Forum:Jason Lisle's Lunar Recession Argument
I was looking at the Answers in Genesis page advertising Jason Lisle's Creationist "Astronomy" book "Taking Back Astronomy".
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2006/07/11/tba-heavens-declare-creation
The Rational Wiki entry for Lisle says of his Lunar recession argument: "He is making uniformitarian assumptions about its recession rate, and conveniently did not mention other lunar processes." This may be true, but having grabbed a calculator myself and checked the sums, it appears that his argument is even more fallacious and dishonest than that.
Assuming a uniform rate of 3.8cm/year for 4.5 x 10^9 years, the Moon's position would have changed by 1.7x10^10cm. Since there are 100,000cm in a kilometre, the position of the Moon would have reduced by 171000km over said period. This is less than half the current minimum distance between the Earth and the Moon.
So even under his own fallacious assumptions, Lisle's sums still don't add up.— Unsigned, by: MikeJH / talk / contribs 19:32, 19 January 2014 (UTC)