> Carol: The origins of life on earth aren’t dependent only on
> the moon. Conditions on earth itself have to be taken into
This is true. The evidence is that life on Earth began pretty much as soon as it could--within a few hundred million years.
As far as the so-called Cambrian explosion goes, it was more an increase in size coupled with the evolution of hard shells and exoskeletons that made fossil preservation much more likely. Soft bodies don't fossilize well.
> > > Why has the earth got ‘no business’ having such a moon?
> > It ain't got no business having one because no other rocky
> > planet has a moon (Mar's "moons" for example are captured
> > asteroids) let alone the 5th largest moon in the solar system
> > and proportionally by far the largest compared to its host.
> Carol: Which law of the universe is earth breaking by being
> alone among the rocky planets in having such a moon?
Excellent question. Since we can't observe rocky planets the size of Earth directly, we don't know YET whether or not other rocky exoplanets have moons. It's a good bet that some of them do, though.
We assume an awful lot because Earth and our solar system is really the only analogue we have. Our solar system may or may not be typical. We just don't know yet.
> > The theoretical model that suggests the Moon was created by
> > impact, two impacts no less, by some unknown body is so
> > as to be only valid in a computer model requiring a near
> > impossible perfect storm of events.
> Carol: It’s complex, but not impossible, and although it leaves
> some questions unanswered, it’s a lot more plausible than
> ‘aliens did it’. Some supporting evidence:
Absolutely agree. Given enough time, even the most seemingly impossible things can and will happen.
The giant impact hypothesis is the currently-favoured
> scientific hypothesis for the formation of the Moon.
> Supporting evidence includes: the identical direction of the
> Earth's spin and the Moon's orbit, Moon samples that
> indicate the surface of the Moon was once molten, the Moon's
> relatively small iron core, lower density compared to the
> Earth, evidence of similar collisions in other star systems
> (that result in debris disks), and that giant collisions are
> consistent with the leading theories of the formation of the
> solar system. Finally, the stable isotope ratios of lunar and
> terrestrial rock are identical, implying a common origin.
> As Isaac Asimov also said:
It’s too big [the Moon] to have been captured by the
> > Earth. The chances of such a capture having been effected and
> > the moon then having taken up nearly circular orbit around
> > Earth are too small to make such an eventuality
> > credible.
> Carol: But you're suggesting that the aliens set it up for
> capture. How did they push it there then, slow it down and
> make sure earth captured it and held it in its present orbit?
> Its sheer size would make this difficult, if not impossible,
> according to what you’ve just quoted above.
Yep, and no matter what people think, the Moon is not hollow. It wouldn't be quite so easy to do. One false move and you'd send the Moon crashing into the Earth.