Lunar mysteries

Lunar mysteries

Why is it, if the Earth is one of the smaller planets in our system that we have the largest natural satellite? And why is it always facing earth? One theory is that the moon was a rouge planetoid that lost its rotation eons ago and was captured by Earths gravity and is stuck in an orbit with only one side facing Earth.


I'm well aware of the subject being posted before about Alien bases on the moon and even some on the dark side that's supposedly the reason we have not seen them yet.

YouTube Link

YouTube Link

I have heard and read about the artificial moon theory.

Interesting Video regarding an artificial moon that’s hollow.

YouTube Link

I don't buy that one.
Sorry all I see are rock.

After searching for detailed images of the dark side something keeps raising its ugly head. Here are some images, some of the few of what the dark side looks like









One would think that the opposite side of the moon would show just as much severe impact damage as the facing side but from the few images available there seems to be less severe impacts. Why is that?



If it orbits Earth it's Dark side gets sunlight exposure, In all the years of probes and space exploration even with the latest High Def Japanese probe, we have yet to see any detailed images of the dark side.

I've discussed this with a few friends it seems to confuse some that simply because the moon is always facing earth that the dark side does not get sunlight, This is simply not true.











Some puzzling questions

1. Was it a passing celestial body that was captured by Earths gravity?

2. If it was a passing body and fairly recently capture did early man take note of it’s arrival and did it have major global climate impact? Ice Age, The great flood etc.

3. Why haven't we've seen good detailed pictures of the dark side of the moon it isn't like the " Dark Side " does not see the light of day so to speak.

4. What is being hidden and not talked about? Are the rumors of alien bases or ancient remains of an Alien base true?


Your take on this subject?

Thanks
Slay


[edit on 20-11-2008 by SLAYER69]

---

Mod Note: Forum Image Linking Policy – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 21/11/08 by Jbird]

When everything finally does come out, and it will. I think people will be very upset at the governments for denying and hiding the evidence for so long.



[edit on 20-11-2008 by warrenb]

According to the gravity density scans done by the new Japanese orbiter, a lot of the heavier material in the core when it was still molten was apparently pulled by the Earth's gravity to the near side, bringing the Moon out of internal balance. Molten material was also pulled to the surface at that same time, and that covered up a lot of the craters that had been there. It also could be why the Moon doesn't rotate in relation to the Earth, only showing us one side. The heavier side is always pulled more toward the Earth.

After looking into the matter for some time, my current beliefs are thus:

1) The moon is older and therefore not the Earths true moon.

2) Since the odds are astronomically against a perfect natural satellite capture with precise axial rotation, speed, and orbit; I believe that the moon was ‘placed’ where it. Therefore making it an unnatural satellite by definition.

3) The supporting facts that suggest a hollow moon only strengthen the theory that it is unnatural.

4) Remote viewing data, when combined with historical references to strange occurrences and observations over the centuries , suggest some form of surface activity at least in the near past.

5) Odd comments about the moon and surrounding space by astronauts of the Apollo program, NASA engineers, and technicians only lead to more questions and speculation.

6) Consider the common public perception that NASA is withholding information regarding the moon. When I try to contemplate a reason that NASA would have classified photos of the so called ‘desolate’ moon I only come to more support for the obviously outlandish unnatural moon theory. Also consider that NASA communications go through the NSA for screening and decrypting before public dissemination. What could be the reason for secure ‘encrypted’ communications channels on a public program? Remember that NASA is supposed to be a CIVILIAN agency.

7) Many of the astronaut corps have been diagnosed with a form of PTSD. It is theorized that this is caused by the massive impact that keeping a secret of this magnitude has on the psyche.

8) The theories that we did not even go to the moon are also interesting. The forensic photographic evidence which supports this theory is compelling.

I believe that we did go to the moon. We also did create a fake moon landing (desert movie set). In my opinion the faked moon landing was done before, or at the same time as the real lunar missions. This allowed the administration the ability to claim their victory over the rest of the world regarding the race to the moon whether we were successful or not. I’m sure that many here can understand the administrations motivations for this.

I believe that the astronauts were not alone when they set foot on the moon. Then they or the administration was told that the moon and deep space missions were off limits to warring nations at that point. That is why the remaining Apollo missions were cancelled even though the funding and planning was already in place. The space vehicles were already manufactured, and now sit unused.

Throughout history, much of the myths and legends have been based in part on some misunderstood truth. I believe that the truth will fall into this category. Somewhere between the outlandish alien moon theory ‘mythology’ and the history we read about in grade school. Of course this is all theoretical until we have been given the gift of hindsight regarding the issue. The moon will remain a truly fascinating and society altering issue for many more discussions. I only hope we as a society can keep an open mind and give new evidence and/or theories their due respect.

-Warrior


[edit on 20-11-2008 by Spirit Warrior]

good post and nice vids
except for the annoying alien dude popping up, like he is a poker website

what do you think the moon is?

i think it's time for some boring cross-reference:

Moon Surface Anomalies [Many Pics]

Has anyone heard of the Hollow moon theory?

espeically interesting is the rleative scarcity of visual data, see

One giant blunder for mankind: how NASA lost moon pictures

nah, the moon's still there, so that mission can be repeated if ncessary

[edit on 2008.11.20 by Long Lance]

www.nrl.navy.mil...
Another clementine map, but much higher resolution than the image you posted, and with far fewer stitching errors. Best map viewer for clementine i've found.

Is there an invisible alien in my backyard? Yes, there could be aliens anywhere, there could even be an invisble alien under your bed right now. The question is whether or not there's any proof of an alien base on the moon and the answer to that is no.

I think the moon was placed there as a calendar. Also, it might have helped slow the earths rotation to perfect it as a calendar, also perhaps the moon serves as a sort of impact or radiation shield. Something just tells me, we placed the moon there for our benefit and the year is actually something like 201354 and not 2008 just like in the matrix, hiding the truth out in the open.

Be careful here. There very well could be evidence there, and I submit that there is. The difference is that the public has little proof, but that does not mean the proof is not there (on the moon). Notice I said there is little proof and not 'no proof'.

Actually, the far side of the moon has substantially more cratering than the near side (dark side is a misnomer, as you have pointed out). The reason being that the near side has had more recent (though still very ancient) volcanic activity which covered very old craters.

The reason we only see once face is because the moon is tidally locked, as are all of the larger moons (to their respective planets) in the solar system.

www.fas.org...

1) The prevailing theory for the origin of the moon is that 4.2 billion years ago a planet larger than Mars collided with Earth. The two planets merged and "leftovers" formed the moon.

2) There are too many problems with the theory of moon being a captured body to give it any scientific consideration. Primarily, the rocks of the moon bear a striking resemblance to those of Earth.

3) As has been pointed out, there are plenty of images of the far side. Here is another source for images from Clementine www.lpi.usra.edu...
and there is a lot of coverage from the Lunar Orbiters of the 1960's here
astrogeology.usgs.gov...

4) Meaningless question unless you just want to speculate. If you do, have at it.

[edit on 20-11-2008 by Phage]

---

Mod Note: Forum Image Linking Policy – Please Review This Link.





[edit on 20/11/08 by Jbird]

I submit that there is proof of an invisible alien under my bed but I don't have access to it. If there is proof of an alien base on the far side, where is it? I've yet to see any that withstands any amount of critical thought or analysis.

Your kidding me right? Remote viewing data? Show me solid evidence of surface activity and we will talk. But remote viewing belongs in the paranormal discussion area, not space exploration

You are correct; one must submit quite solid evidence to convince anyone on such a subject. The question is what can we do about it when the data is being withheld from us as I suggest? Realistically, we simply must keep the discussion going and maintain this medium of communication (internet). The main purpose is to bring up issues for discussion (public awareness). Otherwise people just go about trusting their fate to the elected government. Let’s just look back into history and see how all of the other governments throughout history have withheld or suppressed information from their public whether that system is set up as a socialist, Marxist, democratic/capitalist or dictatorship.




You are correct to question Remote Viewing data, however to dismiss the data would be a falasy. As to what forum this belongs in I believe the mods will take care of that if necessary. You should consider the fact that the US government intel agencies (all of them) used actionable RV data at some point over the DECADES the program was operational. A bit of research on your part wouldn’t hurt. The accuracy rating is a scientifically proven fact to be well above chance. That is the sort of thing that one cannot just dismiss due to rigid belief systems.
For the rest of your comment, lunar surface anomalies have been reported for ages. There are many books on the subject.

Unfortunately, remote viewing at its very best was only somewhat accurate. The Army studies eventually concluded that there was something going on with remote viewing (though they had no clue what), and that it had some small statistical significance, but nothing that could be counted on for real intelligence purposes. Additionally, there was some suggestion that the remote viewers sometimes picked up what could be vaguely described as "alternate scenarios," virtual potentialities, or even "parallel universes," that didn't correlate to what we experience in our own real reality. So in some other reality, there may have been or are aliens living on the Moon. But not necessarily in this one.

One can speculate as wildly as one wishes, but is there evidence to even imply that this is a reasonable concern? I have yet to see any. If something that massive were being withheld they wouldn't be so open with distributing imagery of the far side of the moon and there's no way the average joe would ever be allowed to talk to the astronauts who have flown right over that terrain.

Of course, I just believe that the issues ought to be at least somewhat likely. I don't see that here.

Handwaving, one could use that kind of argument to speculate about literally anything, including a secret invisible alien under your bed who is here on a secret government visa.

5-15% is the number I've seen bandied about by supporters. If it were true it'd be intriguing, but not significant enough to support a claim of this magnitude, not nearly. In science we want things to be at least 95% above chance to be considered significant, this doesn't even come close. Even being generous, 15% above chance means there's a 35% chance that every single instance where it appears to "work" was entirely luck. At 5% above chance, there's a 45% chance that every success was luck. That's not good at all. Furthermore, I'd love to see some repeated tests involving double blind subjects and judges, with control decoys the judges must weed out using the subjects info, where they manage to make it above the chance percentage at all.

When I was watching the first 2 vids I saw 3 images I haven't seen before. (and I thought I've seen 'em all )

Are these real? Because they look pretty artificial to me.
But since the YouTube poster hasn't provided any sources for the pictures I can't check if these 'anomalies' are really there.





Or maybe these are just rocks and I need to buy glasses

At the time Earth formed 4.5 billion years ago, other smaller planetary bodies were also growing. One of these hit earth late in Earth's growth process, blowing out rocky debris. A fraction of that debris went into orbit around the Earth and aggregated into the moon.

The moon has exactly the same oxygen isotope composition as the Earth, whereas Mars rocks and meteorites from other parts of the solar system have different oxygen isotope compositions. This shows that the moon formed form material formed on Earth.

I do not doubt that Governments keep secrets from the populous, Are you saying there is more to this than a simple scientific answer? I believe there is more up there than is being shown.

But I’m not exactly sure what it is.




I’ve heard this one too. But one would think that according to the images and data posted by Phage
That the higher elevations would be facing earth and according to what he posted above it shows higher elevations on the far side. Wouldn’t it make more since if the moon bulged for lack of a better phrase towards Earth?



That is odd. I’ve always wondered why that is. In the beginning that was not the case it seems to me that someone made a decision years ago not to have live feeds. What are they hiding or afraid will come out?
In a “OPEN “and “Public “program that NASA is supposedly the only real viable excuse is national security if the astronauts “Spot “something and give their location and it turns out to be a orbiting military vehicle either manned or unmanned that they were not aware of and somehow that information is leaked to not so friendly countries they would then know it’s trajectory and orbit etc.






Ahh finally
“The right question”

I am not too far away from some of the excepted theories of the moons geneses. But I don’t buy the theory that the moon was created at the same time as the Earth. I do believe that some pretty darn good data and opinions have been presented here by post contributors.

I am considering reevaluating some of my beliefs; however I’m still leaning towards the theory of a near Earth collision. I say near Earth collision because I feel that the moon passed so close to the Earth that it dragged some Earth material along with it when it passed by and finally settled into a nice orbit.

Some anomalies of the Earth moon relationship.
1. It’s disproportionally large compared to Earths mass. IMHO
One would think that the larger solar bodies with their greater mass and gravitational pull would have captured it.
2. The Earth’s crust is totally fractured.
I feel this is a leftover of a major impact or a glancing blow or the Earth reacting to a new satellites gravitational pull and the effects of it has corrupted the crust to the point of fracturing.
3. The Earth is tilted, seems unbalanced kind of like a badly loaded washing machine. Lopsided so to speak.

Now IMHO I think the tilt, fracturing etc is the remains of a history that we have not figured out yet.




No.
But I do feel that anything is possible, I would not be a member of ATS if I did not think outside the box, but right now all I see are rocks.




Good points but again I mentioned severe impacts. I understand the concept of volcanic activity reducing impact scars. There seems to be larger more severe impacts on the side facing earth than on the far side.

Well I’m not discounting the theory of the larger than Mars sized body colliding with the Pre Earth body and the “Leftovers” eventually forming the moon but I think that there is ample evidence to form a newer theory of what I outlined above.






So close
I feel that you are closer to the mark. But again I don’t think that it was created in a near Earth orbit The isotope you mentioned could have been dragged off of the Earth by gravitational forces and now you have an Earth Residue on it’s surface.

reply to post by SLAYER69

---

It is extremely improbable (if not impossible) that, if such a large body was captured at all, it would settle into anything but an eccentric orbit without some other influence to circularize it.

No material could of been "dragged" off of the Earth. The Earth is more massive than the Moon. Its gravity is stronger. If anything, material would have been dragged off of the moon rather than vice versa but a pass close enough to do that would shatter the planet due to tidal forces.




These are the largest 20 craters on the near side:
Bailly 287
Deslandres 256
Clavius 245
Lagrange 225
Bel'kovich 214
Schickard 206
Janssen 199
Einstein 198
Maginus 194
Humboldt 189
Petavius 188
Schiller 180
Gauss 177
Grimaldi 172
Hausen 167
Hecataeus 167
J. Herschel 165
Struve 164
Ptolemaeus 164
Riemann 163

These are the largest on the far side:
Hertzsprung 591
Apollo 537
Korolev 437
Birkhoff 345
Poincare 319
Planck 314
Mendeleev 313
Schrodinger 312
Lorentz 312
Milne 272
Gagarin 265
d'Alembert 248
Leibnitz 245
Harkhebi 237
Van de Graaff 233
Von Karman 225
Pasteur 224
Galois 222
Campbell 219
Landau 214


The average size for the "named" craters on the far side is 43km, on the near side it is 18km. But this probably doesn't really mean a whole lot since most of the smaller craters on the far side are not named while many on the near side are.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by Phage]