Why does the Fission Hypothesis fail to explain the formation of the Moon?

The Fission Hypothesis, which posits that the Moon was formed from material ejected from the Earth due to a rapid rotation, fails to explain the formation of the Moon because of the composition aspect highlighted in the correct choice. Specifically, the hypothesis would suggest that the material ejected would primarily consist of the Earth’s outer layers, which are rich in silicate minerals. However, the Moon's actual composition resembles that of the Earth's mantle, rather than the oceanic crust. This discrepancy indicates that if the Moon were formed solely from material spun off the Earth, it would likely have a different makeup, leading to inconsistencies in the Fission Hypothesis.

In summary, the argument surrounding the predominance of oceanic crust raises questions about the suitability of the ejected materials, thereby casting doubt on the validity of the Fission Hypothesis in accurately describing the Moon's formation.