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.

 

the moon is artifical

page: 3
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Markafeller
1). It once had water
2). its gravity is not 20% more like 52%
3) Plants grow well with added moon soil.
4). It has a very slight atmosphere
5). it has clouds at times



1) There is no evidence to suggest water was on the moon
2) Ummm.....

3) Errr, ok.....
4) Wait, if it had only a slight atmosphere, then how would plants exist
5) Cloud? What pictures are you looking at, and do you have any scientific sources for any of your claims?




posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Is the moon artificial? I doubt it. If it looks like a rock and acts like a rock...

How did it get here? That's an entirely different question.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 11:58 PM
link   
I've always heard the moon was made of Cheese....If so, please pass the crackers.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by esteay812
 


esteay.....

'the 'Dark Side' is a misnomer, as many havew pointed out.

I'm sure you've learned this by now...but, just in case...

The Moon currently rotates about its own axis approx. once every 28 days, which just happens to co-incide with its orbital period. So, a 'day' on the Lunar surface, if you lived there, would last for about 14 days, followed by 14 'days' of darkness....what I mean, is if you had a clock set to Earth time, those 14 'days' would be the equilavent of 14 "24-hour" time periods.

The mere fact that we, and our civilization currently exist is when this 'coincidence' of eclipses and the like occur...is, just....a coincidence.

IF we had evolved a Billion years ago, we wouldn't be seeing this...that's IF we had existed then...

Here's the thing I have seen on many, many science programs --- the Earth used to rotate much, much faster on its axis when it was first formed.

Current theory of the Moon's formation is based on a collision with a very large body, early on in the formation and 'clean-up' of the Early Solar System. This resulted in what is, really, a 'dual-planet' system. The Earth and Moon interact in a delicate gravitational dance. The stability of the Earth's rotation just may rely on the Moon's influence, thus leading to our evolution.

The bombardment of the Moon's surface occured occured for millions and millions of years, after it cooled, and was likely rotating more rapidly than it currently is. Hence, we see the craters still, on the hemisphere that currently is tidally locked to us (actually, we see about 59%....due to variations in the timing of the Moon's axial rotation, and its orbit).

Another interesting fact: There are more indications of 'mare' on the side facing the Earth, than on the opposite hemisphere. AND, many many more craters on the 'farside'.

Tidal influences COULD have caused the Moon, eons ago, to display the (now latent) volcanic manifestations that produced the lava flows to create the 'mares'.

As to the concept of artificiality???

Well....Apollo brought a load of samples....which have been studied by scientists from all over the World. I would tend to think that esteemed geologists (seneologists?) would know the difference between real Lunar samples and "artificial" samples.....

Just my $3....



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   
In the early millenia of our Solar System, it was a very hostile environment. Material was still zooming around the place at great speed and varied masses. As planets were formed, their gravity had the effect of 'mopping up' most of the larger masses and the Solar system slowly became more stable. The craters we can see on ours and other planets/moons is testament to the devastating impacts that occurred. It was during this time that the Moon was formed...

i440.photobucket.com...
i440.photobucket.com...

The general consensus is that the moon was created when a smaller planet impacted with our proto Earth. The resultant collision created a large amount of initially molten material. Over a period of time gravity and inertia caused the material to be accreted to each body. This image is the best visual account I've seen, it really helps to picture the event...

i440.photobucket.com...

It isn't hollow or artificial. It has a crust that is up to 60 miles deep and a core of around 180 miles. The core is thought to be partially molten and that brings us on to to the disparity in the age of the moon. Moon rocks have been dated over half a million years older than the Earth
Weird huh? Must have been hauled into position by aliens! How else could this happen?

The moon is geologically dead. It's possibly 'partially molten' core means that the crust has remained the same for 4.5 billion years. The Earth's core is still molten and the surface of Earth was still volcanically active until 4 billion years ago. This means that whilst the moons rocks can be dated to 4.5 billion ya, ours were still being formed until 4billion ya. There's a Tinwiki Moon article that has sources and covers some of the 'artificial moon' theories.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I guess the only question I have left is... Why do so many people talk about there being buildings and developments of terrestrial or e.t. origin on the dark side (if there is no "Dark Side" wouldn't it blow these theories up immediately?). It would be simple to tell them 100% that this could not be the case because the moon does indeed rotate enough for us to see what is the back of the moon in different phases. I am not trying to be smart at all, really, I am just wondering why they continue to rant about the chances of the complexes to exist outside of our planetary sight. I was under the impression that the moon rotated as it went around the Earth, always showing it's "Face".



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   
there is a lot of "circumstantial" evidence that suggests the moon is not an ordinary celestial satellite.

Its' size, rotation, gravitational anomalies, non-terrestrial origins etc. lead me to suspect that it does not revolve around earth by chance.

reply to post by Kandinsky
 
do you seriously believe that the moon was formed from pieces of a larger pre-"earth"? seriously? Are the "moon" rocks they brought back from Antarctica leading you to believe this?

[edit on 4/6/2009 by JPhish]



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
John Lear also thinks the moon is a giant soul catcher. So I wouldnt put too much emphasis on his ideas about astronomy.


So do many Native cultures believe the Soul goes to the Moon... are they all crazy as well?



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Markafeller


Interesting evaluation



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by OzWeatherman

1) There is no evidence to suggest water was on the moon


Subject: Discovery of Ice on the Moon
Presenter: Dr. Dwight Duston, Assistant Deputy for Technology, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
December 04, 1996 1:45 PM EST



Q: That translates to what in volume?

A: We were very conservative in the press release, but if you take basically 100 square kilometers by roughly 50 feet, you get a volume of something like a quarter of a cubic mile, I think it's on that order. It's a considerable amount, but it's not a huge glacier or anything like that.

Q: Can you compare that with something you know?

A: It's a lake. A small lake.


Department of Defense Press Release
www.defenselink.mil...




2) Ummm.....


It is if you use Werner von Braun's value of the Neutral point he published in Times magazine in 1969...

"At a point 43,495 miles from the Moon, lunar gravity exerted a force equal
to the gravity of the Earth, then some 200,000 miles distant." - Wernher von Braun (Time Magazine, July 25, 1969.)






3) Errr, ok.....


Here is a drawing of a plant seen outside a cave on the Moon by a remote viewer...



Pretty kewl huh?





4) Wait, if it had only a slight atmosphere, then how would plants exist


They just need a little CO2 after all... As a 'weatherman', how are you qualified to judge alien botany?



5) Cloud? What pictures are you looking at, and do you have any scientific sources for any of your claims?


How about NASA? Will they do?


December 7, 2005: Every lunar morning, when the sun first peeks over the dusty soil of the moon after two weeks of frigid lunar night, a strange storm stirs the surface.

The next time you see the moon, trace your finger along the terminator, the dividing line between lunar night and day. That's where the storm is. It's a long and skinny dust storm, stretching all the way from the north pole to the south pole, swirling across the surface, following the terminator as sunrise ceaselessly sweeps around the moon.



Astronauts may have seen the storms, too. While orbiting the Moon, the crews of Apollo 8, 10, 12, and 17 sketched "bands" or "twilight rays" where sunlight was apparently filtering through dust above the moon's surface. This happened before each lunar sunrise and just after each lunar sunset. NASA's Surveyor spacecraft also photographed twilight "horizon glows," much like what the astronauts saw.


science.nasa.gov...

PDF file showing the Corpuscular Rays on the Moon at sunrise and sunset sketched by the Astronauts. I am sure as a 'weatherman' you can explain to us in detail what conditions must exist to see Corpuscular Rays


science.nasa.gov...

Now then as a 'weatherman' I would expect you would be interested in these raging dust storms on the Moon that NASA calls "Moonstorms" rather than ridiculing someone who believes it


Just saying...






...

[edit on 6-4-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 02:45 AM
link   
reply to post by JPhish
 



do you seriously believe that the moon was formed from pieces of a larger pre-"earth"? seriously? Are the "moon" rocks they brought back from Antarctica leading you to believe this?




For 25 years, scientists have pondered a theory that the Moon was created when an object the size of Mars crashed into Earth less than 100 million years after the Sun was born, some 4.6 billion years ago. The general idea has been run through the paces and massaged into shape and is now the favored explanation.
Link

By writing "moon" rocks, I'll guess you don't believe they are from the moon? I 'seriously' believe they are from the moon and that the moon was probably formed in the way described in my earlier post. I don't think the moon is artificial, hollow, mechanized or even a spaceship. I don't think it has a distinct atmosphere. I haven't seen any evidence that there are alien/human bases there. I think it's a natural satellite that came to exist through processes that conform to current knowledge.

What do you think it is?



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 03:30 AM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 


Your logic is...well, illogical dude.

For starters:

Of course in the film 'The Truman show', the office wasn't on the ACTUAL moon, but on the fake moon which posed as the real moon from Trumans perspective. (the film would have been just a little bit over budget, if the office was on the real moon eh?)

Your reason for the moon not being artifically created is because it is moving aeay from Earth at a rate of an 'inch or so' per year, therefore it cannot be man made.

So by your reasoning, a boat that had slipped it's moorings and is moving away from it's port, cannot be man made either, because if it were, it would not be drifting from it's port? Same thing mate.

Who knows what the real deal is, but assuming it IS artificial, how do we know it isn't meant to drift away from us, at a pre-programmed rate as time goes on?

spikey.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


Thank you for posting this web site.
I had it once and lost it somehow.

This info is great !!

I don't believe in coincidence and I think what comes up numerically on this site is amazing. It boggles the mind.



“THE MATHEMATICAL MESSAGE”

There are 366 days in an Earth year

Earth is 366 times bigger than the moon

The moon is 27.31% of Earth’s size.

The moon orbits the Earth once every 27.322 days

The Earth’s speed used to be slowing down, but in 1999 scientists discovered that it had finally stopped and settled in 27,780 meters per second…

…which just so happens to be 1/10,000th of the speed of light in a vacuum.

For every 10,000 Earth days, the moon completes 366 orbits around the Earth.

100 / 366 = 0.27322

There are 109.245 Earth diameters across the face of the Sun at Earth’s aphelion;
There are 109.267 Sun diameters between the Sun and the Earth.
The Moon’s equatorial circumference is 10,920.8 kilometers

The moon spins at a rate of exactly 1 kilometer per second at its equator. Very perfect. Not some random speed.

The Earth rotates 400 times faster than the moon.

The Moon is 400 times smaller than the sun.
The Moon is 400 times closer to the Earth than the sun…
…and this allows for total solar eclipses, which do not occur on any other planet in our solar system.

There’s also a nifty little chart that shows this:

Earth turns per orbit % size of polar circumference

Earth 366.259 27.31
Moon 27.396 366.175


bretthenebery.wordpress.com...


[edit on 6-4-2009 by azureskys]



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 04:38 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Zorgon good post-if you've not read it before,this book raises some interesting points.
ec1.images-amazon.com...

It uses the first system of mathematics ever devised (Sumerian hexidecimal Gesh system) to make some intriguing correllations:


Many early cultures believed the Moon appeared after the Great Flood. The Mayans documented that Venus, not the Moon, shone above them in the night sky, and many accounts told that the Moon only rose in the sky following the after-flood darkness. Such accounts from these early cultures are well known, of the time when there was ‘no Moon in the sky’.

A more hands-on and practical peice of evidence that our Moon is artificial lies within an extraordinary and seemingly impossible series of mathematical ‘coincidences’ (which are less coincidences than they are evidence of something more tantilizing) - as noted below:

“THE MATHEMATICAL MESSAGE”

There are 366 days in an Earth year

Earth is 366 times bigger than the moon

The moon is 27.31% of Earth’s size.

The moon orbits the Earth once every 27.322 days

The Earth’s speed used to be slowing down, but in 1999 scientists discovered that it had finally stopped and settled in 27,780 meters per second…

…which just so happens to be 1/10,000th of the speed of light in a vacuum.

For every 10,000 Earth days, the moon completes 366 orbits around the Earth.

100 / 366 = 0.27322

There are 109.245 Earth diameters across the face of the Sun at Earth’s aphelion;
There are 109.267 Sun diameters between the Sun and the Earth.
The Moon’s equatorial circumference is 10,920.8 kilometers

The moon spins at a rate of exactly 1 kilometer per second at its equator. Very perfect. Not some random speed.

The Earth rotates 400 times faster than the moon.

The Moon is 400 times smaller than the sun.
The Moon is 400 times closer to the Earth than the sun…
…and this allows for total solar eclipses, which do not occur on any other planet in our solar system.

There’s also a nifty little chart that shows this:

Earth turns per orbit % size of polar circumference

Earth 366.259 27.31
Moon 27.396 366.175

Far fetched. But worth a thought

bretthenebery.wordpress.com...
Cheers.

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



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
John Lear also thinks the moon is a giant soul catcher. So I wouldnt put too much emphasis on his ideas about astronomy.


Really? You wouldn't eh?

Well...only a few BILLION people think we have a soul and that it glides out of our physical body and floats off to a paradise called heaven when our body packs in.

So, it's OK for billions to believe we have a soul, but not that it is caught somehow eh?

spikey.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 


I have a soul and when i die if i have any control over my actions i am gonna head straight for the moon just to what all the fuss is about so maybe its not a soul catcher but more of a soul magnet.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Wow...those calculations are...amazing.

That, coupled with ancient accounts of a sky without a moon pre-flood, does make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

It really is a mysterious universe we live in isn't it.

spikey.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 05:32 AM
link   
And when even the scientists say on discovery that it is wrong in every way, both size and mass and even the age of the moon is olden than earth. How come ???



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by spikey

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
John Lear also thinks the moon is a giant soul catcher. So I wouldnt put too much emphasis on his ideas about astronomy.


Really? You wouldn't eh?

Well...only a few BILLION people think we have a soul and that it glides out of our physical body and floats off to a paradise called heaven when our body packs in.

So, it's OK for billions to believe we have a soul, but not that it is caught somehow eh?
spikey.


Yea, thats right. Id forgotten about that.
he sayd there is an soul tower up there that tosses the soul back down to earth or something along those lines..
Omfg, think if that it is purpose, intercept our souls on the way off this rock, to keep us ever inprisoned here ?? Ok, I went to far, but, one never knows



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 06:02 AM
link   
Earth's Moon and Human Evolution

Visit this link for some intresting reading about the Moon...


Possibly the strongest evidence for it to be a 'hollow object' comes from the fact that when meteors strike the Moon, the latter rings like a bell. More specifically when the Apollo crew in November 20, 1969 released the lunar module, after returning to the orbiter, the module impact with the Moon caused their seismic equipment to register a continuous reverberation like a bell for more than an hour. The same effect occurred with Apollo 13's third stage which caused the Moon to ring for over three hours. So what's going on with the Moon?


alot of nice info here, and how can the moon do these things if it is an solid lump of rock ??



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join