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.

 

Is our moon artificial? The lesser known smoking gun fact

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: genma First off our Moon does not have a name while other moons do. All the ATS posters should find a suitable name instead of saying the moooon.
I beleive our moon is the only moon that rotates in the direction it does. While all the other moons around planets rotate the oposit. Because of the orbit around the Earth and the way the moon rotates we only see the front. Weird right.




posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: LA1IMPALA
M O O N that spells moon.




posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: LA1IMPALA
a reply to: genma First off our Moon does not have a name while other moons do. All the ATS posters should find a suitable name instead of saying the moooon.


When writing the word "Moon" in reference to Earth's moon, it is a proper noun (with a capital "M"). So, in that respect, it could be said that the name for Earth's moon is "Moon" or "The Moon".

When talking about moons in general, such as "the moons of Jupiter", the "m" is lower case, making it a common noun.


I beleive our moon is the only moon that rotates in the direction it does. While all the other moons around planets rotate the oposit. Because of the orbit around the Earth and the way the moon rotates we only see the front. Weird right.

Earth's moon does not rotate in a different direction than most other moons. As viewed from "above" (above what we call North), the moon rotates counter-clockwise as it also orbits counter-clockwise around Earth. Earth is also rotating counter-clockwise as it orbits counter-clockwise. However, Venus rotates the opposite direction as the other planets.

As for the reason we only ever see one side of the Moon (the same side always faces Earth) is because the moon is said to be "tidally locked" to Earth. That means it rotates once for every orbit, which in turn means that it will always keep the same face toward Earth as it rotates/orbits.

This is an understood mechanism of orbital mechanics, and is not unique to our Moon. Over 30 other moons in the solar system do this, including both of Mars' moons, eight of Jupiter's moons, including Jupiter's four major moons (Io, Europa, Callisto, and Ganymede), as well as 15 moons of Saturn, including Titan and Enceladus, five moons of Uranus, and two moons of Neptune. Pluto and Charon or tidally locked to each other -- both only ever showing one face to the other..

There are also planets around other stars that are believed to be tidally locked to their star (perpetual daylight on one side, perpetual night on the other).


edit on 3/26/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: LA1IMPALA

It has two names, in fact. The Moon being one of them. The other being "Luna," which is latin.

The Moon is a completely accepted standard when referring to the celestial body orbiting the earth. So is Luna.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther




There's a huge difference between "same depth" and "same range of depth". Meaning crater depths are, more or less, in the same ballpark. Which one would expect, considering that the Moon's mass and internal consistency have remained constant for... almost forever? And that it's late bombardment consisted of asteroids/meteorites that were largely all from the same source, it would make sense that most of them were of similar size. It'd be a lot more fun if it was artificial, though.


Asteroid velocity and size should produce vastly different sized craters in not just width but depth as well, regardless of how consistent the rock layers on the moon have been, unless underneath it all is a highly strong and unnatural construct. It's basic physics really.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: onebigmonkey

Ignoring people whose history is better preserved than our own history says something. They have insight into things we are just now learning about.

Native American, South American, Central America... The Dogon tribes in Africa who know about stellar phenomenon during a time when we consider it impossible.

Tall tales? maybe but I am not willing to ignore what they say just because it doesn't fit in with what we currently think our past is.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: genma
a reply to: NthOther




There's a huge difference between "same depth" and "same range of depth". Meaning crater depths are, more or less, in the same ballpark. Which one would expect, considering that the Moon's mass and internal consistency have remained constant for... almost forever? And that it's late bombardment consisted of asteroids/meteorites that were largely all from the same source, it would make sense that most of them were of similar size. It'd be a lot more fun if it was artificial, though.


Asteroid velocity and size should produce vastly different sized craters in not just width but depth as well, regardless of how consistent the rock layers on the moon have been, unless underneath it all is a highly strong and unnatural construct. It's basic physics really.


First of all, craters an the Moon come in many different depths, mostly depending on diameter. There are extremely small craters only a meter or less deep, small craters that are only a few meters deep, there are medium-diameter craters that are dozens or hundreds of meters deep, and there are very large craters that range from 1 km to 5 km deep.

Here is a link to an alphabetical list of hundreds of the medium-to-larger Moon craters. Clicking on the crater names will take you to a listing for that crater, and many (although not all) have a depth listed. I took a quick look around, and I found some that were a little more than 1 km, some 2 or 3 km, and some 4+ km deep -- a wide range of depths:

Wikipedia article -- List of craters on the Moon

One other thing to consider would be that the larger ones probably would reach an eventual limit, considering that the Moon is not made of the same soil they find on the top "all the way down". The Moon (similar to Earth) has a harder mantle under the relatively softer crust.

Another thing to consider is that very large impacts may have had other factors that affect the depth, such as producing lava-flow events that could back-fill the crater, or producing central uplift peaks that could cause the crater floor to rebound slightly.


edit on 3/26/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: genma

You're right, asteroid size and velocity should create a wide range of crater size and depth. That is absolutely spot on, and is very, very basic and simple physics.

The "range" of crater depth is, as another pointed out, anything from a few meters to several kilometers.

So I guess if you define "range" as "everything from a few meters to several kilometers" then your premise is spot on.

I'm glad we can all agree on this very basic, simple example of physics at work



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: LA1IMPALA
a reply to: genma First off our Moon does not have a name while other moons do. All the ATS posters should find a suitable name instead of saying the moooon.
I beleive our moon is the only moon that rotates in the direction it does. While all the other moons around planets rotate the oposit. Because of the orbit around the Earth and the way the moon rotates we only see the front. Weird right.


It's called tidal locking. Nothing mysterious or magical just plain old ordinary well understood physics. Wikipedia has a nice explanation as to how it occurs and a list of all the other bodies in our solar system that show the same behaviour.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

The craters are impact craters not the result of natural formation under effects of gravity and erosion. .



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 06:45 PM
link   
What i find unsual about the moon is all the impact craters appear evenly space i mean if the impacts have been happening randomly over million of years you would expect to see impact signatures overlayed on eachother as shown in picture A below. In reality we see picture B which doesn't add up.




My first impression would be the craters are result of controlled ballistic trajectories into the moon, i.e. caused by missles the result of ancient war perhaps.
edit on 26-3-2015 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 07:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: AthlonSavage
What i find unsual about the moon is all the impact craters appear evenly space i mean if the impacts have been happening randomly over million of years you would expect to see impact signatures overlayed on eachother as shown in picture A below. In reality we see picture B which doesn't add up.




My first impression would be the craters are result of controlled ballistic trajectories into the moon, i.e. caused by missles the result of ancient war perhaps.


Here are a couple images showing overlapping craters:





However, it's also likely that some later impacts on top of earlier impacts may obliterate some existing craters, plus some of the ejecta material from later craters may fall back and cover older craters.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: RoScoLaz4

Which medication haven't you had today?



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: IShotMyLastMuse


why would anyone believe NASA is telling any truth at all??

I believe the earth and moon are within the atmosphere of our surface plane but thats another story.(thats why i think they can listen to its "ringing") What i mean is..there are people and a few who are ex-workers claiming nasa is a computer generating imaging station faking pictures of our entire universe,planets, solar systems,blackholes etc, And there are many physics scientists finding more and more answers that support the argument we are living in a simulation. So it would make sense to come to the conclusion,based on a lot of support, that the OP may in fact, be onto something.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Take any solid spherical object and strike it. It will "ring like a bell."

This has to be the most misunderstood quote in the history of selenology.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:11 PM
link   
Oh, how I LOVE OPs who post a bunch of nonsense and then put in a later post "the data can all be found with a simple Google search".

You can find data showing ANYTHING on Google.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

The are alot of large craters on the moon, I would expect to see a lot of over laps with these, we don't see. We see commonly small craters poker dotted on the large craters (as evident in the pics above). The small pocker dot craters I have no doubt are natural as they certainly look random but its the lack of over laps on the larger ones which is surprising.
The uniformity of large craters around the moons surface is also unsual as the moon doesn't rotate like the earth so one side should be more littered with craters than the opposite side.

Also with double hits of on same spot if they erase the underlying crater we should see obvious depth increase. Therefore if lots of erasures are occurring we should expect it common to see depth variations in craters the Op indicates this is not the case.


edit on 26-3-2015 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies






Oh, how I LOVE OPs who post a bunch of nonsense and then put in a later post "the data can all be found with a simple Google search".

You can find data showing ANYTHING on Google.


Go to the Ufo threads and replace Ops in line with skeptics/bebunkers and they pull the same trick. So don't beat the OP up on this point this happens on Ats a lot.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
Several probes have been crash landed since Apollo. We do not have seismic recordings for those because Apollo's transmitters were turned off in 1973.


I think the ALSEP stations transmitted several years longer, but as power dropped, instruments were turned off. The room in Mission Control was converted to Skylab resurrection about 1977, I recall, to prepare Skylab for a shuttle rescue mission that never came.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 11:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
Do you have any source that can confirm that it made an "audible sound"?



You're probably going to regret asking this.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join