Tonight's Full MOON ! Here's a Harvest of Myths and Facts.

Tell me tell you a story...

First I'll start with a myth, then I'll reveal the true story.

Once upon a time, there was a full moon. Tonight, in fact. Google is filled with stories about the Harvest Moon and the lunar eclipse. Apparently, National Geographic thinks it will be spooky.

"See a Spooky Harvest Moon Eclipse, the Last Until 2024"

news.nationalgeographic.com...


People have a lot of names of that big round ball of light in the night sky. Super Moon, blood moon, the Native Americans have many names for many different phases and seasons. Me, I'm loony for the moon. I call it my moon.

I expect the stories on the moon because they always have stories about the moon when it comes time for it to become full and obvious. What makes me wonder, is why no one pays attention to the new moon. Well, I guess I just showed my prejudice, because I just realized many cultures use the moon as a way to make time and they celebrate all it's phases. All throughout history, before the Egyptians. Way back. I'm just saying, the moon is always interesting and always on the move.

The real reason I am right is because there has been two other stories about the moon in the news this week. They are both scientific and are aimed at trying to unlock the mystery of the moon. Firstly, scientists have stated that the odds of earthquakes go up during the tides. Of course, the link is to the moon, and the sun and the tides. I'll post a link to ATS's own QuakeWatch 2016. I've been discussing the link for years and rant muchly on this thread...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here's a link for the news story from lower on the thread page...

TIME
time.com...

"Scientists Discover Connection Between Full Moon and Earthquakes"

more links to the same story...

www.spacedaily.com...

weather.com...

So, there's that debate. And here's another story. A story which makes me rant. Sorry. Among the many stories about the Harvest Moon, I noticed and another sciency story about the moon. This time, it was concerning the Mystery of the Formation of the MOON. AGAIN, they're pulling out the old tired idea of Theia and the stupid collision theory. They keep reworking the math because the isotopes are the same and the collision theory has a problem trying to explain it. Again, they say they've figured it out. But too bad, it's more myth than fact.

Here's the story... Wait, better yet. I'll post the link and continue writing on a new window to continue. I'm sure I'm running out of room...

"Moon's Birth May Have Vaporized Most of Earth, Study Shows"

"The massive collision that created the moon may have vaporized most of the early Earth, according to a new analysis of samples collected during the Apollo moon missions.

In the early days of planet formation, a grazing collision between the newborn Earth and a Mars-size rock named Theia (named after the mother of the moon in Greek myth) may have led to the birth of the moon, according to a prevailing hypothesis. Debris from the impact later coalesced into the moon.

This "giant-impact hypothesis" seemed to explain many details about Earth and the moon, such as the large size of the moon compared with Earth and the rotation rates of the two bodies. But in the last 15 years, evidence has arisen that has challenged scientists to alter the details of this hypothesis. [How the Moon Evolved: A Timeline in Images]

Forming the moon

In 2001, scientists began discovering that terrestrial and lunar rocks had a lot in common: the two bodies possess many of the same chemical isotopes. (Isotopes of an element have different numbers of neutrons from each other. These subvarieties are identified by different numbers; for example, potassium-39 or potassium-40). Isotopes can act as geologic fingerprints, because prior work has suggested that planetary bodies that formed in different parts of the solar system generally have different isotopic compositions.

These discoveries threw the giant-impact hypothesis into crisis because previous computer simulations of the collision predicted that 60 to 80 percent of the material that coalesced into the moon came from Theia rather than Earth. The likelihood that Theia happened to have virtually the same isotopic composition as Earth seemed extremely unlikely.

Link to space.com

The original giant-impact model suggested that a relatively low-energy collision melted part of Earth and the whole of Theia, flinging some of the molten debris outward. One relatively new model, proposed in 2007, starts with a low-energy impact just like the original model, but adds an atmosphere of silicate vapor around Earth and the disk of debris that ends up forming the moon. This model suggests that this vapor shroud helps Earth and the disk exchange material before the moon emerges from the debris.

From the ATS Terms & Conditions:

* Proper Attribution for the posting of copyrighted material owned by others is defined as posting a relevant snippet of the online content not to exceed 10% of the entire piece, a properly formed link back to the source website, and a clear indication of the name of the source website. The posting to these websites of any copyrighted material owned by others that is not found elsewhere online is prohibited.

oversized quote removed

see above

a reply to: ericblair4891

Now, that's the myth. Here's the truth. The moon was formed by a series of many giant volcanic eruptions on earth.

I call the eruption state a VME. Volcanic Mass Ejection. It's like a CME in that it throw material out of it's orbit.

The reason earth's early eruptions were so massive is water. Look up phreatic eruption. It's an eruption that involves water exploding within a magma chamber. Early in earth's evolution, giant phreatic eruptions threw material in orbit around earth. It coalesced over time and became the moon. That's the reason the isotopes are identical. The moon was born from the earth. And the earth, alone.

I'm not going to argue much. I've tried for a long time to share the truth. I know most people will disagree and tell me I'm wrong. Go ahead, you'll be one of many hundreds by now. I'm tired of the debate. Because, well, there's no point in starting another debate when I won't really engage in debate my own hypothesis. I'll let anyone tell me I'm wrong do so, and thank them for their participation, however, I'm not going to defend my position.

Do know what I would like? I'd like, one day, someone to take up the cause, and take my place and try and convince the scientific community. Because, they sure as heck aren't listening to me...

Thank you for your time.

And for your listening enjoyment, Neil Young and Harvest Moon

Thanks for writing the OP and OP continuance.

I was taught in school 1965-77, that some multi billions of years ago the moon came from earth. In the early formation of the solar system while the earth was still hot and molten a section separated and later cooled to become the moon.

However that doesn't account for all the meteor impacts on the moons surface.

Some young earthers/old earth but new work of God, believe that when God poured out his wrath on the anointed Cherub that covereth for his attempt to usurp his throne. That he sent waters from the fountains that flooded the heaven around the earth and the moon may have been in that flood found in Genesis 1:2. Hence all the pot marks or craters on its surface was not so much meteors but huge water drops that hit its surface.

But then again I know a man who is a lunatic and every full moon this man goes nuts especially if he is not on his meds.

Anyway I like you write up.

a reply to: ericblair4891

You might be able to help me but when I went out in the early hours last night (15th) the moon was full and seemed a soft Orange. It was high in the sky so couldn't have been anything to do with the horizon or anything, was their a special lunar event last night?

a reply to: Dwoodward85

More likely atmospheric than lunar.
www.windows2universe.org...

a reply to: Dwoodward85
We can't even see it here where we are in the US because of a massive cloud layer.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

You must be talking about Charles Darwin's son, Sir George Darwin. He had a great idea. Too bad the math didn't work out. His ideas had gravity because it was explain why we have such a big mass so close. He figured it had to have come from the earth. He was half right. He just didn't understand the mechanism for throwing the material out far enough to form the moon, but not too far so that the material escapes earth's orbit and gravitational pull. My idea is that water is the fuel for an explosion which is like a rocket taking off from earth. They both use the same fuel Hydrogen and oxygen. Then pressure, heat, and yeah, you have blast off.

Anyway, I like Darwin, and one day, I hope to prove that he was half right. Because, in any hypothesis, or idea, we are standing on our forefather's shoulders. Ask anyone if they've heard of the other Darwin. You won't find many that know of him.

He was a smart guy in his own right.




I was trying to find a video about Sir George Darwin. Poor guy, there's nothing much, not like his dad. The got movies and movies, and much much more. And poor Wallace, And wasn't Charles Darwin just taking Larmarckian evolution onward and upward, branching out. Charles was just putting together all the other information scientist had gathered. He was looking at the rocks in South America and scale up a big idea even bigger and making the ideas even older. Afterall, wasn't stealing his ideas from the farmers. Who already understood evolution and breeding. On a primitive level, humans had perfected the are of manipulating genes, and looking for biological traits.

No video on georgie boy...

more music maybe











Oh, there's like a million songs about the moon. Here's a link with an amazingly detailed list
moon.nasa.gov...

Oh, one last song. It's not about the moon, but it can be sung under the moon. Steve Martin from the Jerk.
... just because I like the song and I'm a loon.

At the most opportune moment, I shall drop my pants and full moon, the full moon, because the moon is actually a space ship full of aliens and they control all the crap that goes on down here. So. THIS FULL MOON IS FOR YOU !!! BITCHES!!!

a reply to: ericblair4891

Love your choice of some of the videos. Left one out...Edit: Heres a myth:

The moon lo on the horizon appears much larger than when directly overhead. Its an illusion, the moon is the same apparent width from horizon to horizon.

a reply to: intrptr
Moon songs? Lunar tunes?

Interesting theory and I admire the passion you obviously have for it. personally I prefer the hollow moon idea, it just appeals to my quirky mind.

Star for the effort put in and the undoubted self belief in your theory and another star for the music, anything with Echo & the Bunnymen deserves it

here we go a real moon song



or how about this one. It is pretty cool

Great OP.

Thank you for taking the time to write this up.

I have always believed there was some sort of connection.

A commonly held myth is that a full Moon increases police and emergency room work loads.

There is a more serious problem for fervent believers in the lunar lunacy effect: no evidence that it exists. Florida International University psychologist James Rotton, Colorado State University astronomer Roger Culver and University of Saskatchewan psychologist Ivan W. Kelly have searched far and wide for any consistent behavioral effects of the full moon. In all cases, they have come up empty-handed. By combining the results of multiple studies and treating them as though they were one huge study—a statistical procedure called meta-analysis—they have found that full moons are entirely unrelated to a host of events, including crimes, suicides, psychiatric problems and crisis center calls.

www.scientificamerican.com...

a reply to: Phage
How could you call it a myth.

I work at a hospital and it sure does seem like we get a lot more people in during the full moon than when the moon is half, quarter or new moon phases.

a reply to: ChesterJohn
"Seems like" doesn't really mean much in the face of actual statistics.

You should read the article.

When there is a full moon and something decidedly odd happens, we usually notice it, tell others about it and remember it. We do so because such co-occurrences fit with our preconceptions. Indeed, one study showed that psychiatric nurses who believed in the lunar effect wrote more notes about patients’ peculiar behavior than did nurses who did not believe in this effect. In contrast, when there is a full moon and nothing odd happens, this nonevent quickly fades from our memory. As a result of our selective recall, we erroneously perceive an association between full moons and myriad bizarre events.

Are just going to ignore that the premise of the thread is that the moon was created by volcanos?

a reply to: Sremmos80

Yes.
Dig the music.

a reply to: Phage

I would say that more study needs to be done.

I mentioned earlier I know first hand how crazy a man got every full moon. Especially when he was off his meds. and I have see it first hand in different parts of the world and the effect on people in different cultures. I never looked for it. But it would happen and then someone would say there s a full moon tonight (even when the skies were cloudy).

I would say these men who did the study ( though you did not post any of their actual methods or the study itself just a commentary on it) were already biased to prove no connection from the start. And preconceived Idea is not how you start a study.