Strange Facts You (Probably) Never Knew About the Moon

reply to post by Illustronic


Illustronice Ty for laying to rest the OP's argument that these are based on supposed "FACTS" this thread never belonged in the Space Exploration Forum. It should be in Skunk works or something similar. Most of these speculations are very wild and fringe science based on zero facts and evidence.

Originally posted by FanarFanar
Erm... I mealy made a joke (see the

) about you mistaking a generalisation for a personal insult. The only comment I've directed at YOU, was the one pointing out that cutting and pasting in its entirety, (In violation of ATS T&Cs I might add) a list of SUPPOSITIONS from a dubious source as FACTS was a bit of a leap.

First of all I doubt he copy-paste everything from that website and second what posted was of extreme importance to the thread. The mods decided to butcher his work so that readers have to visit a different website to get a run-down of what the topic is/was. Poor decision imo! They could have easily inserted everything in external tags while including the proper citations.

Second you falsely ASSUME everything nasa OFFICIALLY says is 100% facts yet they can't answer many fundamental questions as to nature of the moon, its age, its composition and lastly its "tidal locked" orbit around earth.

Why should people believe nasa when so many retired people have spoken off the record against what nasa claims or does not claim? Nasa makes no mention of alien spacecraft on the moon, no mention of entire cities on the far side, no mention of glass structures, no mention of pyramids, no mention of fusion reactors, etc

What do retired people have to gain by making up fanciful stories? All or most of the claimees have WORKED for nasa in the past directly or as contractors but due to national "security" concerns they were not allowed to say anything/everything they saw/heard.

Originally posted by FanarFanar
Please tell me where I said that I disagreed with YOU, or that EVERYONE else that agrees with you is in need of medication? Some people how ever, given the veracity of their arguments in the face of actual facts and logic, I belive could benefit from a little pharma-psychology. But that just my personal belief, much like yours regarding the moon.

You made direct insinuations and further you continue to claim "in the face of facts and logic". What "facts and logic" my friend? Do you realise NASA is an adjunct to the DOD and thus answerable only to the president of the USA? That means anything can be classified and never see the day of light; except by whistleblowers of course.

You may not care about how your hard earned tax dollars get spend, but given the $14 trillion deficit and $2.3 trillion MISSING I am prettty damm sure we were entitled to a lot more info then what we got. Yes I care and you should also. Do we live in a representative republic or a corporate "republic"?

Since I never presented an argument in the first place, there is no logic to be flawed. I made a statement. The only flaw that is apparent is in your comprehension of the English language.

edit on 3-4-2011 by FanarFanar because: spelling

Appeal to Authority

Explanation
An appeal to authority is an argument from the fact that a person judged to be an authority affirms a proposition to the claim that the proposition is true.

Appeals to authority are always deductively fallacious; even a legitimate authority speaking on his area of expertise may affirm a falsehood, so no testimony of any authority is guaranteed to be true.

From Logical Fallacies. A lot of deniers have a bad habit of doing so whenever it suits them. Now your a new member so perhaps your just misinformed. Thats ok...for now!

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
What do retired people have to gain by making up fanciful stories?

$$$ from the gullible people who believe them and buy their books or attend their conferences.

Originally posted by XRaDiiX
reply to post by Illustronic

 

Illustronice Ty for laying to rest the OP's argument that these are based on supposed "FACTS" this thread never belonged in the Space Exploration Forum. It should be in Skunk works or something similar. Most of these speculations are very wild and fringe science based on zero facts and evidence.

Unless you work for nasa or have worked for them in the past, I think you are in no position to differentiate facts from evidence. I don't claim to know anything or everything, all I claim is that "the establishment" has been ignoring or ridiculing lots of people for no good reason.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
What do retired people have to gain by making up fanciful stories?

$$$ from the gullible people who believe them and buy their books or attend their conferences.

If someone with limited knowledge of the black budget wanted to get rich quick, all they have to do is use their knowledge to write science fiction books, magazines, cartoons, etc. Many have choosen this avenue already.

There is no good reason they would claim science fiction as science. They risk their reputation and life for beans?

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

First of all I doubt he copy-paste everything from that website

I never said he copy-pasted the entire website. He did however copy-paste the entire article this thread is about. Doing so puts ATS and the OP in line for possible legal action over copy. A mod has since fixed it so problem solved. The issue is now moot.

Second you falsely ASSUME everything NASA OFFICIALLY says is 100% facts

Not once have I said that I take everything NASA say as truth. YOU falsely assume, that I faulty assume. NASA isn't the only place that has ever studied the moon.

As for the rest of your NASA conspiracy rant... You know what, to hell with it... I can't be arsed.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
There is no good reason they would claim science fiction as science. They risk their reputation and life for beans?

You asked what they have to gain. Now if you want to talk about the reason, I think in some cases senility is also a factor, but we should talk about specific people. What retired people believe in the BS pseudo-facts in the OP link?

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Too many to mention and I can't be bothered actually. I have spent lots of hours and cash reading and listening to various opinions and/or evidence from very qualified individuals. If your not willing to learn, then are you here to "debunk"?

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by XRaDiiX
reply to post by Illustronic

 

Illustronice Ty for laying to rest the OP's argument that these are based on supposed "FACTS" this thread never belonged in the Space Exploration Forum. It should be in Skunk works or something similar. Most of these speculations are very wild and fringe science based on zero facts and evidence.

Unless you work for nasa or have worked for them in the past, I think you are in no position to differentiate facts from evidence. I don't claim to know anything or everything, all I claim is that "the establishment" has been ignoring or ridiculing lots of people for no good reason.

Our company has worked with NASA on many projects and programs throughout my 24 years with my current employer, and we are co-bidding on operating the ISS National Laboratory, (submission April 1st 2011). We authored and operated a program for NASA from when I was hired in 1987 till 1993. We've sent up many experiments on the Space Shuttle, (one of the shuttle's crew main operational activities was monitoring the many–as much as a hundred separate experiments on every shuttle mission, packaged by public and private Universities and R&D companies). I've been sent to NASA Research facilities for tours and hands-on fact gathering for assignments, namely the nearby NASA Glenn Research Center, which was then the NASA Lewis Research Center when I first went.

I have more than a passive interest in all things NASA and being in communications, I have to have more than a pedestrian knowledge of what I'm supposed to be illustrating.

No offense taken but with all of the public and private entities out there working in support of NASA it would be hypothetically difficult that what is published is not fact based to the best of our combined discovered knowledge, because any one of these entities can blow the whistle on woo! Which was in fact, something to do with the program we initiated for NASA after the 1986 Shuttle disaster.

Originally posted by Illustronic
No offense taken but with all of the public and private entities out there working in support of NASA it would be hypothetically difficult that what is published is not fact based to the best of our combined discovered knowledge, because any one of these entities can blow the whistle on woo! Which was in fact, something to do with the program we initiated for NASA after the 1986 Shuttle disaster.

Fair enough but they have security clearances for a reason and lots and lots of compartmentalization, so just because someone has a top secret clearance unless they have "the need to know" according to the government they cannot get involved.

BTW I'm not a writer, so without an editor at my disposal now you can slice apart my writing communications skills.

Here's a trinket NASA gave our team for the last Shuttle Mission our program was able to support, my name is below "Jones" on the patch in the signed photo of the crew. Our program patch is cropped out of the photo with only the bottom triangle showing.




You may recognize Dr. Thomas Jones in the photo as the retired astronaut on TV news explaining the 2003 Space Shuttle Columbia reentry disaster.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


They also can't talk about it, by penalty of law, that they signed.

reply to post by Illustronic


Exactly, that is the point I have been trying to make all along. They can't talk about what they do, see, hear because they have signed non-disclosure agreements. Failure to comply can result in job termination, loss of benefits, jail sentences, etc.

I am not criticising the people who work on such projects. That should have been fairly obvious from the beginning, but the brave people who have spoke out due to great injustice as they see fit, have risked everything and gotten very little.

Phil Schneider, Bob Lazar, John Lear, Richard Hoagland, astronauts who visisted the moon, air force/army/navy officers, Al Bielek, foreign ministers, presidents, etc....the list could be endless! I think we should pay more attention to these people because our future may depend on what they know/knew.

reply to post by DontProbeMeBro


Wow. Over 111 stars and you can't even read the original post. At the risk of straying into copyright waters, I will address the points raised at this website.

The oldest age for the Earth is estimated to be 4.6 billion years old; moon rocks were dated at 5.3 billion years old, and the dust upon which they were resting was at least another billion years older.

The oldest rocks found on the surface of the Earth are estimated to be about 4 billion years old. As Weed pointed out, this is due to the fact that the Earth is geologically active. Rock is recycled. These processes do not seem to be occurring on the Moon, so older rock is preserved.

The chemical composition of the dust upon which the rocks sat differed remarkably from the rocks themselves, contrary to accepted theories that the dust resulted from weathering and breakup of the rocks themselves

Much of the dust simply settled onto the Moon from space. It has no atmosphere to shield it from micrometeoroids.

"The abundance of refractory elements like titanium in the surface areas is so pronounced that several geologists proposed the refractory compounds were brought to the moon’s surface in great quantity in some unknown way."

I can only find this statement on webpages that plagiarize the article that the OP plagiarized.

On March 7, 1971, lunar instruments placed by the astronauts recorded a vapor cloud of water passing across the surface of the moon.

True, It may have been water associated with the lunar mission itself. The Apollo lunar surface water event revisited.

Moon rocks were magnetized

They contain iron. The solar wind emits a constant stream of electrons. Moving electrons create magnetism.

No Volcanoes

Yes, volcanoes. The Moon does not have plate tectonics like the Earth, but there is ample evidence that historically, hot material from below has erupted onto the surface.

Moon Mascons

Caused by material of greater density. They need not be artificial.

Seismic Activity: Hundreds of "moonquakes" are recorded each year that cannot be attributed to meteor strikes.

Why not?

In November, 1958, Soviet astronomer Nikolay A. Kozyrev of the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory photographed a gaseous eruption of the moon near the crater Alphonsus.

"Transient Lunar Phenomena" like this have been observed, quite literally, forever. They are one reason why scientists think that lunar volcanism may still be occurring.

Hollow Moon: The moon’s mean density is 3.34 gm/cm3 (3.34 times an equal volume of water) whereas the Earth’s is 5.5. What does this mean? In 1962, NASA scientist Dr. Gordon MacDonald stated...

1962? The person who wrote this is grasping at anything. The Moon is less dense because it does not have a nickel-iron core like the Earth; it is solid "rock."

I could go on, but the list is lengthy... and misinformed.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Phil Schneider, Bob Lazar, John Lear, Richard Hoagland, astronauts who visisted the moon, air force/army/navy officers, Al Bielek, foreign ministers, presidents, etc....the list could be endless! I think we should pay more attention to these people because our future may depend on what they know/knew.

We should pay more attention to Hoagland? His "facts" are even worse than the ones in the OP. Your list starts out with a who's who of known charlatans, where you actually name names, for example:

www.ufowatchdog.com...

Has claimed that NASA is ran by either the Nazis, the Magi or the Freemasons - he just can't decide which. Continually begs for money to support his 'research.'

Regarding the five specific names you mentioned, I think we should pay less attention to them, they aren't credible. And I think even a lot of believers recognize that Hoagland is off the deep end and don't find him credible.

reply to post by DJW001

excellent response to the OP. I think that if you read the link the OP referenced everything is there, it was just a copy and paste.

It would have been nice if your post had been right after the OP's, maybe more people would realize these aren't facts at all.

Yes excellent and very succinct post DJW001 and in another thread I posted a Purdue University study of relative densities of our terrestrial planets and the moon. It reads like this below excerpt, with the link to the white paper.

Geologic study of moon rocks returned to earth by the Apollo missions.

Demonstrated relative densities of the 4 terrestrial planets and the moon.
Mercury’s average density of 5440 kg/m3) is much higher than the Moon's 3340 kg/m3) and is more similar to that of Earth at 5520 kg/m3).

However, adjusting these average densities for the pressures due to overburden pressure, we get even more contrast.

Planet

Mercury
Measured Density 5440
“Uncompressed” Density (kg/m3) 5300

Venus
M 5300
U 4400

Earth
M 5520
U 4500

Moon
M 3340
U 3300

Mars
M 3940
U 3800

htpp://www.web.ics.purdue.edu

Great post. Even though there is not any definitive proof that the moon is some kind of artificial space station, i do believe that this is the case. Guess you could call it a gut feeling lol

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
What do retired people have to gain by making up fanciful stories?

$$$ from the gullible people who believe them and buy their books or attend their conferences.

If someone with limited knowledge of the black budget wanted to get rich quick, all they have to do is use their knowledge to write science fiction books, magazines, cartoons, etc. Many have choosen this avenue already.

There is no good reason they would claim science fiction as science. They risk their reputation and life for beans?

Like This Right !

H.A.R.R.P no G.I. Joe: Resolute


And this

The Lone Gunmen Pilot - 9/11 Predictive Programming



And THIS ! Right !!


Get Ready to Hold on to your ASS for this ONE!

Buzz Aldrin Dreams of Mars

Oct, 19 2010
Fox News
By: Jeremy A. Kaplan

Source BUZZ's Own Site (Buzzaldrin.com)
buzzaldrin.com...

Aldrin believes NASA should move in stages toward a manned mission to Mars — and ultimately colonization on or near the Red Planet — by building outer space fuel stations and industrializing the moon. NASA has already spent hundreds of millions of dollars researching such projects, he noted, an investment that should be utilized — as recommended by Norm Augustine, former chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board and chairman of the Review of the U.S. Space Flight Plans Committee.

Aldrin endorses the formation of an International Lunar Development Corporation to begin commercial enterprises on the moon. And a broad collation of governments — Russia, China, India, the U.S., and others — should form this quasigovernmental organization, which would help private enterprises capitalize on the lunar resources. Together, these nations can build that lunar gas station.

There are real commercial activities that private enterprises could develop on the moon as well: Helium 3 can be mined, and heavy metal meteorites could be a source of rare earth metals. And the presence of water ice would make great rocket fuel — and rocket fuel is gets us to Mars. Aldrin thinks that base could form part of a transportation infrastructure that would enable us to get to near Earth objects such as asteroids, Martian moon Phobos, even Mars itself and beyond.

The space legend, who is launching a new think tank called U.S.S. Enterprise — which stands for Unified, Strategic, Space Enterprise — believes NASA should think about all of the planets for the most efficient travel across the solar system. And a key item for America should be a permanent base on Phobos.

A Must read!! Especially The Part to have a Permanent habitat on mars !

Why I think this !

Aldrin knows way more then he is Telling ! he's has been in the inside !


Buzz Aldrin's Dream ,Helium 3 and Lunar Resource Base, page 1
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Ohh is this a Subconscious slip up or is it a Senile kind of thing !
Cernan & Aldrin have nothing much to lose there OLD and as the Old Saying Goes!
when you on the Edge of death ( OLD AGE ) what do you have to loose

LISTEN CLOSELY AT the 3.00 min mark! and doesn't bother to correct himself at all.

THEN!!!!!! he say it again right at the ending He interupts and says Can i say one more thing then he say
He not going to be there when we get back to the moon or MARS!!!! yeah Back to Mars not going to Mars Back to MARS as he said back to the Moon or MARS Im pretty sure i herd that correctly ! see for your self ATS

USA already went to Mars : Astronaut Gene Cernan


you may be wondering how can we go to mars! for an out of the box Conspirator mind, It's EASY
we went there by OTHER MEANS..

Not from a Shuttle
Not from a Capsule lunar Lander like Capricorn one SCIFI movie

1) Captured or Back Engineered Alien Craft (anti gravity craft)
2) or a Shuttle like take off From Ground to Space
Like the Experimental Craft's the Soviets Had on the Drawing Board but was Canceled or were they ?
3) plausible for being undetected i would think if its possible from a Ground to space


like this one Soviets
Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-105
en.wikipedia.org...

The Russian Kliper (WOW)
www.russianspaceweb.com...

like this one Americans
Boeing X-20 Dyna-Soar
en.wikipedia.org...



Well our X15 & Our U2 Spy plane can hit the Edge of Space ..
The Problem i would have is


The Problem I would have is the Van allen Belt

reply to post by Wolfenz

USA already went to Mars : Astronaut Gene Cernan

Sorry, but that is just silly.....quite a stretch. It's obvious that he was thinking "Mars", as they were talking about Aldrin....because Aldrin has made no secret that he thinks MARS should be the focus. Of COURSE it was just a mind-slip.....no way can you infer he meant it, in the way that person on UTube thinks!

Apply some logic to it!! Cernan is, in the interview, disappointed in the news that Obama meant to cancel the NASA return to the Moon program.

IF, as claimed, he has some "secret" knowledge of some fantasy Mars missions......then, WHY would he care about the Constellation Project?? He would be more inclined (in this imaginary scenario) to JOIN Aldrin, and be advocating for a "direct to Mars" effort.

Of course....Aldrin is a bit pie-in-the-sky, it seems. Jumping the gun. Makes better sense to have some foothold with a base, and experience long-term, on the Moon, before attempting manned missions to Mars. There is also the matter of the Earth's gravity well to escape...compared to the much shallower Moon's.


The real truth about the Moon is far, far less "exciting" to so many of you, I suppose....so, to compensate, it's just much more fun to "believe" in these fantasies, no matter how ridiculous?

This thread is solid proof of that.....the title has the word "facts" in it.....sadly, that is false advertising.....

Moon’s Age: The moon is far older than previously expected. Maybe even older than the Earth or the Sun.
Moon was captured along the way. Not part of Solar system. If so, then other elements of our Solar system are similarly captured and other parts of our Solar system are now orbiting elsewhere. How many earth's used to be present?

Rock’s Origin: The chemical composition of the dust upon which the rocks sat differed remarkably from the rocks themselves, contrary to accepted theories that the dust resulted from weathering and breakup of the rocks themselves. The rocks had to have come from somewhere else.
Evidence of construction activity of the past on the moon. There has to be a similar amount of solid rocks and similar amount of dust in the sampling. The answer, "it's just space dust will not suffice".

"The abundance of refractory elements like titanium in the surface areas is so pronounced that several geologists proposed the refractory compounds were brought to the moon’s surface in great quantity in some unknown way.
Evidence of construction activity of the past on the moon.
Soil "hardening". Reinforcement of the outer Moon rock layers in order to pass through elements and not break apart, like through the Oort cloud around our solar system. Engineered having in mind the very nature of our Solar system or SIMILAR types of Solar systems.

Magnetic Rocks: Moon rocks were magnetized. This is odd because there is no magnetic field on the moon itself.
Evidense of construction activity of the past on the moon.

Seismic Activity: Hundreds of "moonquakes" are recorded each year that cannot be attributed to meteor strikes.
Evidense of construction activity NOW, IN the moon.

Nobel chemist Dr. Harold Urey suggested the moon’s reduced density is because of large areas inside the moon where is "simply a cavity." MIT’s Dr. Sean C. Solomon wrote, "the Lunar Orbiter experiments vastly improved our knowledge of the moon’s gravitational field . . . indicating the frightening possibility that the moon might be hollow.
Every decent transport vessel or device ought to have at least one cargo bay..

In November, 1958, Soviet astronomer Nikolay A. Kozyrev of the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory photographed a gaseous eruption of the moon near the crater Alphonsus. He also detected a reddish glow that lasted for about an hour. In 1963, astronomers at the Lowell Observatory also saw reddish glows on the crests of ridges in the Aristarchus region. These observations have proved to be precisely identical and periodical, repeating themselves as the moon moves closer to the Earth.
An unknown technology that can alter the Moon's position in space.

Moon Echoes: On November 20, 1969, the Apollo 12 crew jettisoned the lunar module ascent stage causing it to crash onto the moon. The LM’s impact (about 40 miles from the Apollo 12 landing site) created an artificial moonquake with startling characteristics—the moon reverberated like a bell for more than an hour. This phenomenon was repeated with Apollo 13 (intentionally commanding the third stage to impact the moon), with even more startling results. Seismic instruments recorded that the reverberations lasted for three hours and twenty minutes and traveled to a depth of twenty-five miles, leading to the conclusion that the moon has an unusually light—or even no—core.
Apollo 12 was cool, but Apollo 13 had an "accident". I presume that no more Lunar experiments at least of surface bombardment followed after that..apart from a recent one that is, that baffled everyone with it's lack of a dust plume...

The maria is composed primarily illeminite (sp?), a mineral containing large amounts of titanium, the same metal used to fabricate the hulls of deep-diving submarines and the skin of the SR-71 "Blackbird". Uranium 236 and neptunium 237 (elements not found in nature on Earth) were discovered in lunar rocks, as were rustproof iron particles.
Evidence of construction activity of the past on the Moon.
Evidence of fission elements, presumably nuclear fission by products.
Evidence of of metallic contraptions/machinery that was once present some time ON the surface of the Moon or is present periodically.

Soil "hardening". Reinforcement of the outer Moon rock layers in order to pass through elements and not break apart, like through the Oort cloud around our solar system. Engineered having in mind the very nature of our Solar system or SIMILAR types of Solar systems.

There might not be just ONE Moon but several scattered throughout the Cosmos in SIMILAR solar systems containing life just like this one.

Isaac Asimov, stated, "It’s too big to have been captured by the Earth. The chances of such a capture having been effected and the moon then having taken up nearly circular orbit around our Earth are too small to make such an eventuality credible."
No comment. See above.

13. Weird Orbit: Our moon is the only moon in the solar system that has a stationary, near-perfect circular orbit. Stranger still, the moon’s center of mass is about 6000 feet closer to the Earth than its geometric center (which should cause wobbling), but the moon’s bulge is on the far side of the moon, away from the Earth. "Something" had to put the moon in orbit with its precise altitude, course, and speed.
14. Moon Diameter: How does one explain the "coincidence" that the moon is just the right distance, coupled with just the right diameter, to completely cover the sun during an eclipse? Again, Isaac Asimov responds, "There is no astronomical reason why the moon and the sun should fit so well. It is the sheerest of coincidences, and only the Earth among all the planets is blessed in this fashion."
No comment. See above.

Greek authors Aristotle and Plutarch, and Roman authors Apolllonius Rhodius and Ovid all wrote of a group of people called the Proselenes who lived in the central mountainous area of Greece called Arcadia The Proselenes claimed title to this area because their forebears were there "before there was a moon in the heavens." This claim is substantiated by symbols on the wall of the Courtyard of Kalasasaya, near the city of Tiahuanaco, Bolivia, which record that the moon came into orbit around the Earth between 11,500 and 13, 000 years ago, long before recorded history.
If the moon "came" around 11.500 and 13.500 years ago then there is a good chance a global civilization was thriving at the time, namely the Atlantean. Reportedly the 90% of Greek literature of the antiquity is lost. We just gasp at what Plato, Aristotle, and many many many many others discovered about the nature of the Cosmos and humankind. Maybe we would not be gasping so much if we had the rest of the 90% of the missing data.

Ages of Flashes: Aristarchus, Plato, Eratosthenes, Biela, Rabbi Levi, and Posidonius all reported anomalous lights on the moon. NASA, one year before the first lunar landing, reported 570+ lights and flashes were observed on the moon from 1540 to 1967.
An unknown technology that can alter the Moon's position in space.