It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why did the "moon ring like a bell" when anything landed on it? Not only American aircraft but Rus

page: 7
46
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 06:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: nOraKat
Sgt. Karl Wolf: US Air Force - (worked for Director of Intelligence at Headquarters Tactical Air Command) - claims to have been shown structures on the dark side of the moon. www.ufocasebook.com...


Karl Wolfe is not at all credible. The far side of the moon has been mapped in extremely high resolution — not just by the US either — and there ain't nothing there but rocks.




posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 06:10 AM
link   
And for a start the first lunar orbiter wasn't launched until a year after this guy claims he saw photographs from it.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: GArnold

I have herd this story before, one possible answer is that the moon is hollow or has some very large subsurface caverns or there like.

edit on 2-6-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Hollow moon

*facepalm*



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Or is it simply that the moon is a 'dead' object and vibration caused by the impact of an external object reverberates throughout the lunar material plus, most importantly, it's detectable for a time due to the lack of any internal or surface activity. By comparison, the earth would be a very 'noisy' place making such monitoring of 'ringing' much more difficult.

Hollowness would not be factor unless the hollow portion was filled with pressurised gases to conduct the sound waves and a solid body would be far more effective.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Pilgrum

Not to mention that the "shell" would have to be rather dense to account for the mass of the moon.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: GArnold
a reply to: Vasa Croe



"2. The Puzzle of the Moon's Age: Incredibly, over 99 percent of the moon rocks brought back turned out upon analysis to be older than 90 percent of the oldest rocks that can be found on earth. The first rock Neil Armstrong picked up after landing on the Sea of Tranquility turned out to be more than 3.6 billion years old. Other rocks turned out to be even older; 4.3, 4.5, 4.6, and one even alleged to be 5.3 billion years old! The oldest rocks found on earth are about 3.7 billion years old, and the area that the moon rocks came from was thought by scientists to be one of the youngest areas of the moon! Based on such evidence, some scientists have concluded that the moon was formed among the stars long before our sun was born."



that is due to the oldest rocks being in areas of slower tectonic movement. due to the shifting of the tectonic plates on earth the rocks will continually be cycled, being turned into magma then cooling and forming more plate material thus resetting the carbon clock.

csmres.jmu.edu...

the moon on the other hand is "mostly" dormant, with the tectonic cycle much slower then earth's

www.space.com...

edit on 2-6-2014 by deyehaus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: deyehaus

Thank you. I was wondering if anyone would bring that up. I believe the only such forces active on the moon are related to the effect the earth's gravity has on it and that really isnt enough to generate much heat. The moon has no molten core or anything resembling such. It is more equivalent to a rock flying around the earth.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Skywatcher2011




I think the whole ringing thing is a hoax...maybe the astronauts heard ringing in their ears

The astronauts didn't hear anything. Is was the seismographs they setup that detected the "ringing".



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Correct me if I'm wrong, I thought sound was unable to travel in space.



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Mommymomo

That's true.

'Sound' is conducted through a medium and the speed of that sound is proportional to the density of the medium so a vacuum, having zero density, cannot conduct sound. Dense material like iron conducts sounds much faster and more efficiently than a gas would. Going 'supersonic' gets easier as you increase altitude because the air molecules are further apart than they are at lower altitudes.

At sea level on earth the average air pressure is around 14.7lb/square inch and sound travels at 1100ft/sec or 750mph (approx)
Go about 3000' up a mountain and it's down to around 900ft/sec or 650mph (very approx and at the mercy of barometric pressure variations)
By the time you reach space it's down to 0.
edit on 2/6/2014 by Pilgrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2014 @ 10:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
a reply to: GArnold

God did make a beautiful place, didn't he? When you think of the perfection of everything we see and take part of on a daily basis, it is amazing to see the work of God! Even if you break down the human body in each part individually, it is amazing God could make such a perfect thing! Planets alignments, stars, how each planet serves it's own purpose, so much more! God is great, thanks for letting me take part in this amazing place!!

As for the moon ringing like a bell, that is pretty cool! I have never heard about this, but I imagine there is a reason or purpose for this happening. Good thought process here, it is interesting to think about why this happens...?

I am not going to argue about God so please don't even instigate me.



Your first sentence asks a question so if I told you God didn't make the wonderful place, Zork did, we'd be heading for an argument. Why didn't you just say a quiet prayer on the couch instead of letting us know how great god is? I don't see why you would inject your personal religious beliefs into a thread about the moon, then say you don't want to discuss it! Born again much?

On topic....The moon is solid matter I'm guessing and if you hit it with a big enough hammer so to speak, the vibrations will travel outward around the globe of the moon as many times as it takes before the wave diminishes.

I'm not going to argue about Zork though so don't even start with me



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: bbracken677

You do realise until we actually go back to the Moon and drill a few hundred meters under the surface we cannot be 100% sure as to her composition never mind whether or not she's hollow, solid or otherwise?

The only evident Facepalm is on part of humanity given the fact that we have never returned or set up permanent/semi permanent habitats to further our understanding of said Moon.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 07:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Pilgrum

"Hollowness would not be factor unless the hollow portion was filled with pressurised gases to conduct the sound waves and a solid body would be far more effective."

Well we will never know until we return for sure. Hopefully we will indeed go back to our Moon within our life time!



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Really though... How hard would it be for like... Richard Branson to build something that would fly up there, land, and start digging? The guy can shuttle people into orbit - but there isn't a private organization anywhere in the world interested in finding out what's ACTUALLY there?

These are the types of people that need to step up to the plate - the government isnt* going to give us any information unless they deem it 'suitable'. )@#( that. I want to know the Truth - and that won't come from any government agency.

I'd truly love to see the Bill Gates' and the Richard Bransons of the world step up and make some steps in technology - rather than furthering their agendas that don't even seem to have any real goal other than making money.
edit on 3-6-2014 by DigitalJedi805 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: DigitalJedi805
Really though... How hard would it be for like... Richard Branson to build something that would fly up there, land, and start digging? The guy can shuttle people into orbit - but there isn't a private organization anywhere in the world interested in finding out what's ACTUALLY there?

These are the types of people that need to step up to the plate - the government isnt* going to give us any information unless they deem it 'suitable'. )@#( that. I want to know the Truth - and that won't come from any government agency.

I'd truly love to see the Bill Gates' and the Richard Bransons of the world step up and make some steps in technology - rather than furthering their agendas that don't even seem to have any real goal other than making money.


The composition of the moon is pretty well understood now. If you want to know "the Truth" why not start reading through some of the many hundreds of scientific papers that are available, free of charge, on the internet?



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Maybe it is easy like this: The rocks are older, because they are not from here, from this part of the universe. And the sound is because the moon really is hollow. It maybe is kind of laboratory with some "people" in it, watching us growing. Because they maybe made us, who knows.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: BRDAKUT

By definition the rocks on the moon would likely be older than rocks on earth simply due to the active processes on earth that are constantly making new rocks or altering older rocks. Sedimentary, metamorphic and igneous processes simply do not exist on the moon. There is no water, there are no tectonic process nor vulcanism on the moon.
M-O-O-N spells Moon!



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake
Why facepalm?

Simply because of the automatic response to the effects observed by seismic sensors being interpreted by laymen as a hollow moon with zero additional supporting data. Not to mention the interpretation of "older rocks" existing on the moon as meaning anything nefarious.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: bbracken677

You do realise until we actually go back to the Moon and drill a few hundred meters under the surface we cannot be 100% sure as to her composition never mind whether or not she's hollow, solid or otherwise?

Laws of physics prohibit the Moon to be hollow; it would collapse in on itself due to its immense mass and gravity.

The "scientists cannot be sure about anything" is a popular tag line among those who scorn the hard-working and honest mainstream science, and follow various alternative and conspiracy theories instead. *sigh*



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join