I think it would be pretty easy to figure out that the further out the moon gets, the more easily and thus the quicker it moves away from that point. That's just a rough bit of logic of course but my point is that even a cursory glance would tell you that concluding a consistant dropoff rate for ANY object who's orbit is degrading away from us is just nuts.
Let's reverse it and see how nuts it is. Imagine something is getting 3 inches CLOSER to us every year. Am I to assume it'll stay the same rate and we'll be watching it, about a foot above our heads, STILL descending at 3 inches a year, or MAYBE since it's closer it'll actually descend at a faster and faster rate, possibly even smashing into the planet at a speed our eyes can't track?
I'm just saying you need to think just a bit further than the point where you think you have something that kinda works against this or that theory. Try to tear APART your own argument, and maybe you'll eliminate the nonsense before we get a chance. If you can't, then maybe you are onto something.