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.

 

The miracle of the moon

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Blastoff




Oh my, my, my!

Aren't we edgy today?

Hope you feel better soon!


He's from Yorkshire ... we have a tendency to be blunt ... we call it "Calling a spade a spade"




posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa There's plenty of aspect's to our solar system that just seem to feel 'manufactured'. Just about everything about our Moon being a perfect example.



totally. so many neat coincidences.



posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: artistpoet
Just curious ... So what will happen to the Moon ... will it be dragged in to orbit Mars ... what is the actual distance the Moon is moving away at per year ...
3.8cm/year.
We predict the Sun will expand to about the size of the current Earth orbit in 5 billion years, but the Earth is moving away and the prediction isn't accurate enough to determine if the Earth and moon will get swallowed by the sun. Maybe, maybe not.

It would take over 1000 billion years for the moon to reach anywhere near Mars at 3.8 cm/year, even at closest approach. However, all life on Earth might be gone in a billion years because the oceans will probably have evaporated by then, so the fate of the moon isn't something anybody will be around to care about at the rate our colonization of other planets is proceeding, unless we get in gear and do something.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 02:24 AM
link   
Ignorance is strong in this thread.

Ever heard of an annular solar eclipse? It's when the Moon doesn't quite cover the Sun, leaving a bright ring around it.

Also, the Moon is slowly but surely moving away from Earth due to tidal interaction, meaning that in the past the Moon appeared larger than the Sun, and in the future it will appear smaller and all eclipses will be annular ones.

The only lucky coincidence here is that we live at the time when the Moon covers (roughly) the same area as the Sun, giving us these spectacular total eclipses. Your grand-grand-grand-etc. kids will not have that privilege.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 02:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: rkingpin

There's plenty of aspect's to our solar system that just seem to feel 'manufactured'. Just about everything about our Moon being a perfect example.

Examples, please?


I mean, look how big it is compared to the earth. It's quite honestly amazing when you compare it to the other moons in our solar system.

Pluto's moon Charon is very big compared to Pluto (just over half the size), so much so that they both orbit a point in space between them.


How we ended up with this one single massive moon just blows the mind and is a true mystery.

There's a very good hypothesis that the Moon is the producs of a Mars-sized body impacting the proto-Earth and ejecting lots of material from its crust into the orbit. The Moon's low density and similar mineral composition to that of the Earth's crust support this hypothesis.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 03:04 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Examples? Well you come across as a very intelligent person. I'm sure you could come up with far more examples than me, all by yourself, if you were so inclined.

But the most amazing example I can think of is how we ended up with this one massive moon, in comparison to the size of the earth, which just happens to be a vital part of keeping the rotation of the earth stable, which in turn allows life as we know it. Don't tell me you don't find it odd that we are the only planet in the solar system that only has one single moon, that is just absolutely massive in comparison to the earth?

Yeah, the collision hypnosis works for my uneducated arse. But, a lot of scientist dispute it and from what I've researched, most good scientist will admit that we still don't have any solid theory for how the moon got there and why we should be so unique as to only have one single massive one.

Though, I do except that considering how big the universe is, that the mathematics might have just come together by coincidence here, which is the only reason life has been able to thrive on earth in the first place. But still, a creative mind can't help but think, about that crazy ancient alien theory.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 06:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: wildespace

Examples? Well you come across as a very intelligent person. I'm sure you could come up with far more examples than me, all by yourself, if you were so inclined.

I don't see anything "manufactured" about the Solar System. As the one who made the statement, I would have hoped you could bring up some examples to support it, instead of laying the burden of evidence on other people's shoulders.


But the most amazing example I can think of is how we ended up with this one massive moon, in comparison to the size of the earth, which just happens to be a vital part of keeping the rotation of the earth stable, which in turn allows life as we know it. Don't tell me you don't find it odd that we are the only planet in the solar system that only has one single moon, that is just absolutely massive in comparison to the earth?

I don't see it as particularly amazing or unbelievable, unless you apply the "strong anthropic principle". As I already mentioned, Pluto (although not being exactly a planet) has huge moon relative to its size. The Moon isn't absolutely necessary for life on Earth, although its absence might have prevented humans from evolving.

I think you are making a mistake by placing so much importance and significance on certain parameters, limited to just the Solar System, and disregard the rest of the universe, where I'm sure there are plenty of planets that have a single large moon.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Yeah, you would think the same occurrence has happened outside of the solar system, once you consider how big the universe is and all. Nevertheless, it's just an assumption and not exactly a valid scientifically based argument. We only really have our own solar system to compare the definition of 'incredibly unique' at this point in time and our earth having only one single massive (relative to its its planet) moon is just that (incredibly unique).

The fact that the full moon only appears at night is also a very interesting coincidence, imo.

Also, Pluto has at least 5 moons (as your already aware of), so it really doesn't fit the category of the uniqueness of our single massive moon.

Either way, we as a simple primitive life form are prone to interpreting meaning into completely chance occurrences, that irony isn't lost on me. I'm just saying that when you really think about the idea that the Moon was deliberately placed there to stabilize the earth......... Well, it just makes you think is all.

Though, I'm not in anyway claiming as fact it must have been aliens, lol. Just saying it's an interesting and valid (imo) thought when your staring up at our Moon on a clear summer night. Not like we've got a solid theory for how it turned out that way anyway.
edit on 3-4-2015 by Subaeruginosa because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: wildespace
The fact that the full moon only appears at night is also a very interesting coincidence, imo.

Really? You aren't aware of how the Moon's phases work depending on the angle between it, the Sun, and the observer?



www.moonconnection.com...

From Earth, looking at the full moon requires the Sun to be directly behind you, which means you have to be on the Earth's night side.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Well that's just quite ridiculously obvious, now you've clearly pointed it out. Like an apple knocking you on the head I suppose, it was as clear as day all along, yet just never occurred to me.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   
BTW, just to be clear, I'm not conceding my main point in anyway shape or form. I'm just conceding that one single sentence about the full moon only coming out at night as being an amazing occurrence.

The Moon to me still seems manufactured. Any scientist who disputes it as just a crazy conspiracy theory and an invalid hypothesis is probably just politically motivated, lacking creative thought or just probably a religious fanatic.

Give me a solid scientific theory for how the Moon got there and I'll go with that. But until then, The Moon being manufactured is a completely viable thought, imo.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 04:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

I'm interested in some points as to how the Moon seems manufactured to you, so please share them here. I am scientifically-minded (which comes with a good dose of skepticism), but I do like exploring possibilities and examining evidence.

But it also seems unfair that you label scientists with those tags, yet decide to believe what you want to believe because you "feel like it".

The Sun, to all intents and purposes, appears to us as going around the Earth in the sky, but science has shown that it's actually the Earth that rotates on its axis and goes around the Sun. So many things aren't what they appear to be from a limited point of view, and it's the science's job to look at as much data as possible and make working hypotheses and theories based on them.

Good questions to ask here would be: a) can the Moon, with its huge size and mass, be manufactured? Does the average density and solid-ness (as shown by seismic and other measurements) correlate with a manufactured body? What about all the huge craters, mountain chains, and lava fields (which we call the maria)?



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   
This article explores several alternative hypotheses about the origin of the Moon, and shows how the "giant impact theory" is the best explanation fitting the known evidence: starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov...


Various theories had been proposed for the formation of the Moon. Below these theories are listed along with the reasons they have since been discounted.

* The Fission Theory: This theory proposes that the Moon was once part of the Earth and somehow separated from the Earth early in the history of the solar system. The present Pacific Ocean basin is the most popular site for the part of the Earth from which the Moon came. This theory was thought possible since the Moon's composition resembles that of the Earth's mantle and a rapidly spinning Earth could have cast off the Moon from its outer layers. However, the present-day Earth-Moon system should contain "fossil evidence" of this rapid spin and it does not. Also, this hypothesis does not have a natural explanation for the extra baking the lunar material has received.

* The Capture Theory: This theory proposes that the Moon was formed somewhere else in the solar system, and was later captured by the gravitational field of the Earth. The Moon's different chemical composition could be explained if it formed elsewhere in the solar system, however, capture into the Moon's present orbit is very improbable. Something would have to slow it down by just the right amount at just the right time, and scientists are reluctant to believe in such "fine tuning". Also, this hypothesis does not have a natural explanation for the extra baking the lunar material has received.

* The Condensation Theory: This theory proposes that the Moon and the Earth condensed individually from the nebula that formed the solar system, with the Moon formed in orbit around the Earth. However, if the Moon formed in the vicinity of the Earth it should have nearly the same composition. Specifically, it should possess a significant iron core, and it does not. Also, this hypothesis does not have a natural explanation for the extra baking the lunar material has received.

There is one theory which remains to be discussed, and it is widely accepted today.

The Giant Impactor Theory (sometimes called The Ejected Ring Theory): This theory proposes that a planetesimal (or small planet) the size of Mars struck the Earth just after the formation of the solar system, ejecting large volumes of heated material from the outer layers of both objects. A disk of orbiting material was formed, and this matter eventually stuck together to form the Moon in orbit around the Earth. This theory can explain why the Moon is made mostly of rock and how the rock was excessively heated. Furthermore, we see evidence in many places in the solar system that such collisions were common late in the formative stages of the solar system.

edit on 5-4-2015 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace
From Earth, looking at the full moon requires the Sun to be directly behind you, which means you have to be on the Earth's night side.

If you are far north (65.6N, 22E) or south you can see the sun and full moon at the same time. This picture is taken 2014-08-11 at 21:02, one day after full moon. The moon did rise at 20:31 and the sun did set at 21:10.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

The Moon to me still seems manufactured. Any scientist who disputes it as just a crazy conspiracy theory and an invalid hypothesis is probably just politically motivated, lacking creative thought or just probably a religious fanatic.


Science is not about belief, it's about knowledge.

You have a belief the moon is manufactured but your belief is not supported by the evidence that it is a natural object . Fanatics are often those who eschew scientific evidence for their own personal beliefs religious or otherwise.

The facts don't add up to an artificial moon. At this point to hold such a belief that it is artificial in the face of those facts is like believing the Earth is flat.... kinda fanatical.

Perhaps you should ask yourself why you throw the very valid science out entirely? Is it because it doesn't support your belief or is it because you do not understand it?
edit on 5-4-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar

Well you don't necessarily have to be a fanatic to eschew scientific evidence. I mean, it should be clear from my avatar & signature that I have a lot of respect for scientists who have stood up to popular "beliefs" or dogma and have proved these beliefs that are accepted as fact by the masses as incorrect, using the scientific method. But lets face it, scientist are human and like most humans can usually be easily brought. When it comes to living off an oily rag or writing a paper for the government or corporation using eschewed scientific evidence, well most scientist are writing a paper.

But anyway......... I feel my words have been taken out of context here, I never said I "believe" as 'fact' the Moon was manufactured by some intelligent entity, I just think its a fascinating thought is all. I mean, I'm sure most professional Astronomers will admit its a real possibility that there is other life out there, even intelligent life. But that doesn't mean there claiming it as scientific fact, just that it isn't a completely ridiculous idea to entertain, with the recent discovery of all these exoplanets and considering how large the universe is.

I'll be the first one to admit that the most likely scenario for how we got here is that we are merely an amazing coincidence of chemistry and physics. But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter how scientifically minded you are or how high your IQ may be, none of us have any definitive answers. So imo, a Prometheus type origin hypothesis is not as far out or ridiculous as some would make it out to be.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: JadeStar
I'll be the first one to admit that the most likely scenario for how we got here is that we are merely an amazing coincidence of chemistry and physics. But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter how scientifically minded you are or how high your IQ may be, none of us have any definitive answers. So imo, a Prometheus type origin hypothesis is not as far out or ridiculous as some would make it out to be.


Actually we do have definitive answers about the moon being artificial or not.

The definitive answer is that it is not. To pretend that it's even a question is silly.
edit on 6-4-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar

Your taking my words out of context again. Though, I'm start to think that's your actual intention, lol.

I never said anything about the Moon being "artificial", because clearly its not. I said that I don't think its such a completely crazy thought to wonder if it might have deliberately been placed there to stabilize the earths rotation.

Its not a hardcore belief, I'm not claiming there's scientific evidence to prove it as fact. I'm just saying an open minded individual entertaining the thought, is not an indication of a serious mental illness, or delusional mind set. Like a lot of mainstream scientist of modern times would make it out to be.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

You were talking about the Moon as having been "manufactured", which equates to being constructed as an artificial object. Even if you meant the Moon being a natural object, it's titanic mass precludes any idea of moving it and placing it into an orbit around Earth. The only scenario where that would be possible would be complete sci-fi where we would have to suspend all physical limitations.

Manufactured Moon is a dream that doesn't conform to any scientifically known facts, sorry.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

my whole original argument was that the Moon wasn't a miracle made by some supernatural being, since just like the earth, there's nothing perfect about it. But that it does have attributes to it that could indicate its the product of terra forming the earth. But, I also clearly pointed out that us humans are prone to interpreting higher meaning into natural occurrences, when in reality there is none.

I never made any definitive claims about anything! Nor did I say anything about humans possibly having something to do with it, so I'm a little confused why you brought 'our' technological limitations into the conversation.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join