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.

 

How long has the moon been in orbit

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 05:25 AM
link   
a reply to: AdKiller


The Earth is a molten cube of liquid covered in a thick layer of space dust, you say?

Would you like to elaborate on that?




posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 11:41 AM
link   
The earth is a hypercube. We just don't see it. Magic is real, the moon is cheese, we're all figments of each other's imagination.



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 03:56 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Yes,no reference in any writing found before that time



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

The last extinction level event happened well before the advent of the written word, so again, what EXACTLY are you driving at?



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

The last extinction level event was over sixty MILLION years ago. Human ancestor species have only been around for about six million years, and people we would recognise as actually being people, only developed 200,000 years ago, or there abouts.

Writing was first developed around 5,200 years ago.

So what possible relevance does a lack of reference in writing have to do with anything? There WAS no writing, no one around to do any writing, during the period where the last great cataclysm struck the Earth.



posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 04:44 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Last catyclism was 9200 years ago,but you are from UK so you buy into the mainstream media,check your facts,earth was devastated 11,200 yrs ago,and then 9200 yrs ago approximately,where is your proof of this extention of yours?



posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

The Earth was not DEVASTATED, there was no extinction level event during that period. Tell me, what percentage of species are supposed to have been wiped off the map in moments by this event?

There were ice ages, which are not the same thing, and the exit from those ice ages, involving sea level rise related to the end of that situation, but no massive die off of species associated with a mass extinction event at all.

You need to be certain of your terminology here. A mass extinction event is a very specific set of circumstances, it is not some nebulous term, which describes everything from a mild inconvenience, to the snuffing out of billions upon billions of living things.

As for where I live sir, yes, I live in the UK, which means that unlike members from the USA, I live in a nation which is NOT considered a nation you visit, when you want a break from scientific accuracy and rigor. In the UK, for example, we understand and accept, by and large, the physical sciences and what they say to us about the world and the universe around us. Many of us even accept these things because we have weighed the evidence for ourselves, not just because the information is available readily.

There are very few people in my nation, regardless of their religious belief or lack thereof, who believe for instance, in a flat Earth, Young Earth Creationism, or in the hollow Earth concept... the reason for that is that even amongst the dullest of my countrymen, there is the understanding that the evidence required to prove any of these things to be true, does not exist, and is outweighed by uncountable orders of magnitude, by the evidence for the theories and full understanding of aspects of reality, put forward by our greatest scientific minds, including Newton, Darwin, Faraday, Lovelace and countless others.

Hell, upon the matter at hand, the man whose work allows even the sedimentary rock types which more often contain fossils (which do not respond to radiocarbon dating) to have their ages accurately estimated, was a Briton, whose work in geological mapping, culminating in his 1815 publication "A Geological Map of England and Wales, and Part of Scotland", is the basis for his understanding of faunal succession, a principle which still informs geology and paleontology to this very day, still proving useful to high science even now.

The last cataclysm worthy of being called such was NOT 9,200 or 11,200 years ago. Perhaps you ought to put that Graham Hancock nonsense down? His pseudoscience is no more valid than are the rantings of a scat flinging maniac.



posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

I agree with TrueBrit here. You are referring to the end of the last glacial period, as well as the "mini ice age" from 8000 or so years ago. Yes, they did cause havoc in certain areas, but those events are nothing in comparison to the 5 BIG extinctions on earth (Permian, Triassic, Cretaceous, Ordovician, and late Devonian). During those are extinctions we lost a significant amount of species (75%+ in some of them). We haven't had anything like that since then. Humans almost went extinct around 70,000 years ago when the Toba super volcano blew. That was the closest we ever came to extinction, and our population numbers were in the range of a few thousand to ten thousand individuals.
edit on 1 22 18 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: TrueBrit

Last catyclism was 9200 years ago,but you are from UK so you buy into the mainstream media,check your facts,earth was devastated 11,200 yrs ago,and then 9200 yrs ago approximately,where is your proof of this extention of yours?
I think you are closer to the truth with your timelines. Research the oxygen content of earths atmosphere and you will see a trend.

Your comment about a poster being from UK is partly correct. The "Royal" institution has been the clearinghouse for scientific information since 1799. And going into the "Royal" mindset, just like Royal subjects, the people owned by the crown, information is views in the same manner. Regardless as to what is said publicly. The whole scientific community seems to submit to this organization as being the end all for scientific truth.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 03:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: TrueBrit

Last catyclism was 9200 years ago,but you are from UK so you buy into the mainstream media,check your facts,earth was devastated 11,200 yrs ago,and then 9200 yrs ago approximately,where is your proof of this extention of yours?
I think you are closer to the truth with your timelines. Research the oxygen content of earths atmosphere and you will see a trend.

Your comment about a poster being from UK is partly correct. The "Royal" institution has been the clearinghouse for scientific information since 1799. And going into the "Royal" mindset, just like Royal subjects, the people owned by the crown, information is views in the same manner. Regardless as to what is said publicly. The whole scientific community seems to submit to this organization as being the end all for scientific truth.



Say what again? Are you saying that The Queen is secretly ordering Britain's scientists around? Really?
(Hysterical laughter)
Um, no.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 03:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: TrueBrit

Last catyclism was 9200 years ago,but you are from UK so you buy into the mainstream media,check your facts,earth was devastated 11,200 yrs ago,and then 9200 yrs ago approximately,where is your proof of this extention of yours?


9,200 years ago? That would have been the end of start of the Seventh Millennium BC. A time of farming and domestication and not a lot else to be honest. As for 11,200 years ago? What? Do you mean the Younger Dryas period? That was not a cataclysm.



posted on Jan, 25 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: TrueBrit

Last catyclism was 9200 years ago,but you are from UK so you buy into the mainstream media,check your facts,earth was devastated 11,200 yrs ago,and then 9200 yrs ago approximately,where is your proof of this extention of yours?
I think you are closer to the truth with your timelines. Research the oxygen content of earths atmosphere and you will see a trend.

Your comment about a poster being from UK is partly correct. The "Royal" institution has been the clearinghouse for scientific information since 1799. And going into the "Royal" mindset, just like Royal subjects, the people owned by the crown, information is views in the same manner. Regardless as to what is said publicly. The whole scientific community seems to submit to this organization as being the end all for scientific truth.



Say what again? Are you saying that The Queen is secretly ordering Britain's scientists around? Really?
(Hysterical laughter)
Um, no.
I notice you have cleverly circumvented the core message. Oh, I agree with you. Today, there is no need to order anyone around. Its all been Institutionalized....



posted on Jan, 25 2018 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: TrueBrit

Last catyclism was 9200 years ago,but you are from UK so you buy into the mainstream media,check your facts,earth was devastated 11,200 yrs ago,and then 9200 yrs ago approximately,where is your proof of this extention of yours?
I think you are closer to the truth with your timelines. Research the oxygen content of earths atmosphere and you will see a trend.

Your comment about a poster being from UK is partly correct. The "Royal" institution has been the clearinghouse for scientific information since 1799. And going into the "Royal" mindset, just like Royal subjects, the people owned by the crown, information is views in the same manner. Regardless as to what is said publicly. The whole scientific community seems to submit to this organization as being the end all for scientific truth.



Say what again? Are you saying that The Queen is secretly ordering Britain's scientists around? Really?
(Hysterical laughter)
Um, no.
I notice you have cleverly circumvented the core message. Oh, I agree with you. Today, there is no need to order anyone around. Its all been Institutionalized....


There was a core message? It just looked like a bunch of assumptions and false accusations about science.



posted on Feb, 21 2018 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Woodcarver
So it’s settled then, humans built the moon 4.5 billion years ago.

Don't be silly!

I don't think humans had scaffolding that could reach that high 4.5 Billion years ago.



originally posted by: neo96
What the hell people.

Everyone knows the moon is made of cheese.

Wensleydale? No?
Maybe Stilton.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
I don't think humans had scaffolding that could reach that high 4.5 Billion years ago.


What you never heard of the tower of Babel?



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join