Nasa To Reveal New Scientific Findings About The Moon

reply to post by Pathos


I dont know about vabor making its way through vacum to get to the moon but Ill bet the water inside the moon will either be concentrated on the side facing us of the side not facing us.

We will soon be thinking of the Universe as an Electro Mangnetic Circuit.

There is A Lot of Water on the Moon
Why Has NASA Waited Years to Say So?
www.nasawatch.com...

A Whiff of Water Found on the Moon
sciencenow.sciencemag.org...

Three Separate Spacecraft Have Detected Significant Water On the Moon:
Why Has NASA Waited So Long To Say So?
www.spaceref.com...

NASA to Reveal New Scientific Findings About the Moon
www.spaceref.com...

It's not lunacy, probes find water in moon dirt
Associated Press

Prospect of Water Ice Spurs Excitement for Moon Exploration www.space.com...

Water on the Moon?
Separate lunar missions indicate evidence of ice and hydrated minerals.
www.nature.com...

New research shows water present across the moon's surface - It turns out the moon is a lot wetter than we ever thought
www.spaceref.com...

Brown Scientists Announce Finding of Water on the Moon
www.spaceref.com...

Deep Impact Spacecraft Finds Clear Evidence of Water on Moon
Source: University of Maryland
www.spaceref.com...

M3 AND INDIA'S FIRST MISSION TO THE MOON
m3.jpl.nasa.gov...

Water Water Everywhere...





[edit on 26-9-2009 by zorgon]

FUEL DEPOT PAPERS

Selenian Boondocks: Realistic Near-Term Propellant Depots: Implementation of a Critical Spacefaring Capability
selenianboondocks.com...

11 page powerpoint presentation on fuel depots in space
selenianboondocks.com...

...

[edit on 27-9-2009 by Plastered]

Yay, just got home. Well, just got home from the bar. half in the bag and I skimmed over some posts but its too late for me to read all tonight.(15 days at sea will make you tired). i put on the news everyday at sea on the sirus radio, but heard absolutly nothing about the moon. All i read so far is that small amounts can be found in a ton or so of moon soil. Thats cool. I wasn't up to date on the official bombing of the moon by Nasa and i just read in a post it will be tomorrow!(or later today actually) Yikes... Good thing I'm off the sea. Nasa is retarded. Our moon is sooo important!! Tides, Womens cycles, Sea creatures mate and travel by the light of the moon at night. Countless others i'm sure. All civalisations who have a moon god must be pissed. Off to bed. Go back to the boat in the morning for gear work.

RedPill

reply to post by BluePillOrRedPill

I don't think you should worry about the supposed bombing of the Moon for at least two reasons:
1. It's not really a bomb, there are no explosives on board.
2. The impact will be like the one of a small meteorite, and that's nothing for a large celestial body like the Moon.

Wow, look at that. Hypothesis confirmed, see my earlier post. Although the EU guys have been saying for years. Sorry for the gloating but I've been ridiculed for thinking this before in this forum.

Chandrayaan-1’s lunar orbiter confirms how the water is being produced. The Sub keV Atom reflecting Analyzer (SARA) corroborates that electrically charged particles from the Sun interact with the oxygen present in some dust grains on the lunar surface to produce water.

www.universetoday.com...

This is why we have large OH readings from comets, it's being created in the coma, and this is why the readings are stronger further away from the nucleus, not because it is sublimating from water ice. And this is why no were near enough water has been detected on the nucleus in any of the comet missions.
This is why water has been detected in Mercury's atmosphere in surprising amounts, and can go a long way to explain Enceladus plumes.

The idea that Earth was seeded by water bearing comets while avoiding the other planetary bodies is ridiculous.

Originally posted by squiz
This is why we have large OH readings from comets, it's being created in the coma, and this is why the readings are stronger further away from the nucleus,

Actually the readings are stronger further away because water vapor is not nearly as massive as dust particles and is not as easily bound by the comet's loose gravity. The huge discrepency between the amount of OH on the moon vs from a comet even farther from the sun is proof that it's not being created de novo, as well as the much larger OH reading after impact with Tempel 1 vs just prior to impact. Such a huge and rapid swing cannot be explained by proton collisions.

Originally posted by ngchunter
Actually the readings are stronger further away because water vapor is not nearly as massive as dust particles and is not as easily bound by the comet's loose gravity.

Of course there's no proof of that, it's an excuse. In fact it's quite ridiculous.
And entirely different from your last excuse If I recall.
And the fact that most of the comet surfaces that have been viewed have been bone dry, no where near enough water has been detected on the surface to account for the OH readings. Oh that's right it's beneath the surface.

See the pattern? they tuck things away that can't be observed or measured just like your gravity explanation that defies logic.

And that's what it is OH not H20, for over 50 years they have assumed that OH must be the remnant of H2O broken down by photolysis. Well guess what? there's another process. H20 is not needed.
You ridiculed me about OH creation with the solar wind, now it's confirmed.
I thought you'd be back for a stab. Although a lame one.

I agree kinetic impact cannot account for it, your missing the entire point once again.

I know how pre conditioned you are so I won't be arguing with any brick walls here thanks.

[edit on 16-10-2009 by squiz]

Originally posted by squiz

Originally posted by ngchunter
Actually the readings are stronger further away because water vapor is not nearly as massive as dust particles and is not as easily bound by the comet's loose gravity.

Of course there's no proof of that, it's an excuse. In fact it's quite ridiculous.

Gravity is a well known phenomenon. The solar depletion of atmospheres proportional to the weight of the gasses and materials that compose them is well understood as well. Ridicule does not change this fact.

And entirely different from your last excuse If I recall.

I don't recall ever addressing you on this thread before now.

And the fact that most of the comet surfaces that have been viewed have been bone dry, no where near enough water has been detected on the surface to account for the OH readings.

Strawman, it's not expected that we'd find ice sitting exposed directly where it would sublimate away way too fast.

See the pattern? they tuck things away that can't be observed or measured just like your gravity explanation that defies logic.

Gravity is well measured...

And that's what it is OH not H20, for over 50 years they have assumed that OH must be the remnant of H2O broken down by photolysis. Well guess what? there's another process. H20 is not needed.

H2O is needed to explain the spectra seen...

www.springerlink.com...

...as well as the large and immediate post-impact shift in the amount of H2O seen.

www.nasa.gov...

These effects cannot be explained by third or fourth order effects of solar formation of OH. As you said yourself, an impact wouldn't create this.

[edit on 16-10-2009 by ngchunter]