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.

 

Jesuit priest debunked the lunar breathable atmosphere theory!

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Lest we forget the question I posed
If anyone wants to chime in with any knowledge they have, please do! I'd be curious to hear it!




posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 09:40 PM
link   
eaurouge, well, it's obvious that if we have suits that allow our men to walk on the surface of the moon, certainly an advanced civilization would hav ethat ability and more.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 09:54 PM
link   
I was referring to human activity, and what we, as people, may have already developed.



posted on Nov, 21 2007 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Originally posted by syrinx high priest



c'mon Mr. Lear, humor me with your data. I'm sure a man of your infinite abilities has this information at your fingertips.

I'm sure, as a seeker of the truth, you would never just throw out a half assed idea just for the sake of it, I'm sure you have examined the moon carefully, and have data to back up your speculation.





Thanks for the post SHP. And sorry for the delay, it took me about 2 full days to put this together. First let me tell you what led to my opinion. Here is a section of a photo taken by the Lick Observatory of the moon in 1946.



(1) Initial point of explosion (2) Horizontal plume extending approximately 80 kms. northwest (3) Cloud rising to top of atmosphere.

You can see a huge cloud (top left) of what appears to be dust or dirt. At what appears to be the initial point of the explosion there appears to be horizontal plume of this dust/debris which is drifting to the northwest. Incidentally that is the crater Endymion to the right and it was the artifacts on the craters rim which initially interested me in this photo.



Then I noticed this explosion. Now we know that a plume of dirt/dust this size could not maintain a cohesive nature, such as this well defined plume (which is obviously drifting horizontally) if there was no atmosphere. Nor could the plume rise upward as it appears to do. Nor could it maintain intact for several months as it appears to do.

So it seemed possible that there was an atmosphere which held this enormous cloud intact. And of course for there to be an atmosphere there had to be gravity sufficient to hold the atmosphere on the moon. And certainly one sixth gravity would not hold an atmosphere of the density which supports this enormous cloud.

At the same time I was looking at this photo I came across "The Picture of the Century" which was the famous oblique view of Copernicus and I noticed little plumes of rising vapor:











Then I noticed the structures were all 'square' In other words if the moon was a vacuum the structures would have to be dome shaped to efficiently contain the pressure of the atmosphere within the structure:





Here is a photo of what Zorgon calls "The Keep". You can see the long, low rectangular shaped building. First the overview:



Then the rectangular building enlarged:



Then Lunar Orbiter (LO-I-102) took this photo of a mining camp seen in the lower left. You can see roads, graded areas, structures and in the crater you can see something emitting a spray of dust or dirt.

Now in this picture there doesn't seem to be any indication of domes or evidence of any kind of gear that would lead me to believe they were operating this mining camp in a vacuum environment. Which would then lead me to believe that there was indeed an atmosphere and that atmosphere would have to be breathable in order for everyone to work in an upright position. Or actually, work at all.



Now before you say, "Well I don't see anything in those pictures" let me say this: those pictures are what convinced me and I am trying to explain what convinced me. I've spent hundreds of hours looking at pictures of the moon and I think I have a pretty good feel for some of whats up there.

So to get to your specific questions:


What is the relative humidity in this atmosphere ?


I don't know.


please state, in specific terms, the following about the atmosphere on the moon;

does this atmosphere currently exist ?


Yes, in my opinion there is currently a breathable atmosphere on the moon.


what gasses (by molar content/volume) compose the atmosphere ?


We know from A.L. Morrill, M. Mendillo and J. Baumgardner (Boston University) that sodium has been imaged out to 10 lunar radii. I am assuming that sodium is what makes the lunar sky look like a saffron color.



Title: The Lunar Sodium Atmosphere: A Study as Observed Through Four Lunar Eclipses
Authors: Morrill, A. L.; Mendillo, M.; Baumgardner, J.

Affiliation: AA(Boston University), AB(Boston University), AC(Boston University)
Publication: American Astronomical Society, DPS meeting #29, #13.10; Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 29, p.987
Publication Date: 07/1997
Origin: AAS
Abstract Copyright: (c) 1997: American Astronomical Society
Bibliographic Code: 1997DPS....29.1310M
Abstract

The Moon's sodium atmosphere has been imaged during four lunar eclipses: November 29, 1993, April 2, 1996, September 27, 1996, and March 24, 1997, using a coronagraph type system at the Boston University four inch telescope located at the McDonald Observatory, TX, and at La Palma, Canary Islands. The Moon is imaged with a 5893A filter with a FWHP of 16A to include the sodium D1 and D2 lines. The eclipse condition provides the opportunity to observe the faint lunar atmosphere when the bright disk of the Moon is within the umbra and penumbra greatly reducing the scattered light in the system. In all four cases, the sodium atmosphere was imaged out to radial distances of 10 lunar radii. The brightness patterns were essentially uniform in azimuth and exhibited a radial decay far more gradual than seen at sub-solar radial distances at quarter Moon. While some variability appears among the four data sets, the large scale morphology under eclipse conditions was remarkably constant during the 1993 to 1997 events. This implies a
steady source of sodium at times of full Moon.


adsabs.harvard.edu...



The crater Copernicus (1965) imaged with what I believe to be the true color of the Moon's sky.


what is the density of the atmosphere ?


On the near side I think it is equivalent to 18,000 feet here on earth. On the far side it is probably denser. The density of the atmosphere is obviously going to higher at lower altitudes.


what is the temperature of the atmosphere ?


My opinion is that is neither as hot nor as cold as we are led to believe by NAZA.


does it have 6 layers like Earths atmosphere ?


I don't know.


what is the maximum altitude of the atmosphere ?


According the photo of the explosion the atmosphere appears to extend many thousands of feet.


which gravitational forces keep the atmosphere in place ?


On the near side the gravitational force is at least 64% of earth's gravity. There are allegedly areas of alleged "mascons' that have more gravitational force.

On the far side it may be the same or it may be more. I have no idea what would be the nature of the phenomena that would be able to create an increased gravitational force on the opposite hemisphere.


by "breathable" do you mean specifically breathable to humans, or earth based life forms ?


Yes, by breathable atmosphere I mean that it is breathable to humans.

Thanks for the post.



[edit on 21-11-2007 by johnlear]



posted on Nov, 21 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   
I'll chime in here, and say respectfully I personally don't see anything in those particular pictures to indicate anything other than natural formations. I'm more interested in several other pictures out there, some of which you've shared in lectures and posts (and thank you for doing so).

Just my three cents. (p.s. I need them back, cable bill is due)

Edit: I could be very wrong. Thanks again for sharing the pictures and text.

[edit on 21-11-2007 by eaurouge]



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by eaurouge
Not to stray too far from topic, but I will add to that...


Here in Las Vegas there is a Methodist Church that actually teaches (and convinces) their followers that there were no such thing as Dinosaurs...

Konstantin Tsiolkovsky however designed a space station and drew a sketch of a Gold Mine on the moon in 1886...





Monsignor Corrado Balducci of the Vatican


This important Catholic prelate was already well known for his previous statement, some time ago, that he believed in the presence of alien intelligences interacting with planet Earth.

Cardinal Niccolo Cusano (1401-1464) who accepted the “alien” and “E.T.” concepts and wrote about them. And also there had been the early Jesuit astronomer Father Angelo Secchi (1818-1899) who wrote: “*It is absurd to think that the other worlds around us are uninhabited deserts*”.


unconventionalindividualist.wordpress.com...

1895 of a gold mine in operation on the moon...
Reported in three newspaper articles

Delphos Daily Herald, The Wednesday, February 06, 1895 Delphos, Ohio
Evening News, The (Newspaper) - March 12, 1895, Lincoln, Nebraska
Delphos Daily Herald, The (Newspaper) - August 28, 1895, Delphos, Ohio



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
As early as in the 18th century direct observations ruled out the presence of any significant atmosphere on the Moon.


Ah so this Jesuit Priest was taken up to the Moon by an Angel so he might 'directly' observe the conditions on the Moon?

Sounds a little wacky... but then we have stories of others who visited there as well..

But if he was really there I am sure he would have seen the spectacular sunset and sunrise rays so famous up there...


Now here on Earth of course they are quite common...



I would LOVE to see what these look like on the Moon, wouldn't you?

Oh yeah I forgot... you guys are skeptics,,, Well much as I hate to use NASA as my source, they do have their moments...


NASA Space Science
Moon Fountains
March 30, 2005



In the early 1960s before Apollo 11, several early Surveyor spacecraft that soft-landed on the Moon returned photographs showing an unmistakable twilight glow low over the lunar horizon persisting after the sun had set. Moreover, the distant horizon between land and sky did not look razor-sharp, as would have been expected in a vacuum where there was no atmospheric haze.


Funny I seem to have missed that in the evening news... and THIS too...


But most amazing of all, Apollo 17 astronauts orbiting the Moon in 1972 repeatedly saw and sketched what they variously called "bands," "streamers" or "twilight rays" for about 10 seconds before lunar sunrise or lunar sunset. Such rays were also reported by astronauts aboard Apollo 8, 10, and 15.


Too bad that they forgot they had expensive cameras with them... well at least they made sketches... but they only released one set to the public...




During the Apollo era of exploration it was discovered that sunlight was scattered at the terminators giving rise to “horizon glow” and “streamers” above the lunar surface. This was observed from the dark side of the Moon during sunset and sunrise by both surface landers and astronauts in orbit. These observations were quite unexpected, as the Moon was thought to be a pristine environment with a negligible atmosphere or exosphere.


I bet they were 'unexpected'



Each of the Surveyor 7, 6, and 5 spacecraft observed a line of light along its western lunar horizon following local sunset. It has been suggested that this horizon-glow (HG) is sunlight, which is forward-scattered by dust grains (~ 10µ in diam, ~ 50 grains cm–2) present in a tenuous cloud formed temporarily (lap 3 h duration) just above sharp sunlight/shadow boundaries in the terminator zone.


SOURCE

Well if you can bring up your Ancient Jesuit who made 'direct' observations, I get to use someone else who stood on the soil of the Moon...

Howard Menger claims the sky is Saffron... when I first ran into John he was unsure whether the sky was Blue or Yellowish... so we sent Howard a color chart... and he picked the shade he remembers



Now I wonder if the high Sodium content in the Lunar Atmosphere might account for that Saffron color...


The outer limits of the lunar sodium exosphere.


A new wide-angle coronagraphic-type imaging system used for the lunar eclipse of 16 July 2000 resulted in detections of the lunar sodium exosphere out to 20 lunar radii, approximately twice the size recorded with narrower fields of view during previous eclipses.


"The Outer Limits"


So the sodium exospheres extends out from the Moon 20 lunar radii

But I suppose the Boston University is crazy too huh?


[edit on 22-11-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


John,
Let me again thank you for humoring a cranky skeptic and wish you a happy and healthy thansgiving. Thank you for your thorough and detailed response. I'm no good at the mutli-quote technique, so please bear with me


I love ATS, because I learn things all the time. I learned we went to the moon 6 times instead of just once as an example. JRA alone has given me a lifetime's education on the apollo programs.

I thought the moon had a mostly radon atmosphere, thank you for the sodium data, I never knew that.

The main difference between us is the images of the lunar surface. I just don't see what you see.

I would say the venting is radon gas.

I think the main missing ingredients for a breathable atmosphere would be nitrogen, oxygen and water vapor.

Over the years, I've read about then moon having helium, argon, radon, and now sodium.

our atmosphere has nitrogen, oxygen, argon, carbon dionoxide, many trace gasses, and water vapor

I guess my basic point is if the moon has an atmosphere suitable for human life, it would have to be a moderate tempurature right ? I'm not saying it has to be "warm", the moon experiences massive fluctuations in temperature, but as the moon rotates, wouldn't there be weather events ? wouldn't there be snow and rain and storms ?

That is why I am so skeptical of this idea, I don't see any evidence of weather.

cheers





[edit on 22-11-2007 by syrinx high priest]



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


A Methodist CHurch that teaches people dinosaurs never existed? That makes me as sad (and mad) as the Physics students at college level who don't understand gravity and its effects.

Carl Sagan is spinning over, just every once or twice a day....

Good info in recent posts, very interesting. Lot os work, thanks.



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by eaurouge
I'll chime in here, and say respectfully I personally don't see anything in those particular pictures to indicate anything other than natural formations.


I second Earouge's opinions. A couple of "vents", in fact, are certain to be surface features. Try rotating the photo 180 degrees.

Spectrography experiments showed presence of sodium in extremely low concentrations, and there was no mention of oxygen or other gases. If someone was to compress the lunar atmosphere to the terrestrial density, it would occupy mere 210 cubic meter.



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 12:30 PM
link   
buddhasystem, it really isn't worth arguing directly with Mr. Lear. He's going to stick to his guns no matter what is presented to him!

At the same time, your arguments as to why there is NOT a breathable atmosphere have certainly been far more persuasive than John Lear's argument that there is (Which, as far as I can tell, boils down to "Mining on moon without domes. Thus people must have been exposed to the lunar surface without protection. Thus atmosphere.). Now that's a use of implications that requires a stretch to believe, in my opinion.



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Or they could just bring a mouse next time and set it free.
That would let us know in a hurry.



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlearThen I noticed this explosion. Now we know that a plume of dirt/dust this size could not maintain a cohesive nature, such as this well defined plume (which is obviously drifting horizontally) if there was no atmosphere. Nor could the plume rise upward as it appears to do. Nor could it maintain intact for several months as it appears to do.

So it seemed possible that there was an atmosphere which held this enormous cloud intact. And of course for there to be an atmosphere there had to be gravity sufficient to hold the atmosphere on the moon. And certainly one sixth gravity would not hold an atmosphere of the density which supports this enormous cloud.


This is yet more nonsense and circular reasoning.

Atmospheres are dynamic, ever moving environments which by their nature would disperse a cloud or plume. Ever heard of the wind?

Try lighting a bonfire and then tell me how many days/weeks/months the smoke is held intact for?

Watch a cloud float past your window and see how long it maintains its shape for.

Thanks, as ever, for your most amusing contribution.



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest



I'm sure, as a seeker of the truth, you would never just throw out a half assed idea just for the sake of it, I'm sure you have examined the moon carefully, and have data to back up your speculation.



given your apparent tenure (6600 pts, and a few "wrist slaps" to bring your BTS pts down) it would seem that the above statement by yourself is a willful mistruth.

Everyone knows that John admittedly will lob out concepts he has been mulling over a nothing more than a catalyst for conversation. And it works....looks at the 4 pages of drivel in this thread.



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Originally posted by Mudshark


This is yet more nonsense and circular reasoning.

Atmospheres are dynamic, ever moving environments which by their nature would disperse a cloud or plume. Ever heard of the wind?


Thanks for the post Mudshark. Yes, we on earth have a very dynamic atmosphere but if you have ever looked up at the Moon you can see that there a very few clouds and little indication of wind which would mean that if there was an atmosphere that it was very stable. Yes, I've heard of wind. Wind is caused by movement of pressure areas of which there doesn't seem to be on the moon.


Try lighting a bonfire and then tell me how many days/weeks/months the smoke is held intact for?


This seems like a rather simplistic example but if you are comparing it to the huge explosion in the 1946 Lick Observatory photo it is a very poor analogy. You see a bonfire is only a few feet high and that explosion was obviously kilometers high. Try another example.


Watch a cloud float past your window and see how long it maintains its shape for.


I am not sure what your analogy here is but if you are comparing a cloud of moisture to a cloud of dirt and debris it is a very poor analogy. Give this one another thought or two.


Thanks, as ever, for your most amusing contribution.



And thank you Mudshark. Lets work on those comparisons. Thanks



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmcivor
Or they could just bring a mouse next time and set it free.
That would let us know in a hurry.


Dear jmcivor, the animal rights groups would sue NASA for cruelty to animals the second it dies and trust me, laws in that regard are enforced in this country, just check the news. So unless NASA is willing to fund a million dollar penalty bill for that freaking little rodent, it ain't gonna happen.

Let alone the mouse, the craters on the surface of the moon and the isotope content of the lunar soil are in themselves a good enough evidence, in addition to 10,000 other pieces



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
We know from A.L. Morrill, M. Mendillo and J. Baumgardner (Boston University) that sodium has been imaged out to 10 lunar radii.


We also know from multiple sources like the one you quoted that the amount of sodium there is extremely small. If you do a little research yourself (I'm not holding my breath, though), you'll find lunar sodium data like this:

www.lpl.arizona.edu...
where they measure:

The number density at the surface is 57 + or - 20 atoms/cu cm


I'm not sure how firm a grasp you have of typical properties of the media, but I hope you should be able to discern the infinitesimal nature of that number. I advise you to not try to breath an atmosphere which contains a couple of dozen atoms per centimeter cube. It's going to suck, John.


I am assuming that sodium is what makes the lunar sky look like a saffron color.


Unless you are nano-tech enhanced cyborg whose eyes contain powerful image intensifiers, you won't see emission lines from 20 atoms per cm cube, John. No amount of photoshopping the lunar images to your liking is going to change that. No saffron for you today.



[edit on 22-11-2007 by buddhasystem]



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Originally posted by buddhasystem


We also know from multiple sources like the one you quoted that the amount of sodium there is extremely small.



Thanks for the post BS. Would any of those sources happen to be independent of NAZA or other than government funded entities?

Thanks for your input.



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Thanks for the post BS. Would any of those sources happen to be independent of NAZA or other than government funded entities?


And the paper you quoted, John... Does it come from a privately funded source?


LOL typical Lear style - smash and run bad science. You grab one piece of data which you misinterpret, and then any other source, according to you, is a paid NASA provocateur. Weak.

It just so happens that I googled up info a week ago, regarding the spectroscopy of the tenuous lunar atmosphere. There were indeed data on low number densities and sodium emission lines. These data are available to you for scrutiny as well.



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
A dome would be a useful shape, strength-wise, if the pressure was from the outside. The LEM was not a sphere shape. To hold the pressure similar to Earth's atmosphere a dome would not be necessary.

Mining equipment could have a cab to hold an atmosphere or breathing gas.

What is the resolution of the best lunar pictures. Wouldn't a lot of recognizable features be very, very large across due to the size of a pixel or unit in the image.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join