Earth May Not Have Needed Moon for Life

Earth May Not Have Needed Moon for Life

news.discovery.com

THE GIST
Earth's moon helped stabilize the planet's tilt, making its climate suitable for advanced life.
Without a moon, life on Earth probably would have flourished as well, since Jupiter and other factors exert a steadying hand.
The research has implications for understanding if planets in habitable zones are indeed suitable for life.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Very interesting since we all are tought otherwise.

What do you think? - Is it true or just another claim.

If it IS true, it is very interesting since many of the exos we found so far may or may not have moons as we know it. So it could be very cool if the moon is not needed at all if other parameters are in place.

news.discovery.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

It is possible it could sustain life without the moon, but could it have sustained humanity?

The thing is, the moon controls the tides of the ocean, alot of species do depend on the tides. It is curious indeed, what kind of species would have emerged if the moon wasn't around.

and most importantly, would they be intelligent?

Something to consider:


If humanity somehow came to be without the moon, how would that have affected us and our personality?

Not much to say here, although I will be checking in to see thoughts and opinions, but this struck me:

The study also showed that if Earth revolved around the sun in the opposite direction, called a retrograde orbit, it wouldn't need a moon at all to have a climate about as stable as it has today. Likewise, a Jupiter about half the distance to Earth as its present location would have had a similar steading hand, Barnes added.

That really got me thinking.

reply to post by Hilltaker


I like this post. Just goes to show that, the more advanced we become with technology and the more data we compile, we are continually changing our perspective of current teachings. The Electric Universe theory, Quantum Mechanics IMO these are what we are going to change our "history books" to. Too many "harmonious" coincidences.

this immediately made me think of mentions of a time when earth was moonless. PLutarch among others has written of a time before the moon was in the sky.

www.varchive.org...

Today we have had alot of news !!! Meteorites probably were the jumpstart kits for life on earth, and humans, and now this, earth could have been quite similar without our moon !
Whats next ? We are now certain that mars has micro-biological life ?

reply to post by WeSbO


I just saw a thread posted that they are now finding clouds up there Why do I get the feeling that we humans are gonna get bits of the truth dumped on us steadily and heavily on us in the coming days and then its trial by fire from there, lol.

Personaly speaking, I do not believe that LIFE needs any particular strict things that you or I would recognise as ingredients or building blocks. I believe that life will eventualy be found in more star systems than not. However, I do not believe that we will be able to recognise what is infront of our faces for many years after we get to that stage. I believe that we have yet to discover that life requires not flesh, nor chemical process , nor intelligence, in order to be life,and be important.

I have no doubt that there are other flesh life forms out there, and I have no doubt that somewhere out there there is mind, and deeply intelligent mind as well. But I also think there are going to be energy beings, life forms made of what appears to be stone, life forms made of barely cohesive clouds of gas, plants with intellect, and so on.

I also believe that we will find this life in places which appear utterly opposite to those traditional goldilocks zone planets that everyone gets creamy over. Life will be found in radiological hells, in cyanide rich atmospheres, in terrains washed by sulphuric and hydrochloric acid rain of molar strength we just arent familiar with on earth, and in a thousand , a million other suposedly impossible situations.

In essence , I do not think we know enough about how we got to be here, to say how anything else might evolve. Furthermore, until we find something out there, until we expand our knowledge by visiting and sampling other places in the galaxies, we will not know enough to make any assumptions about where and what may be out there.

Interesting information, surrounding this topic.

Giordano Bruno (a 16th century Italian philosopher) is reputed to have written in De Immenso: (Bk IV, x, pp. 56-57): “There are those who have believed that there was a certain time (as our Mythologian says) when the moon, which was believed to be younger than the sun, was not yet created. The Arcadians, who dwelt not far from the Po, are believed to have been in existence before it (the moon).” “Theodorus writes in his first book that the moon had appeared a little while before the war which was fought by Hercules against the giants. Aristochius and Dionysius Chalcidensis, in the first of their works, confirm the same.” “Mnaseas said that the Arcadians were born before the moon, and so they were called ‘proselenian’; meaning, ‘before the moon’.”

When the Earth was Moonless

Have a read, it's very interesting if nothing else.

Thanks for the link. Is very interesting.

It seems to me like life is even more resistent than first thought - I think in this news with the moon it is refering to human life and not just micro organisms.

If we didn't have a moon, every culture, and in particular religions, would be completely different. It's interesting to think of myths created by lifeforms on a moon circling a planet o.O.

There's definitely other fleshies out there What else is the point of the universe if not to experience every bit of it?

Originally posted by TrueBrit

Personaly speaking, I do not believe that LIFE needs any particular strict things that you or I would recognise as ingredients or building blocks. I believe that life will eventualy be found in more star systems than not. However, I do not believe that we will be able to recognise what is infront of our faces for many years after we get to that stage. I believe that we have yet to discover that life requires not flesh, nor chemical process , nor intelligence, in order to be life,and be important.

I have no doubt that there are other flesh life forms out there, and I have no doubt that somewhere out there there is mind, and deeply intelligent mind as well. But I also think there are going to be energy beings, life forms made of what appears to be stone, life forms made of barely cohesive clouds of gas, plants with intellect, and so on.

I also believe that we will find this life in places which appear utterly opposite to those traditional goldilocks zone planets that everyone gets creamy over. Life will be found in radiological hells, in cyanide rich atmospheres, in terrains washed by sulphuric and hydrochloric acid rain of molar strength we just arent familiar with on earth, and in a thousand , a million other suposedly impossible situations.

In essence , I do not think we know enough about how we got to be here, to say how anything else might evolve. Furthermore, until we find something out there, until we expand our knowledge by visiting and sampling other places in the galaxies, we will not know enough to make any assumptions about where and what may be out there.

I completely agree here also. Life is adaptable, very adaptable. It wants to survive, and it will, wherever it can.

reply to post by lateralus11235


100 percent correct.

However as one stated it doesnt have to be the outcome has been us. It is also many other factors playing, like what if the dinasours never was exstingquished? - we wouldnt have had a change to grow I think and many other factors like the earth has been relative stabel the last many many years.

The moon raises more questions than it answers.

Not just our moon, but other planet's moons too.