posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 02:16 AM
The moon originated from planetary impact between proto earth and another mars size planet. That's the theory most supported by scientists and
You have some real old info in the fp. The idea e.g. that Luna was captured by earth gravity has been put in a trashcan a long, long time ago.
There's a lot of older and extra solar material on the moon, is that so strange seeing as it's scarred all over from impacts?, never mind the dark
side of the moon, it's 'worse' there.
We have comets and so on entering and exiting our solar system all the time. Extra solar and/or older material is not strange at all imho.
To be blunt, the speculations in that book are based on bad information from the start and then written to make it sound as if there's something
unusual going on.. Cashing in on the gullible and uneducated (in science).
My 2 cents.
It's just the whole premise it starts with. captured the moon.. this theory never reached a point where it was seriously concidered a possibility,
despite that, it's this assumption which makes the findings seem strange..
Luna most likely is a product of planetary collision, all evidence points that way and it is the accepted theory for quite a while now. So far
evidence does not contradict this theory at all. This whole book then can disappear in a shredder being based on a wrong premise. All speculation and
extrapolation based on an incorrect premise is fundamentally flawed.
As for the capture theory, Earth simply is not massive enough, add to that Luna is pretty massive itself. To capture a body like Luna you need to be
Jupiter or the like.
[edit on 2/9/2007 by David2012]