Question

Until the 1960s, it was widely believed that the Moon was made of material that was flung off Earth during a time when it was rapidly spinning. Proponents of this hypothesis claimed that when the material was ejected, the void it left formed the Pacific Ocean. Which of the following pieces of evidence could be used to discredit this hypothesis?
A. The rock on the Moon is older than the rock in the Pacific Ocean by billions of years.
B. The rock on the Moon is chemically similar to the rock on Earth.
C. Computer models show that Earth has never spun fast enough to eject that much material into space.
D. Samples of rock from the Moon were discovered to contain water.
E. The rock on the Moon has a different composition compared to the rock in the Pacific Ocean.

Answer 1

E

All the other chices give evidence that supports that hypothesisthat the Moon was made of material that was flung off Earth during a time when it was rapidly spinning.

Explanation:

There is an enormous amount of similarities between the minerals in the moon rocks and the rocks on earth, except that for some minerals, like potassium, their quantities are higher on the earth than on the moon.

However, there is still supports for the evidence (by the other choices) that the moon was made from a piece of earth ejected from asteroid impact in primordial earth.Explanation:It’s believed that more than 3.5 billion years during the formation of earth and before it had cooled there were frequent asteroid impacts and one enormous collision ejected a large piece of molten earth into space but within earth’s gravity influence. This piece formed the moon. Evidence of asteroid impacts are frozen in time on the moon surface thanks to the fact that the moon has no atmosphere or tectonic plates movements that wipe off this ‘evidence’.

Learn More:

brainly.com/question/12718187

#LearnWithBrainly

Answer 2

Answer:A,C,E

Explanation:All discredit this hypothesis.