Photo Courtesy Nasa.gov
Moon Maria: A Biblical Catastrophic Explanation
Jeramy Anderson
ICR Graduate School
July 2009
Abstract
The moon has three dominant surface features: maria, highlands, and craters. Among these, its maria are peculiar in their orientation. There is a significant disproportion of maria versus highlands on the near side versus the dark side, especially in the northern quadrant of the near side. This phenomenon is difficult to explain within a uniformitarian framework, but, on the contrary, a short, sudden catastrophic event lends itself as the better explanation. Two questions then arise: what exactly caused this peculiarity and when did it occur? Explaining this phenomenon within a Biblical timescale provides a unique insight into answering both questions. After careful analysis, it will be argued that this catastrophic event was due to impacts which most likely occurred during the Genesis Flood, probably at the beginning.
Moon Maria: A Biblical Catastrophic Explanation
The moon is filled with craters, highlands, and maria, yet the near side of the moon is distinctly different from the far side, which is the side seen from earth. The far side, which is not seen from the earth because of the moon’s synchronous orbit around the earth, has far fewer significant maria. Attempts to explain this with any credibility must take into account all of the data. Uniformitarian explanations have been proposed historically, but they are insufficient in identifying causation and time of occurrence because of uniformity considerations. For this reason, a sudden catastrophic means needs to be explored, and the Bible may provide insightful clues. To better analyze the matter, four areas will be discussed regarding the maria and their origins: present lunar terrain and orbital features, insufficient uniformitarianism, sudden catastrophism, and a presuppositional Genesis Flood framework.
Present Lunar Terrain and Orbital Features
The surface of the moon contains three dominant terrain features: maria, highlands, and craters (Chaissan & Macmillan, 2005). Marias are large dark nearly circular low lying areas on the moon (ibid), and they predominately lie in the Northern Quadrant on the near side of the moon with respect to the earth (Faulkner, 1999). The highlands are higher in elevation than the maria, and they are lighter in appearance (Chaissan & Macmillan, 2005). The third dominant landscape feature is the crater, and it can vary in size from many kilometers to microscopic (ibid). The central feature in this perplexing discussion lies with the maria, because, as mentioned, they are especially found in a focused area on the moon’s surface. However, before one can theorize properly, one other critical observation must be addressed: the synchronous rotation of the moon. Like other solar-system moons, the moon rotates on its axis at the same rate it revolves around the earth; this is called a synchronous orbit (DeYoung 2000). This is an important observation because a synchronous orbit may also provide clues into why the maria are located in such a unique position.
Insufficient Uniformitarianism
The traditional uniformitarian model proposes that the present is the key to the past. This model attributes the lunar landscape to slow processes over eons of time, though not necessarily denying the impact of volcanism and seismic activity. Therefore, this position would not incline itself to a large-scale catastrophe. However, because it predicts a more uniform lunar landscape with respect to the features mentioned, a non-uniform surface is problematic. This is a critical flaw in the uniformitarian explanation, so even evolutionary scientists have turned to more cataclysmic means.
Sudden Catastrophism
In response to purely uniformitarian models, evolutionary astronomer and physicist Ralph Baldwin argued that catastrophic impacts appear to have contributed to maria formation.
He noted the similarity in form between craters on the moon and bomb craters created during World War II (1939-1945) and concluded that lunar craters form by impact. … He stated correctly that the maria are solidified flows of basalt lava, similar to flood lava plateaus on Earth. Finally, independently of Gilbert, he concluded that all circular maria are actually huge impact craters that later filled with lava (Spudis, 2004, no page number).
This explanation helps to answer prevailing questions; however, it still does not explain why the maria are not uniformly represented on the moon. On the contrary, a sudden catastrophic event is a unique possibility that accounts for all the data. In this proposal, a stream of meteoroids or comet fragments could have impacted the moon very quickly (Faulkner, 1999). It would have hit one side of the moon in its greatest thrust before the moon could turn around and be hit as hard on the other side, which is due to the moon’s synchronous rotation around the earth (Ibid). Because of its mass, this same stream would have likely impacted the earth to some extent. The difference is that the earth would have erased many of its impact scars due to heavy geologic activity (ibid).
Presuppositional Genesis Flood Framework
Up to this point, only natural data has been observed, but there is yet one other vital piece of information needed to further develop a theory of maria formation: revealed data from Scripture. This is different because it is not subject to error and can therefore give us a right framework from which to begin research. The last scientific model is more explanatory, but it needs a Biblical presupposition to give it credence, and events surrounding the Genesis Flood provide basic parameters to better understand both possible causation and time of occurrence.
The Genesis Flood was a cataclysmic event that could have contained meteoritic bombardment, and we do see remnants of impacts on the earth today (Faulkner, 1999). Because the Genesis Flood was short (as compared to uniformitarian and even neo-catastrophic models), it limits the time span of large-scale impact events; if impacts played a role in Flood initiation (ie fountains of the great deep bursting forth in Genesis 7:11), then they would have probably impacted the moon due to proximity (ibid). These sudden deep impacts would have pounded the moon creating gigantic craters while at the same time triggering heavy volcanism on the near side; in turn, this would have then filled the large impact craters with basaltic lava that cooled and hardened forming the maria observed today (ibid). Craters observed in the hardened maria today can then be interpreted as small scale subsequent impacts (ibid).
In conclusion, it is arguable that the proposed Biblical model accounts for all the data the best way. This does not mean that the scientific aspect of the model is not subject to alteration and change. However, one must maintain the integrity of the Biblical framework because it is unchangeable, and it alone will always give a right lens through which to makes sense of data received. All other models will prove faulty to some extent or another because they deny the Biblical account in some way shape or form. Ultimately, to deny the Biblical framework for understanding anything is to deny our very foundation for knowledge itself, and this is no less the case with the present discussion about lunar maria. Truly, the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge (Proverbs 1:7).
References
Chaissan, E. & Macmillan, S. (2005). Astronomy Today (5th ed.). Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
DeYoung, D. (2000). Astronomy and the Bible: Questions and Answers (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books.
Faulkner, D. (April 1999). A Biblically Based Cratering Theory. Retrieved June 18, 2009, from Answers in Genesis website: http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v13/i1/crater.asp
Spudis, P. (2004). Moon. Retrieved June 18, 2009, from World Book at NASA website:
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/moon_worldbook.html
No comments:
Post a Comment