>Using the lack of significant meteoric dust on the surface of the moon
>has been a standard YEC "apologetic" for many years now. However, I
>thought that Howard van Till, Clarence Meninga, and Davis Young had
>laid this legend to rest in their case study in "Science Held Hostage".
>
>Am I wrong? Glenn, can you help here?
My understanding is the lunar lander and much of the procedure for landing
and taking off were predicated on the possibility that there would be
significant amounts of lunar dust at the landing site. In retrospect it is
easy to discount this speculation, but it was a widely anticipated
expectation that was not realized. This comment has nothing to do with YEC,
only with the fact that science is tentative in its opinions.
Art
http://chadwicka.swau.edu