light years from us, but we don't know. --
Q04: Lets say, for humors sake, that evolution and the big bang theory are the actual reasons for the existence of the universe and everything in it. So, people came from apes, ... all the way to single celled organisms that came from a primordial soup. And the planets (including our own) and all the stars followed a similar path, right?
A04: Yes, you got it in one. --
Q05: Ok, so, where'd all that astral dust come from?
A05: Through astronomic "evolution", ultimately as a result of the Big Bang (improperly named - it was ironically called so by the astronomer Fred Hoyle who doubted the theory, because it went contrary to his own (faulty) Steady State theory). --
Q06: Other planets being blown away by stars, right?
A06: No, see 5 above. --
Q07: Ok, where'd those planets come from?
A07: See 5 above. --
Q08: Ok, where'd the dust come from? The big bang?
A08: Yes, ultimately. --
Q09: Ok, where'd the big bang come from?
A09: We don't know, but one possible cause may be that our universe ultimately ends up in a black hole, which implodes and "turn its inside out" resulting in a Big Bang. --
Q10: And then it (the Big Bang) exploded and poof, everything was made (after trillions and trillions of years), right?
A10: No, the Big Bang was not an explosion, more like a doughy mass, which rose very fast - NO bang! --
Q11: Ok, where'd the energy come from to make the big bang?
A11: See A9. --
Q12: And where'd the next previous thing come from? And the next? And the next?
A12: See A9. --
Q13: (Proposition 01) ... you have to face the fact that infinity does exist.
A13: Exactly. --
Q14: (Proposition 02) And if infinity exists, so can infinite power.
A14: We haven't got the foggiest idea about that, only propositions in a number of "holy" book, written by human beeings in possion of what knowledge they had in the bronze- and iron ages (plague is the reult of demonic posssesion, etc.). --
Q15: (Proposition 03) Everything had to come from somewhere.
A15: Possibly, even probably - but we actually don't know if conditions before Big Bang were identical to the present ones. They may have been very different from what we now observe. --
Q15: (Proposition 04) You can either believe that there is intelligence that organized the mathematics that govern the universe,
A15: Re. Q15 (everything had to come from somewhere) who created the creator? You are simply adding one more assumption to the chain of assumptions if you claim the existence of a deity.
Correction to previous post: "reult" read: "result".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisXeph: "Jesus didn't come to bring religion, but redemption, right? "
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWrong: Matt. 10, 34-38 + Luke 14,26 + Luke 19, 27
Jstahle, you contradict yourself - and you also take information out of context. There's a part in the Bible that says an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, right? But that doesn't apply by itself does it? To get the full understanding of that statement, you have to take the entirety of the Bible to see how it applies. Taking scripture out of context is the same thing that the pharasies did in Jesus' time. Also, Matt. 10, 34-38 is not stating religion. If you think it does, then your idea of religion is very skewed. This entry was simply an explanation that his message of peace would bring division among men (i.e. everyone in reading and commenting on these pages, like you and I). His message is NOT religion and never will be. Religion will not get you to heaven. You can be totally religious and still have a one way ticket straight to hell. Jesus' message of peace is a personal peace, and it's about a personal relationship with him. Not some kind of twisted man-made version of salvation. As for Luke 14 verse 26; what are you pointing at that for? He's saying in the scripture that we have to love Him more than anyone else. Loving Jesus doesn't mean spewing religion all over him and everyone else. Following Jesus isn't practicing religion. Telling people that they have to pray to go to heaven is practicing religion. Telling people that they have to tithe their 10% of their household income to please God is practicing religion. Jesus has never, at any point in the Bible, ever said that religion would get you to heaven. He never even mentioned the word religion. He only mentioned the Body of Christ aka the Church (Church meaning the people of Christ, not the building). Jesus said that we should fellowship with one another and pray for one another. Again, that is not practicing religion. That's loving one another as He has loved us, which is a command he gave before heading off to heaven. Furthermore, Luke 19:27 is not about religion either. It is a parable (and one of the most controversial in the Bible). This is a parable where Jesus compares himself to an earthly king who expands his kingdom. In the old days when a kingdom expanded, you were killed for resisting. This parable describes Jesus as a king, and is telling us the eventual consequence for not accepting the free gift of forgiveness - that you go to hell. It is not describing religion in any respect. Look up the word religion. You'll find that it is described as a ritualistic practice made by men. Jesus didn't bring religion. He just told us what's right and wrong.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSorry, double post again - stupid connection! Jstahle, you also fail in your scientific explanation. Children growing up and the evolution of a species are not comparable. Any real scientist/evolutionist would laugh in your face for making such a comparison. Humans reproducing versus DNA changing to compensate for an environment are not the same. Our bodies naturally follow a path of natural growth, not evolution, to become an adult. Growth is controlled by the pituitary gland. Evolution is theoretically a change that starts at a genetic level (i.e. modification of genetic sequences to exact an overall change to adapt to an environment). I'm not saying that certain aspects of evolution don't exist. I'm saying that evolution to the extremity that most hard core evolutionists describe it is just too much. Natural selection does exist. Minor adaptations in humans to compensate for an environment also exist. Evolution from single celled organisms, I'm sorry but that just doesn't make logical sense. Not only that, all the evidence that supports the theory of evolution from a single celled organism to a human today is just as much of a leap of faith as Christianity. They're all based on theories. These scientists are making gross assumptions on where a creature came from by, what, comparing similarities in two different fossils? There are still huge gaps in the research. All those "transitional" phases where nobody has a single fricking bone or fossil of any kind to support that the two phases are even related, except for the fact that they look similar. It sounds more like a bunch of people who want to believe something so bad that they'd devote their entire life to trying to prove it. For example, the Piltdown man was a total fraud, and nobody knew it until 41 years after everyone had accepted it as the most important fossil proving the evolution of man. The Nebraska man, another failure in trying to prove evolution. Someone found a tooth and drew up an entire line of evolution between a donkey and man, just like the ones where we see apes and men, and it turned out to be the tooth of a pig! Then there's the Java man, so stupid I can't believe anyone even considered that crap. Also, there's the Orce man, which turned out to be bones from 4 month old donkey. And of course, the Neanderthals. Once thought to be half ape half man morons, now found to be just like us (surgeons even) that were plagued with severe arthritis and rickets.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd furthermore, my comment about where everything came from (everything had to come form somewhere), that was me implying that evolutionists are no different in their beliefs than deity followers. An evolutionist at some point has to accept the idea of infinity. Christians accept the idea of infinite power. The difference is one says there's no true consequence for your actions except cause and effect, the other says there will be an account for your actions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPersonally, the idea of evolution is harder to believe because science has limitations, where the real world does not. Think of the molecule. What makes the molecule? The atoms. What makes the atoms? Protons, neutrons, and electrons. What makes up the protons and neutrons? Supposedly something called quarks. How about those? And further on down the line, I'm sure you get the picture. You believe in a world of mirrors, where one faces the other and you have the infinite effect where there is no beginning and no end. A Christian's belief isn't so different. There's no beginning, nor an end. However, in either aspect, our tiny minds will never be able to wrap around the idea of infinity and eternity. It's too big. We can identify not knowing the ends or beginnings by calling it infinity or eternity, but we will never be able to describe how it actually works. The final point; evolution is just as much of a desperate assumption as creationism, and neither will be able to prove the other wrong by any human means. One idea says you simply get recycled - the other says you will be held accountable for your deeds. The easier and more comfortable choice is obvious. Evolution means I can do whatever I want. It doesn't matter anyways. I can be a doctor, I can be a cereal killer, I can save your children, or I can rape and murder them, it doesn't matter I just get recycled anyways. I don't have to worry about going to some kind of hell. Creationism says you have to love the world, be self sacrificing even if you don't want to, and that you will have to answer for EVERY sin you've ever committed. Creationism is accountability. So where you say people who believe in God are afraid of death, I can say you don't believe in God because you're afraid of accountability. Not just for speeding and stuff like that, but all your dirty little secrets and thoughts that everyone has. I'm more afraid of being held accountable than I am of being recycled. The easier choice for me would have been evolution, but my own logic leads me a different direction.
WTF! I was delighted to discover that this interesting article was so popular until I realized that it had become a platform for people to voice their misguided religious views.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOops, I meant *serial not cereal lol fx'd
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisregardless whether or not you believe in god is irrelevant. I, myself, know the truth, which happens to be a universe without a "god" in a religious sense, but I can also see and appreciate what some scientists refer to as "intelligent design" Even if a god did exist, the chance of some random dudes writing a really long story about him and his myths accurately, is impossible. I love how all the christians in the world believe in their one true god, but so does every other religion, now and past. I had a conversation with a christian recently about the Greeks and who they worshiped. My point to this person was that, they believed in their gods the way that you do yours, how does this make them or you more right or accurate than the other? it doesnt, its just a belief system, and the worse part about this belief system is that it makes you miss larger, more macro-scaled points and truths about the universe, like this article about the moon. Of course the first thing that would be said is about god... its a shame really. I support anyone and everyone with any kind of belief if they can actually base it on some truth. To me, faith is an easy way out of really really really hard questions and its sad to see people arguing semantics of religion when they have something more beautiful and more perfectly placed that any God i have ever seen; the moon, the stars, the galaxies, ourselves. appreciate and absorb these things, these real things. But Im sure those of you that are SOOO hurt that I made a point or two against who or what you believe in, will be so offended that you will (once again) miss the macro point to what I have said, I truly hope you prove me wrong.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe confusion in the religious mind stems from their inability to comprehend that there are billion of stars in the milky way, and billions of galaxies, therefore billions upon billions of planets. We are incredibly, amazingly lucky to be sitting here today. Remember you are the union of one of millions of sperm with the 1 egg. Obviously, God did not preordain that this 1 specific sperm out of millions and billions of sperm would combine with that 1 egg in the backseat of a 57 Chevy. One other point about being lucky; people do win the lottery, somebody wins even though millions by a ticket. It just so happens that we won the lottery ticket of life.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou all shoud read the book of Job. Start with the beginning it might givve you a better understanding.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat was this article about again??!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting that anyone can push out a lot of loosely based ideas, and then don't wait for evidence before proclaiming their correctness: "outlook for life would have been dim". Not according to the abiogenesists, which for example sees plenty of raw material and steady state conditions in hot vents.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the Moon had been of green cheese, in the same way people could (and likely would) argue that it was a necessary environmental condition for life. Um, by way of less harmful and even beneficial organic ejecta during the late heavy bombardment, for example.
Gosh. Where to begin. Okay. EVERYTHING NASA says about the Moon is false. Every single word. Let's start there. No exceptions. The distance is wrong, the dimensions are wrong, the weight is wrong, the effects on tides are wrong. False. Worse. Falsified. Fabricated. Made up. Look at my Moon Album on Facebook. Our Moon is a hollow metallic space station, that rings like a bell because it's built like a bell. It's less than 10km in diameter, and much much closer than NASA says, 1/5th of the distance NASA claims. NASA LIES.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this