It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Where is the Moon From?

page: 7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:03 PM
Our Moon's Forbidden History

[ quote ]

The age of the Moon soil is 6.2 billion years old, and has compound and chemicals not found on Earth. In fact, there are many chemical compounds that were discovered, but withheld from the public.

There are many more we've yet to discover because our science is not advanced enough yet. The lunar soil did not come from the rock that makes up its mountains and craters. This is known to some lunar scientists.
However, its not spoken about, but in whispers. So, where did the soil come from?

The Andromedans say the soil and many of the rocks come from Ursa Minor. The location is a solar system named in the Orion tongue "CHOWTA". This is a binary sun system. We have many similarities in our system as well. "CHOWTA" is a very large system, holding 21 planets and 47 moons. Our moon is said to have been made around the 17th planet in this system.

Portions of the moons crust is radioactive. Apollo 15 discovered this. Especially near the Apennine mountains. Why were the readings so hot? The Andromedans have said it's because some nuclear waste was brought up there to be reused as a fuel supply for the spacecraft that the world government has built.

However, many of the ships that use nuclear fuel are obsolete now. So, how was the moon brought here? It was, I'm told by the Andromedans, put into the tail of an asteroid which brought it into our solar system.

This same asteroid circles our part of the galaxy every 25,156 Earth years. Andromedans have said that our moon has been inhabited periodically in it's history for 1.8 million Earth years.The Moon is hollow. It contains huge underground facilities built by E.T.'s and later humans from Earth.

There are seven openings into the Moon's crust, and the underground bases. Conservative scientists have wondered why so many craters seem so shallow, despite their size. The Andromedans say, it's because
much of the surface was built on top of a metallic shell of a circular space crest; or " A War Carrier ", as the Andromedans describe it. An example of a shallow, but large crater would be the crater Gagarin. This crater
is roughly 185 miles across, but is only 4.5 to 5 miles deep. Based on the impact and size across the craters welt on the surface, the depth should be 4 to 6 times that deep. In fact, all the craters are the same; they are too shallow. They defy known science.

Many of the craters have been artificially created. The Andromedans have said that many of the craters on the far side were in fact domed cities at one time and that they were destroyed during a war that goes back 113,000 yrs.

Many of the original structures on the surface of the moon were destroyed during what the Andromedans refer to as the "Black League Conflict". This was a battle fought by humans of different systems that formed a secret alliance, and fought the tyranny of the Orion Empire. Continuous destruction occurred on one side of the moon as it was being transported here by space debris. The side that suffered the heaviest
destruction is the visible side we see. The destruction was caused by particle beam weapons when our Moon was located in the orbit of Maldek, now a destroyed planet.

Our present Moon was one of two moons, hat orbited it. The second moon, I'm told, is the moon Phobos. It also has ruins on it, as does Venus which was a moon of Uranus. Uranus is abundant with plant and mammal life. The glass that is abundantly spread over the moons surface came from the Domed cities that were once on this war carrier.

[ / quote ]

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:13 PM
Does anyone else find it pretty amazing that the reason we have our 24 hour day is a remnant of that long past collision over 4 billion years ago?

After 4 billion years, we just keep spinning around.

Space really is virtually friction free.

Additionally if it hadn't happened we wouldn't have our life/atmosphere preserving magnetic field so we wouldn't even be here without that original collision.

Something to think about.

[edit on 8-4-2010 by slank]

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:14 PM
reply to post by Reevster

Well I'm really open minded and easy to convince do to my lack of knowledge on these issues.

But... You did post this because it's a nice read right ?
You don't really believe it right ?

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:15 PM
Time before the moon was known by man.
So the moon is a recent addition.
see here

The Hebrew Cosmogony
Planet Ages
Deification of the Planets
The Earth Without the Moon
A Brighter Moon
The Worship of the Moon
The Pre-Adamite Age
Astronomical Knowledge Before the Deluge

The Earth Without the Moon

The period when the Earth was Moonless is probably the most remote
recollection of mankind. Democritus and Anaxagoras taught that there was
a time when the Earth was without the Moon.(1) Aristotle wrote that Arcadia
in Greece, before being inhabited by the Hellenes, had a population of
Pelasgians, and that these aborigines occupied the land already before
there was a moon in the sky above the Earth; for this reason they were
called Proselenes.(2)

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:34 PM
reply to post by TeslaandLyne

They claim the same about Venus.

I believe Mythology to be full of truth wrapped around in a good story.
A great deal of all myth talk about aliens or trolls, fairies. Anything. There must be some truth in it for them to be remembered. Religions are based or wrapped around some sort of alien visitor or creator.

Yet physics show us ( apparently ) without the Moon life wouldn't nearly be as comfortable as they are now.

I'm stuck with to many logical explanations of why the Moon is not just a visiting alien.

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:53 PM
reply to post by TeslaandLyne

Democritus and Anaxagoras taught that there was a time when the Earth was without the Moon.

Problem is, that was just their opinion. No basis in solid fact, n or evidence.

Democritus lived circa 370 B.C.E. -- or, roughly, 2,380 Earth years ago.

I linked, earlier, a story about rock carvings frm over 15,000 years ago, that depict the Moon.

Prehistoric, likely Stone Age, in that era, people.

NO, the Moon has been here for just about as long as the Earth....give or take a few million years.

Moon is formed OF the Earth, calved off, from the gigantic impact event.

Stands to reason, also, that the body of mass that impacted Earth is also included in the mix, shared in some way between us.

Also, for the person who asked about the cratering on the near side.....the Moon's rate of rotation about its axis has NOT always been the same. Like Earth it was spinningmuch, much faster, four billion years ago.

The great majority of the craters were formed billions of years ago, as well. THAT was when the Solar System was most active, in terms of frequent collisions. In time, most debris was eventually "cleaned up", as it collided or its orbit sent it outward, or inward. All settled down, compared to the early eons.

We likely would not have evolved to be discussing it, if not for the Moon. OR, we'd be in a substantially different form, even if we achieved intelligence and sentience.

The Earth/Moon system is, in many ways, a 'dual planet' dynamic. The barycenter of the combined masses actually lies a few kilometers beneath the Earth's surface, in the crust. Moon's pull on Earth is far less than Earth's on Moon, of course.

Still, the energies relased ~4 Billion years ago have led to the current situation. Moon gradually "steals" a little bit of Earth's momentum, with each orbit, as it has been doing since it was formed. It is ever-so-slightly accelerating, thus itsorbit is gradually widening outward.

This was more significant, early on, and slows progressively over time, although at some point the gravitational attraction, as it weakens with distance, will mean the rate of Moon's retreat might increase.

But, the Human species will either be extinct by then, or so far evolved that we won't care, or maybe...just maybe, WE will alter things to our liking...?

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 08:23 PM

Problem is, that was just their opinion. No basis in solid fact, n or evidence. Democritus lived circa 370 B.C.E. -- or, roughly, 2,380 Earth years ago.

Opinion or re teller of respected legends of human observations.
The legends have been recorded so we should make use to them.

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 09:52 PM
reply to post by TeslaandLyne

Sorry, tesla. I do not buy into that quasi-religious stuff --- I think of it as claptrap.




"The Deluge"?

All legends, stories, lore. NOT based on actual truth (although usually there is some natural event, not well understood by primitives, and the story, in the re-telling, becomes embellished, generation after generation, around the campfires, in the caves, etc.)

The mysticism surrounding early Man's awe as he gazed at the sky, not comprehending what he was seeing, and therefore inventing "gods" to explain it, is well documented.

NONE of the fantasies in your cited 'source' explain the rock carvings from ~15,000 years ago, depicting the Moon.

Another aspect of the Moon that has occured to me, in terms of how ancient peoples related to it, is the belief that it had some sort of "fertility" influence on Humans. This, because of the woman's menses cycle being fairly close in timing to the Lunar phases.

Coincidence, most likely. BUT, it would have seemed significant to the early, unscientific and superstitious types.

( AND, a little logic shows why it's coincidence...because IF it had a direct influence on Human females menstrual periods, then they'd ALL be on the SAME cycle, right??

This, the connections drawn to Moon and Menses, might have been uncomfortable for the MEN to discuss....since most cultures, clans, societies were patriarchal in make-up, I believe. SO, men controlled what was talked about, and what had precedence and attention....

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:08 PM
reply to post by Reevster

the age of the moon has been verified to be younger then the earth.

The study also found that the moon is younger than previously believed. Prior studies had found that it formed when Earth was about 30 million years old. But now it appears that the impact occurred 30 million years after that.

Be careful science continually updates as we discover new things.

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:19 PM
reply to post by dragonridr

After your link. I'm disturbed on the fact that they still spew out a collision is the most plausible.
dumbness correction.

[edit on 8-4-2010 by Sinter Klaas]

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:23 PM
reply to post by Sinter Klaas

It fits.
Isotope distribution. check
Orbital parameters. check
Rotational parameters. check

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:38 PM

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Sinter Klaas

It fits.
Isotope distribution. check
Orbital parameters. check
Rotational parameters. check

I'm not denying here. I misunderstood the article. It only says it formed later.

posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:27 AM
reply to post by Reevster

The age of the Moon soil is 6.2 billion years old, and has compound and chemicals not found on Earth. In fact, there are many chemical compounds that were discovered, but withheld from the public.

NASA's own Preliminary Science Reports tend to agree with the compounds held from public.

The age issue remains, I have heard all various lengths and time frames.

There is such a varing degree of acceptance, its like still the argument between science and religion decree!

posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:02 PM
I don't have the time of Velikovsky and neither did he to
track down Aphrodite (Moon) legends.

However his methods involve studying just about every source
and analysis which gives the best way to learn about the past.

Velikovsky agrees with the radioactivity being on the moon but
that just entails heavy metal or the original UV photo electric effect
that will induce radioactivity on surface compounds.

posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 09:28 AM
Here is an excellent example: the crashing into earth with object size of mars, 3-D models showing what might have happened during the collision.

Funny I was prosing through the web and found a webpage that asks the same question.

Another interseting article that says: that during the alleged time of impact that formed the moon the earth was cool enough to have oceans!

posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 10:26 PM
reply to post by EvilBat


posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 10:44 PM
reply to post by discl0sur3


You logged on to ATS, to leave THAT worthless one-line post?

To "lmao" at another really really either (clever), or (inane)....

(Choose one)

Let's try to salvage this, and make it relevant.

Exactly HOW, pray tell, does an image from a Science Fiction (and that's pushing it...more like "Science Fantasy") movie....we all know the film, it's Star Wars...(Oh, crap! Do I owe George Lucas royalties, now??? Damn....)

HOW, exactly, is that (A) Funny? And, (B) Relevant?

Can't wait to read the response.

Oh...right. Guess I'll be waiting a long, long time...

posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 02:07 AM
reply to post by star in a jar

Your wrong we actually see part of the darkside we see about 59% of the moon surface from Earth.

The Moon doesn't have a darkside either another simple mistake people make if you think about it when you see say a half moon why do you think you only see half

One half of the moon will always be lit by the sun the earth is

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 09:52 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6   >>

log in