We were hit by a Water Moon and I can prove it.

I think if a large water bomb hit earth and cracked the mantle?...

The earth should've been obliterated when the gold bomb impacted.

Water was found... In almost a rock like substance. I believe almost three times the liquid water on earth. Here's a link from 2007 explaining it.

www.livescience.com...

How does this old news fit into your water planet theory?

there are a couple of cool graphics here showing all the world's water as a single sphere, to scale

water.usgs.gov...

Bravo for novel thought...

novel thought is rare, and even if in error, can lead to communal progression... so thanks on behalf of the rest of us in the cave.

a reply to: Newt22

I'm not going to knock your theory in fact it is rather interesting and well thought out...
Surface area vs volume big deal I understood what you wanted to say...
I'm not going to question where the water came from because there are bodies of water larger than Jupiter floating through space ya just water...
But then again why couldn't the water have been on the moon?
It's not impossible for Luna to have been a rogue body travelling through space which entered our solar system captured by the gravitational well of Sol and impacting earth...
Nor is It not impossible it struck another body that used to exist in our solar system either further out before impacting Earth...
This initial impact would be very severe and that's the only problem I see with your theory...
But if there was another body that was a watery world that was struck and obliterated creating the asteroid belt for example... the fragments or the asteroid belt would have its own trajectory but the remaining mass or Luna if you will would have a diff trajectory after impact...
And I propose the water would have done many things but the largest remaining mass of water would be more likely to follow the larger mass or Luna... Then Luna would have slowed from its initial entry into our solar system and the impact with Earth would not have been as severe but still able to do the things you mentioned...And the water would have followed right behind and then become married to the Earth being as it is the bigger body but also because of momentum...
Further more this could also explain the rotation of Luna it's scarring and the fact it is drifting further away from earth...
Anyway... Like I said interesting theory...

I think that a very young Earth simply had large amounts of Hydrogen and Oxygen in a very thick atmosphere. Even the theory of Earth being pummeled by comets etc is hard for me to swallow.

Great ideas and strange as i have just glanced through my new book Genesis Revisited and the few bits i read are about this subject. From what i gathered, the book seems to suggest that the water on Earth has something to do with a Godess called Tiamat,

en.wikipedia.org...

And it goes on about a collision between planets and that the asteroid belt is the remains of that collision. So from the little av read, the book does seem to have similar ideas to your own.

Good theory you have there and i`m interested to read the book properly and see how close to your theory it actually is.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Newt22

No.

Who even starred that post?????? In my opinion it`s a very ignorant post and contributes absolutely nothing to the thread other than to try and belittle the OP. To just type the word No and then not actually add anything to the thread? why do that???? Unless you have some great wisdom and knowledge on this subject that you think that your judgement on the OP is not even worthy of an explanation. Jeeez.

2/3 of surface is water. That's not the ratio of mass or volume for the planet.

Scientists calculate that the total mass of the oceans on Earth is 1.35 x 1018 metric tonnes, which is 1/4400 the total mass of the Earth. In other words, while the oceans cover 71% of the Earth's surface, they only account for 0.02% of our planet's total mass

Do people here seriously believe the earth is 75% water?

The surface of the earth might be 75% covered in water, but the surface of the earth is a fraction of the earth itself...


As for other planets not having as much water...
If we had no atmosphere, wouldn't the water be "evaporating" off into space? (sublimating, if in ice form)

A few hundred million years of that would make it a pretty dry place, I'd think.

Another thought, hydrogen and oxygen burn to create water. I don't know where we got such an abundance of these two things, but I'd consider that the water might have been "home grown"

a reply to: Newt22

I like your idea but I think you would have to account for the formation of Pangaea rather than the land masses we see today. That is unless this collision happened more recently after Pangaea had already dispersed. Maybe it accounts for the Flood. It certainly would have killed most life on Earth.

I also believe the an impact like you describe would result in most of the water being thrown off into space either as spray or steam.

a reply to: lordcomac

Many people don't understand the geometry. Quite sad isn't it. It's not that difficult.

Earth formed wet. Think about it. Picture a comet, meteor, Armageddon, Deep impact, Comet ISON - they're all ice & rock. Key word: ICE. The meteor impacts don't account for the water on Earth, but they do account for some of the rare water isotopes. Also, the impact with Theia (or Chicxulub) didn't turn it into a molten heap like we think so.

Earth Formed Wet - Natl Geo

I'm pretty sure that nothing put forward on this site will ever constitute empirical proof.

a reply to: roadgravel

Not to get into a bickering match, but most of us are capable of understanding that the OP meant the percentage of the surface of the planet, not it's overall mass.

It's not that difficult.

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: Newt22

there are bodies of water larger than Jupiter floating through space ya just water...

Can you please elaborate on this? Pure water/ice larger than Jupiter free floating in space?

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: roadgravel

Not to get into a bickering match, but most of us are capable of understanding that the OP meant the percentage of the surface of the planet, not it's overall mass.

It's not that difficult.

It was a different post. You have seen some of the many wrong factual claims here. And yes, it is not that difficult of material to understand.

a reply to: Phage

Anything @.gov has a big question mark over it. ALphabet agencies lie. Except to you, perhaps.

a reply to: FamCore

Here is something which touches on bodies of water in space from NASA...
I was referencing a different article I read years ago that I think was a finding by hubble of a blob of water many time larger than Jupiter floating through space...
Anyway here's the NASA article...
www.nasa.gov...

Just want to say thanks to all the people that supplied a link.. Wrote other perspectives and took this theory serious enough to answer back. This was my first post, and, I feel did exactly what I wanted or I had hoped. Got people thinking. Thanks everyone

It was a great skunk works post.

An initial skunk works post to my understanding does not need the heavy "Proof" and sourced link because it is considered 100% speculation until good info can be built up and accounted for. I have seen some good topics grow in a skunk then when all the angles are figured out get reposted with citation to another forum. For even stronger deconstruction.

For a first OP that was awesome. kudos to you.

CoBaZ