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.

 

A new theory/question.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Is it possible that the Moon was struck by something, causing it to become engulfed in flames (Sun like) and the heat from the burning Moon, cause the extinction of the Dinosaurs?

Some might say that ther is nothing on the Moon to keep it ablaze.

Well, you're right, there IS nothing there now. Who's to sayu nothing was there back then?

I mean afterall, the Moon is COVERED in ashlike matereal.




posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 01:45 PM
link   
I'm by far no expert, but wouldn't that be quite a distance to have that effect on the earth ?


oh crap, wait, the sun has great effects on the earth and it's far away,...

never mind, I'm just rambling....



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 01:46 PM
link   
no. where's the crater? actually, there probably wouldn't be a crater at all. anything large enough to do that would probably crack the moon in half. also, any fire intense enough to bun sun-like would no doubt burn itself out at a ferocious rate.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   
The moon being covered in ashlike material is true. However, there have been many studies into that, and there is actually a cosmic dust which is berating the solarsystem at a constant rate since it's discovery. Since the moon has no atmosphere, the dust doesn't burn up on entry and just lands on the moon.

Also, in order to have the moon aflame, there would need to be some kind of catalyst, such as oxygen, which would keep it burning. Without that, there would be no blaze.

And finally, why would an ice age have resulted in the moon heating the earth up?

Just playing devil's advocate. If you have answers or responses to these points, I'd be interested to hear them!



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 01:48 PM
link   
But a fire that large, and that close to us.................wouldn't it only have to burn for a short amount of time (a couple days or less) to destroy life on Earth?


Sh!t, we hear all the time that people die from the heat in the summer whn it's only 100 or so.

A full burning Moon would be alot hotter than that.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Also, in order to have the moon aflame, there would need to be some kind of catalyst, such as oxygen, which would keep it burning. Without that, there would be no blaze.

And finally, why would an ice age have resulted in the moon heating the earth up?



But who's to say there was nothing on the Moon to keep it burning? Some rock, and topical samples won't show that. You'd have to dig deep to find that out.

And the second part...........

When you get out of a hot shower, do you stay hot? No, you get cold. Even if it's not really cold in the room.

What if this Moon thing happened in the dead of winter.........everything melted, water started to evaporate, but as soon as the fire went out, just like getting out of the shower, it got cold. Now it being in the winter, water particles in the air around the globe that was being evaporated, froze........

There's the start of your ice age.

[Edited on 5-4-2004 by AnonymousPoster4]



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:02 PM
link   
If you had read your earlier post you would realize a few things.

1. Fire requires oxygen to burn

2. The moon has not atmosphere....no oxygen

3. The sun burns due to nuclear fusion

4. It would be very difficult given the known composition of the moon for this type of reaction to occur there.

Basically this is, in my opinion, an idea that popped into your head and instead of doing any research, you posted it here...kindof lazy don't you think?



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:06 PM
link   

2. The moon has not atmosphere....no oxygen


NOW!

Who's to say millions upon millions of years ago, it didn't?

[Edited on 5-4-2004 by AnonymousPoster4]



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousPoster4

2. The moon has not atmosphere....no oxygen


NOW!

Who's to say millions upon millions of years ago, it didn't?

[Edited on 5-4-2004 by AnonymousPoster4]


How would it maintaiin an atmosphere? Please do some research about atmosphere composition and what is required for a planet to maintain one before you continue this post. You will see that the moon does not have the properties required.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:36 PM
link   
NOW!

Who's to say it didn't back then?

Sheesh.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousPoster4
NOW!

Who's to say it didn't back then?

Sheesh.


Physics. The moon doesn't have the mass to maintain an atmosphere. It would just drift off into space if, somehow, it formed. But then, it would need an higher mass to collect that atmosphere.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Thank you junglejake....I wanted anonymousposter4, to look into it, but you've summed it up just about right. It isn't a plausible theory...given the physics we know.

[Edited on 5-4-2004 by Lukefj]



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Again...............now!


Who's to say it didn't back then.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousPoster4
Again...............now!


Who's to say it didn't back then.


This reminds me of the Monty Python sketch "Are you here for the 5 minute argument..."

AP4, repeating "Who's to say it didn't happen then" over and over isn't debate is it?

Please have a look at this , which explains some theories about how the Moon was possibly formed.

OK?



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Oh, so their theories are good enough?


But seriously, you don't know, and therefor, can't dismiss this theory.


Remember, the World used to be flat.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 04:39 PM
link   
What you're implying, AP4, is that the moon was a lot larger and a lot more dense back in the dino era, about 65 million years ago. So therefore, somehow, in the past 65 million years, the moon has lost about 2/3rds of it's mass (that which would be necessary to collect an atmosphere), but losing that mass didn't effect the orbit of the earth in any way, just caused the extinction of SOME animals. Spicifically, the animals who need to bask in the heat of the sun to stay warm, not the animals which have fur coats and need to hide from the sun on some days because it gets to hot...



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousPoster4
Oh, so their theories are good enough?


But seriously, you don't know, and therefor, can't dismiss this theory.


Remember, the World used to be flat.


Funny. People for the last 3000 year accepted the earth was a sphere. In the mid 1800s people started a rumor that people used to think the world was flat as a way of showing how modern and sophisticated they were. But in scientific and even religious text dating back well into BC the earth was known to be a sphere. And culture with boats became quickly aware of this as they learned to watch the oceans horizon.

As for your air tight "now" argument, thing leave evidence. The moon doesn't have the gravity required to hold onto anything that can burn, shows no signs of combustion.

You "now" argument shows a complete lack of understanding of how things work. When things combust they chemically alter everything around them and would leave behind evidence on the surface.

You idea is an interesting concept, but has abosolutly no evidence.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 04:50 PM
link   


Funny. People for the last 3000 year accepted the earth was a sphere. In the mid 1800s people started a rumor that people used to think the world was flat as a way of showing how modern and sophisticated they were. But in scientific and even religious text dating back well into BC the earth was known to be a sphere. And culture with boats became quickly aware of this as they learned to watch the oceans horizon.


Actually, durring the dark ages, a lot of technology and knowlege was lost to the world, including the greek astronomical discoveries. There are greek texts which speak of a heliocentric solarsystem and a spherical earth. Then astronomy disappeared for a while, people seemed to be content living in their own filth for a petty tyrant king, and didn't bother looking up, I guess. As soon as astronomy started to gain the lime light again, it didn't take long at all for people to start saying the earth was round, and we live in a heliocentric solar system.

Unfortunatelly, the Catholic church did a pretty good job, at the time, of stemming that branch of research. But as we all know, there were still the die hards who would seek the truth despite what some power hungry politician running the vatican might say, so astronomy continued, but took a while to reach the levels of many of the other sciences.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 05:01 PM
link   

The moon doesn't have the gravity required to hold onto anything that can burn, shows no signs of combustion.


Again, you're thinking of the Moon from it's present standpoint.



And I don't follow the logic in saying the Moon would have to shrink in order for my theory to be possible.



Look, the Atersoid (one of) that nailed Jupiter, left a scar/burn mark/whathaveyou on Jupiter many sizes larger than Earth.

Now if that asteroid had hit Earth instead, everything on Earth would have been destroyed, leaving next to no evidence of past population.

The oxygen in the air, and everything that made oxygen, (trees, etc) would be gone, burnt away. Thus leaving Earth, an uninhabited, non atmospheric, barren planet, covered in ash...........just-like-the-Moon!!!

[Edited on 5-4-2004 by AnonymousPoster4]



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
(...) the moon was a lot larger and a lot more dense back in the dino era, about 65 million years ago. So therefore, somehow, in the past 65 million years, the moon has lost about 2/3rds of it's mass (that which would be necessary to collect an atmosphere), but losing that mass didn't effect the orbit of the earth in any way, just caused the extinction of SOME animals. (...)


Well, actually, the formation of the moon remains partly a mystery, and some theories, without going that far, are interesting on some points...

Maybe a bit more than 65 millions of years (3 billions?) the moon could well have been a planet assuch orbiting between the mars and jupiter, where asteroids are found now. The moon, if it were there now, would be categorized as a telluric planet, i.e. similar to earth. The collision of it with "something" could well have been placing it in our orbit. It is believed that earth might not always have had a satellite... I know it is somewhat strange, but this theory is plausible when examined in details.

Actually, Bode and Kepler's laws can show us where to place planets in orbit around a star if we know where at least one of them is, and the space between jupiter and mars is on that point of view not logical. A planet should indeed be between them.

The other possibility is that the planet that was there has been smashed by that flying something, creating the asteroids we find now.

Sorry for not providing any links or sources (i don't have them now available) but a bit of research should do. I'll post links if I find them.

Regards,



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join