Our Moon is an Artificial Space Station ~~~ PROOF!!!

page: 2
133
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by sp00n1
 


I've heard about this theory, but I never looked into it. And your right, it is the biggest coincidence with the ratio of the moon and sun to the earth.




posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by sp00n1
 


Yup! What OP said.

When wonderment's like this present themselves (and people can't explain them) they simply call them 'miracles' or 'blessings' then, call it a day.
How silly.

Vasin and Shcherbokov (Soviet scientists) spent much of their careers examining the facts compiled on lunar phenomena. Their conclusion is that the Moon is artificial, possibly a hollowed-out planet, and that it was steered from some distant region of the galaxy into a circular orbit around our planet




The origin of the Moon is one of the most complicated problems of cosmogony. So far there have been basically three hypotheses under discussion.

HYPOTHESIS I: The Moon was once a part of the Earth and broke away from it.
This has now been refuted by the evidence.



HYPOTHESIS II: The Moon was formed independently from the same cloud of dust and gas as the Earth, and immediately became the Earth’s natural satellite.

But then why is there such a big difference between the specific gravity of the Moon (3.33 grams per cubic centimeter) and that of the Earth (5.5 gr.)? Furthermore, according to the latest information (analysis of samples brought back by the U.S. Apollo astronauts) lunar rock is not of the same composition as the Earth’s.

HYPOTHESIS III: The Moon came into being separately, and, moreover, far from the Earth (perhaps even outside the Solar system).

This would mean that the moon would not have to be fashioned from the same "clay" as our own planet. Sailing through the Universe, the Moon came into Earth’s proximity, and by a complex interplay of forces of gravity was brought within a geocentric orbit, very close to circular. But a catch of this kind is virtually impossible.



In fact, scientists studying the origin of the Universe today have no acceptable theory to explain how the Earth-Moon system came into being.

OUR HYPOTHESIS: The Moon is an artificial Earth satellite put into orbit around the Earth by some intelligent beings unknown to ourselves.
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   
Over years of doing research surrounding our existence and given situation in the universe, I'm getting close to the conclusion that there is no way it is a mere coincidence or accident. There must be some kind of outside force that has significantly influenced our existence at one point in time.

I'm not completely sold on our moon being artificial, even with the "proof". However, there's a lot more to this than we know and this is a good wake up call for most.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by sp00n1
 


over dramactic headlines without source's for your research,so it boils down to your own theorization,i like your idea's,but you need to add source's to complement your work,so we can come to our own opinion upon your findings,then we can debate this.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 

Hypothesis 1 has not been refuted. In fact it is the strongest theory, backed by very strong evidence.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by sp00n1
 


Is too much coincidence, the chances of this happening are indeed very difficult.

The moom always was a big issue for me. Always surrounded by mysteries. More than 40 years after the naza went there and i still have doubts about its real nature.

Of course this issue will reveal more while the time goes by.

S/F




posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by winston_jones


Nice post but I have to correct you on this particular point. There is no mystery as to why the same side of the moon always faces the earth. It's because the moon's mass is not evenly distributed. Much of the moon is porous, or even hollow. There are however small areas of much denser mass concentrations (mascons) that are clustered on one side - 'our' side. They lie below the darker areas we call the maria or seas. Because the moon's centre of gravity is skewed towards these areas that side always faces the earth and always will, however much the moon's orbital path lengthens.


thanks for that info ive alwas wounderd the real reason and that sounds prity rite to me.

could you please post that source thank you



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   
Very interesting topic and speculation, although I see no proof so the thread title is a bit misleading. I have always thought there was something strange about the moon and its effects on earth even though it acts relatively normal compared to moons orbiting other stars. As soon as I read the thread title ANNUNAKI popped into my head



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Why haven't we been back to the moon? Think about it.

Do you know there were 2 more Apollo missions with completed modules that never made it off the ground?

The moon does not belong to us.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 08:56 PM
link   
I personally just feel that the Universe is intelligent,
just as Earth itself is.
And it can just make seemingly 'impossible' things happen.

I have a pretty good feeling that the moon is used as a 'space station' of sorts..
but I dont much buy into the "moon is a giant spaceship" thing.

Though I wouldnt rule that out as an 'impossibility' either. lol


I do think that there are artificial structures on its surface, and below the surface though. lol



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by hoghead cheese
 


"BREAKING"????? "PROOF"???

how about "LAME" ??

there is no proof only your opinion.

seductive, misleading, inaccurate title.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 09:02 PM
link   
i dont think of the way the moon ended up were it is or the fact that it haoens to be 400 times smaller than the sun ect, theres many strang things in the univeres just like us her on earth it just hapens



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
You've massively plagairised a Rense article but other than that:

That's quite a bit of speculation to say that there would be no intelligent life on Earth without the Moon. Life would indeed be different than it is but who knows what it would be like?

The Moon rotates once each revolution because it is tidally locked to Earth. All of the major moons in the Solar System are tidally locked to their planets and exhibit the same behavior.

The distance of the Earth from the Sun varies, depending on the time of year, from 152,097,701 km to 147,098,074km, with an average of 149,597,887.5 km. In the past the Moon was closer to Earth than it is now and in the future it will be farther away but right now the distance of the Moon from Earth varies, depending on the time of the month, from 364,397 km to 406,731 km, with an average of 384,748 km. So the ratio of the two orbits varies from 417 to 361, with an average of 388. So yes, sometimes the ratio is the same as the ratio in sizes but most of the time it is not.

Your claim about the solstices is incorrect. In Los Angeles, on June 21st, the Sun rose at at an azimuth of 61º. On December 21 the Moon will rise at 63º.

The Moon does have a solid core.


Wow,... 2 snaps up to Phage.


in a circle even.
Thanks for bringin' the facts.
edit on 26-10-2010 by Shivering Coward because: img embed



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Shivering Coward
 


following his lead, i can prove the moon is hollow with a simple diagram!!!






posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 09:23 PM
link   
A Jose Escamilla film about anomalies found on the Moon. As well as UFOs, and the continued inconsistencies pertaining to NASA.




posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by sp00n1
 

ARGH! Another false titled thread.



BREAKING? Nope
PROOF? Nope

You did however do a nice job of plagiarizing An Interview With Christopher Knight discussing the book he co-authored with Alan Butler titled Who Built the Moon, released in 2005. The authors don't even consider their book proof of anything but rather use evidence and logic to draw possible conclusions.

Here's the "breaking" thread from 2005 minus the sensationalized title, capitalized words and too many exclamation points.

Who Built the Moon (alternative ideas) (What a great thread title
)

edit on 10/26/2010 by Three_moons because: I did



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   
Interesting stuff... but why did this go out on the ATS Twitter? I expected some actual, hard proof... like NASA releases, analyses of moon rock showing high concentrations of plastic or such... or even an Astronaut's account of his own experiences on the "artificial space station"...

We need to be able to vote down things like this... things that use "PROOF" and "!!!!!!!" in the title... and then deliver nothing. Whenever I see either of those two items in a title, I immediately adopt the attitude I do when I see the supermarket tabloids... Weekly World News, et al.

I'm not even going to comment on the plagiarism... other people have already done that,

Definitions of "Artificial" for the OP:

adjective
1.
made by human skill; produced by humans ( opposed to natural): artificial flowers.
2.
imitation; simulated; sham: artificial vanilla flavoring.
3.
lacking naturalness or spontaneity; forced; contrived; feigned: an artificial smile.
4.
full of affectation; affected; stilted: artificial manners; artificial speech.
5.
made without regard to the particular needs of a situation, person, etc.; imposed arbitrarily; unnatural: artificial rules for dormitory residents.
6.
Biology . based on arbitrary, superficial characteristics rather than natural, organic relationships: an artificial system of classification.
7.
Jewelry . manufactured to resemble a natural gem, in chemical composition or appearance. Compare assembled, imitation ( def. 11 ) , synthetic ( def. 6 ) .

source:
dictionary.reference.com...
edit on 26-10-2010 by ConradsLaces because: addendum



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by sp00n1
The Moon is not a naturally occurring body and was quite possibly engineered to sustain life on Earth.


Where is the proof that the Moon is not a naturally occurring body? Unusual, maybe. But I do not see any proof that it is not naturally occurring.

While it may someday be proven to be true that the Moon is artificial, I do not believe this statement solely based upon the statement that life and nature would be tremendously affected if the Moon was not as it currently is. To say that if the Moon did not exist exactly as it exists currently life here would not be the same, doesn't mean that the Moon was engineered to create life as we know it. It simply means that things on earth would have developed differently if the Moon behaved in a different way.

No disrespect meant and I applaud you for presenting your information and for thinking about things like this. I love to mull things over as well. I just am not yet convinced and I do not see the proof.
edit on 26-10-2010 by idunno12 because: spell-check is my friend



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lord Jules
since Jupiter has 63 moons, does that mean Jupiter has super-intelligent life forms? or does the multiple moons somehow cancel each other's powers out?


This means that the intelligent Lifeforms on Jupiter are 63 times smarter than humans on this Earth. Have you ever wondered why Jupiter has 63 Moons?



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 11:51 PM
link   
title says proof. I appreciate you reiterating these facts for those who havent read this theory. The title said proof. What proof other than the theory do you have? Not a misleading title is it?





new topics
top topics
 
133
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join