"authfriend" wrote: > Just one such arrangement between a star, a planet, > and the planet's satellite might be chalked up to > happy coincidence. > But *two*? > Astronomers tell us the orbit of the moon isn't > eternally fixed, but drifts slowly; that this precise > alignment wasn't the case eons before humans evolved > to see it, and will not be the case eons hence when > we're no longer around. > I'm not buying it. > There's something we're not getting...
Judy, I'm not up on optics, but I believe that if the Moon covers the Sun from an earthly POV, then the Earth MUST cover the Sun from a lunar POV. So you can't have one, but must have two equal POVs, so then that would mean it's not a suspicious coincidence. Not sure though. Anyone? The Moon is moving about an inch per year away from us, so over time, it's getting smaller and that means that someday it will be but a dot crossing the Sun's disk instead of covering it completely. To me, it's not so much a red flag that God is afoot with tricks, but that our having the Moon that is so close and so big compared to it's parent planet was very rare and very lucky. It helped life form in many ways. Edg
