Re: moon dust info - please help

Glenn R. Morton (
Mon, 02 Nov 1998 19:04:12 -0600

At 01:22 PM 11/2/98 -0500, Joel Duff wrote:
>What is the real "TRUTH" regarding the state of knowledge concerning the
>amount of dust on the moon at the time of the moon landing? I suspect this
>might be a case of NASA having a good story and milking it even though by
>the actual time of launch they knew it wasn't going to be that big of a
>problem. Has anyone researched NASA documents to get a close look at what
>the thinking process was? I still find the use of the data many years
>later by Morris wrong but how do I respond to this person who basically
>says he doesn't care what the data is but only that it shows that
>scientists don't question their presuppositions.

This is one of the most frustrating arguments by YECs. It shows that they
ignore history, are unable to do independent research and in general don't
test what they teach. My encyclopedia Britannica says:

"The first soft landing on the Moon was made by Lunik 9 on February 3,
1966; this craft carried cameras which transmitted the first photographs
taken ont he surface of the Moon. By this time, however, excellent
close-range photographs had been secured by the United States Ranger 7,8,
and 9, which crashed into the Moon in the second half of 1964 and the first
part of 1965; and between 1966 and 1967 the series of five lunar orbitors
photographed almost the entire surface of the Moon from a low orbit in
search for suitable landing places. The United States Surveyor 1
soft-landed on the Moon June 2, 1966, and this and following Surveyors
acquired much useful information aboutthe lunar surface." Technology,
History of, Encyclopedia Britannica 1982, vol 18 p. 53.

They knew that the moon was not made of dust before they sent the men up
there. Why YECs distort history, I don't know!

Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information