"Since Apollo 11 landed on the Moon in 1969, scientists have known the Giant Impact Hypothesis has serious problems. Chief among them: the Moon’s composition doesn’t match what we’d expect from a collision between Earth and another planet. Moon rocks differ significantly from Earth’s — even though the theory predicts a blend of both.
To explain this, secular scientists have proposed increasingly complex alternatives: a series of glancing collisions, multiple impactors, or other exotic scenarios.
These are speculative and often contradictory — and none have gained consensus support. So, the original flawed theory stays in place, not because it holds up under scrutiny, but because it fits the preferred framework: one that excludes design.
If secular science were being completely transparent, the Moon origin story might sound more like:
“Honestly, kids, we’ve been trying to figure out how the Moon formed for decades, but we still don’t know. Its unique orbit, precise tilt, unusual chemistry, and role in stabilizing Earth’s rotation all suggest… design. It’s as if it were placed there with precision and purpose.”
Exactly."
CEH