Maybe this has something to do with NASA's planned press conference tomorrow afternoon regarding whatever information they've been withholding. Tomorrow is hopefully going to be an exciting afternoon, I hope it's not just to say they found more rocks and dust

Originally posted by Estharik
Maybe this has something to do with NASA's planned press conference tomorrow afternoon regarding whatever information they've been withholding. Tomorrow is hopefully going to be an exciting afternoon, I hope it's not just to say they found more rocks and dust

That would be great if they said something earth shattering. I agree I hope it is not just about rocks and dust. I hope MikeSingh didnt leave here to go to NASA and try to convince the world that a bunch of rocks are alien skulls or wrenches from a lost civilization.

One big difference is that they are no longer saying that the water is just at the poles in permenately shadowed craters.

Now they are saying it is almost everywhere!

I think 10 degrees above and below the Moon's equator to be more accurate.

too bad theres no geothermal activity. I wonder if its safe to drink?

[edit on 23-9-2009 by Totalstranger]

Its a spacestation up there! Offcourse it is water there also! we are 50 years behind the truth!

Where there is water.. there is life !!!!

Could there be some sort of life form on the moon? maybe the type that can withstand the lack of atmosphere and harsh moon environment?

Originally posted by Gorbash

Where there is water.. there is life !!!!

Could there be some sort of life form on the moon? maybe the type that can withstand the lack of atmosphere and harsh moon environment?

If there is it's almost certainly not in these regions of the moon, and if it's in a place where water is more abundant like at the poles it would be unlike any extremophiles we're familiar with. The traces detected by these spacecraft are too small to be useful to life, we're talking about molecular amounts. I highly doubt any water-requiring life could survive on that amount while being steadily bathed in ionizing radiation. The permanently shadowed lunar poles might at least provide some shielding from solar radiation, but I still don't see how it's possible given the lack of useful energy in those regions. It's interesting from a chemistry point of view, and because it points to large amounts being available at the poles, but even with processing the amount elsewhere is probably too small per ton of regolith to be practical for use by future explorers.

The reality is that no one in this thread or anyone else knows how much water is there.

The instuments used could only penetrate a very thin layer of the surface so that is the only place we know for sure it exists. The water could go much deeper than just a thin layer but the instruments can't see into the regolith to confirm or deny this.

Further more the solar wind theorey is just that... a theorey not a fact. In the press conferance they said that it is possible that the water is seeping up from under the surface. In other words there could be resivouirs of water underground for all we know.

Interesting how some are so quick to say there is very little water. They don't really know that, and if the past is any indication then they will probably eventually be proven wrong once again.

Why not think of the possibilities rather than allways seeing the glass as half empty... or in this case the Moon.

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
The reality is that no one in this thread or anyone else knows how much water is there.

The instuments used could only penetrate a very thin layer of the surface so that is the only place we know for sure it exists. The water could go much deeper than just a thin layer but the instruments can't see into the regolith to confirm or deny this.

We've hit the moon with some very large impactors over the years and we've never seen large amounts of water from those impacts.

Further more the solar wind theorey is just that... a theorey not a fact. In the press conferance they said that it is possible that the water is seeping up from under the surface. In other words there could be resivouirs of water underground for all we know.

Could be, but there are reasons why that is less likely, including previous impact evidence and a failure to detect such in seismic studies. I'll believe the seepage theory when there is evidence for it.

Interesting how some are so quick to say there is very little water.

There's no real reason to think otherwise (and some reasons to think there isn't), at least at mid-latitudes. The poles are a different story. I'll believe the "large amounts" theory when there is proof.

[edit on 24-9-2009 by ngchunter]