• CSC Home Page
  • Order Book
  • Table of Contents
  • Preface
  • Endorsements
  • Part I: Scientific Case for Creation
    • Life Sciences
    • Astronomical and Physical Sciences
    • Earth Sciences
    • References and Notes
  • Part II: Fountains of the Great Deep
    • The Hydroplate Theory: An Overview
    • The Origin of Ocean Trenches, Earthquakes, and the Ring of Fire
    • Liquefaction: The Origin of Strata and Layered Fossils
    • The Origin of the Grand Canyon
    • The Origin of Limestone
    • Frozen Mammoths
    • The Origin of Comets
    • The Origin of Asteroids, Meteoroids,and Trans-Neptunian Objects
    • The Origin of Earth's Radioactivity
  • Part III: Frequently Asked Questions
  • Technical Notes
  • Index

  • Previous Page
  • Next Page

[ Technical Notes > Did the Preflood Earth Have a 30-Day Lunar Month? > References and Notes ]

References and Notes

1. “Moon Fact Sheet,” NASA. http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/moonfact.html.

2. R. A. Parker, “Ancient Egyptian Astronomy,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 276, No. 1257, 2 May 1974, p. 51.

u Early Egyptians assumed a 360-day year, until they realized that the Nile was flooding later and later each year according to that calendar. Because Egypt’s earliest settlers probably would not have adopted a 360-day year while in Egypt, they presumably brought that outdated understanding with them. [See  J. Norman Lockyer, The Dawn of Astronomy (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The M.I.T. Press, 1964), pp. 243–248.]

3. Frank Parise, The Book of Calendars (Gorgias Press LLC).

4. Ibid., p. 44.

5. Wayne Horowitz, “The 360 and 364 Day Year in Ancient Mesopotamia,” Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society, Vol. 24, 1996, p. 36.

6. T. Freeth et al., “Decoding the Ancient Greek Astronomical Calculator Known as the Antikythera Mechanism,” Nature, Vol. 444, 30 November 2006, pp. 587-591.

7. Dileep Kumar Kanjilal, “The Origin of the Concept of the Intercalary Month (Malamāsa) in India,” Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol. 77, No. 1/4 (1996) p. 259.

8. For the purposes of this study, these percentages could be varied slightly and the two assumptions could be replaced by one assumption; namely, that 0.036% (0.03  × 1.22% = 0.036%) of the preflood Earth’s mass hit the Moon.

9. The cross section of the Moon’s sphere of influence (SOI), whose radius is 66,100 km, is 4p(66,100)2. This is 0.7% of 4p(395,844)2—the surface area of a sphere with a radius from the Earth to the Moon.

10. “Cataclysm’s End: A Popular Theory about the Early Solar System Comes under Fire,” Nature, Vol. 553, 25 January 2018, pp. 393–395.

11. Ibid. p. 393.

  • Previous Page
  • Next Page

Updated on Sunday, September 01 09/01/19 20:39:49
Copyright © 1995–2013
Center for Scientific Creation
http://www.creationscience.com

(602) 955-7663