Changes

===Theory 1: Fission===

===Theory 1: Fission===

Developed in 1878, this theory by [[George Howard Darwin]] (son of [[Charles Darwin]]) states that the Moon had been a part of a rapidly spinning Earth. This rapid spin, as well as the Sun's gravitational influence, led to a piece of the Earth breaking free and forming the Moon. Osmond Fisher added that the Pacific ocean basin is actually the scar of this process.<ref name="Nova1">PBS NOVA: "To the Moon - Origins" [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tothemoon/origins.html (Page 1)]</ref>

Developed in 1878, this theory by [[George Howard Darwin]] (son of [[Charles Darwin]]) states that the Moon had been a part of a rapidly spinning [[Earth]]. This rapid spin, as well as the Sun's gravitational influence, led to a piece of the Earth breaking free and forming the Moon. Osmond Fisher added that the Pacific ocean basin is actually the scar of this process.<ref name="Nova1">PBS NOVA: "To the Moon - Origins" [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tothemoon/origins.html (Page 1)]</ref>

===Theory 2: Capture===

===Theory 2: Capture===

==Current Status==

==Current Status==

The Moon cannot possibly be 4.5 billion years old as it would have been lost to the pull of [[Earth]]s gravity a long time ago <ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i4/moon.asp]</ref> current estimates put the Moon at approximately 8-10000 years old in line with Genesis.

As of now, the Giant Impact theory still stands. Research on it is not yet complete, and the theory is currently neither proven nor disproven. To date, it is also the most plausible theory considered by scientists.

Independently of the Giant Impact theory, Peter Noerdlinger from Saint Mary's University in Halifax, Canada proposed an expansion of the Coaccretion theory. He suggested that the Moon formed next to the Earth, complete with an iron core. However, this core was then ripped out by the Earth's gravity shortly after the formation, leaving an iron-less Moon behind to orbit the Earth.<ref>New Scientist: [http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19325875.700-did-the-new-moon-lose-its-iron-heart.html "Did the new moon lose its iron heart?"]</ref>

Peter Noerdlinger from Saint Mary's University in Halifax, Canada proposed an expansion of the Coaccretion theory. He suggested that the Moon formed next to the Earth, complete with an iron core. However, this core was then ripped out by the Earth's gravity shortly after the formation, leaving an iron-less Moon behind to orbit the Earth.<ref>New Scientist: [http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19325875.700-did-the-new-moon-lose-its-iron-heart.html "Did the new moon lose its iron heart?"]</ref>

Scientists need to do further research to show if either of these theories is correct.

Further research will show if either of these theories is correct, or if scientists are going to develop a new theory based on new observations.

 

According to [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth]] creationists, the Moon is not as old as any of the above hypotheses suggest. One argument against the its age is that the Moon would have been lost to the pull of Earth's gravity a long time ago<ref>Answers in Genesis: [http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i4/moon.asp "Is the moon really old?"]</ref> Their current estimates put the Moon at approximately 8,000 to 10,000 years old, matching the rough age [[Genesis]] suggests.

== Reference ==

== Reference ==

<references/>

<references/>