Me: "Voyager 2, during it's pass of Uranus, recorded that Uranus's magnetic axis was about 60 degrees tilted from it's rotational axis. The reason it unknown."
You: Ah, the good old argument from ignorance. Please realize that saying "We don't know why thing X happens" or "Theory Y doesn't explain all observations" is far, FAR away from saying "Creationism is correct." There's a lot of stuff we don't know, and saying "God did it" only pushes the problem further back. When a scientist proposes a theory, he is immediately subjected to scrutiny from all sides. But all a creationist has to do to explain Uranus' magnetic axis is say: "God did it." Why did he do it? "Because he wanted to." Why did he want to? "He moves in mysterious ways." Sorry Sam, this is not an argument."
You are right. That would not have been much of an arguement. But why didn't you read the next paragraph? They go toghether!
"Evolutionist claim that the reason the Earth's magnetic field is not decaying is because of the Earth's rotation, creating a 'dynamo' effect (This is my understanding). But this theory can not be used for Uranus's magnetic field because the rotational and the magnetic axis's are so far apart."
The point was that Uranus's magnetic field should not exist, or should be MUCH weaker, because there can not be a 'dynamo' effect. You only read half the arguement!
"Many fragments would have been sucked back into the planet. Also, it's perfectly possible that its moons formed from orbiting asteroids, etc."
Titania is the largest moon of Uranus. It is about 50% ice. I just looked up a whole lot of info about asteroids, and I found asteroids rarley have ice, and when they do it would not be anywhere near 50%. So Titania would not have been an asteroid.