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.

 

Hollow Moon?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Does anyone have an opinion on the hollow moon theory? I found this link and it seemed to me pretty interesting.

tinwiki.org...




posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   
This should keep you going....

Hollow Moon Theory Facts

Aliens Live Inside A Hollow Moon

Has Anyone Heard Of The Hollow Moon Theory?

Hollow Moon

Hollow Moon Hollow Earth

ATS "Search" is our friend.


And don't forget "Tinwiki" is mainly created by ATS members. Why not edit the "Hollow Moon" article when you've done some reading/research and accumulated a wealth of new and interesting information?

[edit on 18/2/2009 by nerbot]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
From what I've heard, the moon is the wrong size to be in its current orbit...

When they impacted it to shoot up dust (or for whatever reason) it apparently rang like a bell for 'hours'...

And it's a heck of a strange coincedence that the same side always faces us...

BUT

I may be completely wrong on all that... some people make up stories... I just repeat them



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   
This books worth a read:



Interview with author (hes using the Sumerian gesh system for his mathematical corellations)
www.newdawnmagazine.com...

Sumerian gesh - first system of mathematics ever devised:
www.springerlink.com...


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
I listened to a talk radio show about this and it all sounded really convincing until this scientist guy who was the guest & author of the book the show was about said he believed that humans from the future travelled back in time and put it there so that life could exsist on earth.

Talk about a paradox.

I dont think i slept well that night



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by 4demon
 


The moon is orbiting at the correct speed, for an object of its mass, at its distance from the Earth.

As for the "rang like a bell" thing. See here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4demon

And it's a heck of a strange coincedence that the same side always faces us...


Not so. The Moon is 'tidally locked' which means that it rotates at the same rate as it orbits. This happens to all objects in orbit eventually. Pluto and Charon are also tidally locked along with many other objects in the Solar System and elsewhere.

Tidal Locking

[edit on 18/2/09 by Insomniac]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Well its good to know that others believe the way I always have. I said way back when I was 13 years old that the moon was Hollow and I even did a great science experiment at school that proved it could be. So for once someone has agreed with my strange thinking.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
I have a suggestion on why the same section of the moon is always facing the Earth- perhaps it's not because the moon happens to have a perfect rotational/orbital speed that syncs with the Earth's own, but that it is lopsided?

If one hemisphere of the moon had significantly more mass than the other half, wouldn't the heavier half be perpetually "pegged" to the Earth via the basic properties of gravity?

This could lend itself to the idea that "aliens" hollowed out part of the moon, and upon doing so altered its orbit in such a way that the same surface was always facing the Earth, or perhaps during the supposed collision that created the moon a lighter (upper) part of the crust was ejected along with deeper (metal) material, leaving us with an unbalanced moon.

edit: it occurs to me that this would very easily by detectable by observing the path of a single object orbiting the moon. Do we have any satellites that circle the moon regularly? They would surely have to account for this composition? Are we positive at this point that the moon is composed uniformly? Maybe it wouldn't be that easy, if the difference weren't so drastic it might take a long time of orbit to notice the difference in gravity between separate faces of the moon, but over time the heavier side would certainly gravitate towards the Earth, so maybe it's a minor change in composition from the "Earth" side to the "dark" side. Still a possibility?

[edit on 18-2-2009 by Chilkoot]

[edit on 18-2-2009 by Chilkoot]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Chilkoot
 


As has been pointed out, we only see one face of the Moon because it is tidally locked with Earth.

The Japanese currently have Kaguya in orbit around the Moon. India has Chandrayaan I. The USA will be launching the Lunar Reconnassance Orbiter this spring.

None of the currently orbiting spacecraft, nor have any of the past orbiting spacecraft (including those with people in them) have provided any indication that the Moon is anything other than a natural object.

[edit on 2/18/2009 by Phage]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:49 PM
link   
well, that negates the majority of my post. well done.

You indirectly answered my last remaining question, but I do have to ask it again,

Do we have evidence that the moon is uniformly constructed, with a similar density at any given depth?



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   
I mean when you say hollow.
Everything in someway is hollow.
The earth has caves going into it, volcano's and faults going deep inside it.
The moon could be similar to this.
If you mean like, you open a door on the moon and there is a whole world inside.
Then no its not hollow like that.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Chilkoot
 

The Apollo mission carried out seismic studies which show that the moon has a core, mantle, and crust. It is thought that the core was once molten, like Earth's, but has solidified.

One of the missions of Kaguya and the LRO are to study the internal structure of the Moon by using gravity measurements



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   
I would think that ground penetrating radar would be better served to determine internal structure than gravity measurements.


Cheers!!!!



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by RFBurns
 


GPR is extremely limited.
Ground based systems barely get beyond 10 meters. I know of no space-based systems.


To add, space-based systems which are more capable than ground based.

[edit on 2/18/2009 by Phage]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Why do we shift our focus away from the moon and even Venus and go the opposite direction further away and right outta sight?

Surely by now there must be some backyard astronomer/rocket ship builder that will independently go there and show us the real moon story?

I think the moon is hollow and artificial, and can you imagine how the world would change and minds would open once this is as obvious as the world is round? I personally can't wait! It's always good to see new people bring up the topic of the moon - and it's great to see a resurgence of interest in this mysterious craft.


wZn



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by RFBurns
 


GPR is extremely limited.
Ground based systems barely get beyond 10 meters. I know of no space-based systems.


To add, space-based systems which are more capable than ground based.


Apparently NASA sent two of these space based GPR systems to Mars back in 2005 on board MEX and MRO.

From article..


In contrast, if the cap consistency is more like firm snow, with σ ~ 10-5 S/m, aquifer detection with a return signal above the noise level is possible to a depth of about 1 km.


Granted 1km is not that deep either, but would give a good indication if this theory of a hollow moon is true or not. The system would not need to look through an atmosphere, ice, snow, mud etc. So the return signal should be pretty good and may even exceed that of the specs for these systems used on the polar caps of Mars.


Cheers!!!!

[edit on 18-2-2009 by RFBurns]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
Reply to WatchZEITGEISTnow

Whilst it's interesting to speculate on the nature of the Moon, there is no evidence to suggest that it's anything other than a natural satellite, whilst the evidence that it is a natural satellite is pretty conclusive. Incidentally, the debate in the scientic community has now moved on to discussing whether the Moon still has a molten core.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns



In contrast, if the cap consistency is more like firm snow, with σ ~ 10-5 S/m, aquifer detection with a return signal above the noise level is possible to a depth of about 1 km.


Granted 1km is not that deep either, but would give a good indication if this theory of a hollow moon is true or not.


This is talking about penetration a layer of ice or snow, not rock. I don't think the lunar regolith has the consistency of firm snow. It's pretty doubtful returns from even 10 meters could be attained through the regolith and solid structure beneath it.

I also think it doubtful that much effort would (or should) be devoted to "proving" that the moon is not hollow.

[edit on 2/18/2009 by Phage]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Chilkoot
 


I have heard an astronomer describe the reason the moon is always facing earth the same way as you (almost). For some reason the moons mass is not evenly distributed; therefore the earths gravity exerts a torque on the moon, which locks it into the steady state with reference to the earth.

That explanation made sense to me...



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join