Is the Moon an Artificial Satellite? Look at This.

reply to post by zarp3333

Believe "they" consider that: "impact ejecta": liquified rock splashed out ward from impact site (crater).

reply to post by zarp3333


I see what your sayin ,We get to look forward to "it">the moon coming into our atmosphere,or why would it be there with those scars of re-entry/collision with host planet. if it is artificial

Tidal Locking
I have never really looked at any of this but apparently we are not the only planet with this situation.

reply to post by Aeriq


Impressive post, you got my star and flag ;D .

to add on your excerpt dealing with moonquakes this could correlate with this video :

Moon grows

but if we agree with this mister adams then we have to disagree with the artificial satellite stuff, although i do feel that the moon is special.

What do you think ?


EDIT: All the maths you did showing us "strange" results just made me think of the golden number.

I was taught as a child that the moon is artificial. Maybe the moon helps keep the Earth in orbit or is used to absorb large meteors. There's no telling what happened millions or even billions of years ago, and I think that to under estimate our ancestors is ignorant.

I am on a dial up internet which is really slow tonight, so I am sorry if some one already mentioned this.
I just finished reading the Jim Marrs' book Alien Adgenda, the first bit of the book talks about the moon being a billion (1 BILLION) Years Older Than The Earth... So where was it before it was here for a Billion years? and How did it get here in such a perfect orbit between the Earth and the Sun with out crashing into the Earth? He also talks about the rocks on the moon being of dense metals and the dust as being something totally different. I really like the book, it just opens up all kinds of ideas and UFO topics. I don't know if its all real or a total money making BS book. I have the feeling its all real ideas based in forbidden truths.....

Originally posted by Aeriq
Let’s look at what a total solar eclipse is. It is when the diameter of the moon completely covers the diameter of the sun, only showing the sun’s light rays. For this to be possible, the Moon must be exactly 400 time’s closer to Earth than the Sun (at that point in time.) This makes it appear, from the perspective of the viewer from Earth that the Sun and moon are the exact same size. So the Moon's pretty much exactly 400 times smaller than the Sun and 400 times closer to Earth (at full solar eclipse... the yearly average is ~390x).

Not exactly. For a total solar eclipse to occur, the apparent diameter of the Moon must be at least that of the Sun, not exactly the same. It seems nitpicky, but it's an important distinction.

Interesting, there are craters on the Moon's side facing Earth.
Where did those asteroids which impacted Moon on that side come from? Did they somehow miraculously bypass Earth? Or was Moon actually rotating in a different way at the time when that happened, and when did it happen? Very long time ago?

Synchronous rotating is, I think, called Laplace resonance
en.wikipedia.org...
Check it out, three biggest moons around Jupiter have a very interesting orbital game.

Examples are the 1:2:4 resonance of Jupiter's moons Ganymede, Europa and Io, and the 2:3 resonance between Pluto and Neptune.

this tidal lock phenomenon seems relatively simple to me. unless the moon is totally symmetrical mass-wise, then eventually one face will be always towards the earth and the other always away from earth. i read one post here saying that centrifugal forces would put the more massive side outward but couldnt earths gravity keep the more massive moon hemisphere fixed facing earth instead? not sure which way it actually works but the list of local planets with locked moons is long and distiguished. given enough time i think its just equillibrium due to physics.

just in passing, Billy Meier (think what you will of him) was allegedly told by his ET hosts that eons ago earth actually had two moons. more interesting is the fact that neither of those moons is the one thats up there now. discuss...

A great book called "WHO BUILT THE MOON?" is out there (google it or amazon it).

There are a couple of really interesting items they point out. First, and pretty astonishing if you really take some time to think about the implications. The moon is *OPTICALLY* the *exact* size as the sun, as seen from Earth. Sure, the sun is physically enormous and the moon, in comparison, is miniscule. HOWEVER, *optically* --as visually seen by our eyes from this planet-- they are *identical* in celestial size. They are not off by a small percentage. They are identical. What are the chances of that? Truly ASTRONOMICAL. We really don't appreciate the sheer size of that "coincidence" because, as we might say, "But that's how it's always been!" Well, for us, that's true, but it doesn't eliminate the fact that to have our primary star and singular moon share the identical optical size is very, very rare. It depends on the sizes and distances of two extreme objects in our visual sky PERFECTLY occupying exact distances.

Another thing is that NASA had pre-placed seizmometers on the surface of the moon before the moon landings. When the lunar module landed, they conducted an experiment just prior (or during) and NASA said that the moon "rang like a bell." This would indicate that it (or part(s) of it) was hollow. Also, the moon does not have a "standard" gravitational pull. In other words, gravity changes depending on where you are. These areas where gravity is concentrated are called MASCONs (mass concentrations). This suggests that parts of the moon might be hollow, or at least the density is so blatant as to suggest anomalous compositions beneath the surface.

Also, although popularized theories state that the moon was formed in several ways, the truth is that scientists really have no idea how it got here. The models they use to illustrate strikes by other planets, comets, etc. are just as valid or invalid as other theories involving the arrival/creation of the moon.

Could it be that every time we see the moon, we are seeing the largest, most blatantly hidden in plain sight UFO placed here before recorded history? And thank goodness it's here, for its influence on our planet has been called essential by so many scientists.

I highly recommend reading "WHO BUILT THE MOON?"

What I find fascinating is the number and size of craters on our side of the moon despite the moon being tidally locked. In my mind, I would think that it would be incredibly uncommon for an asteroid to slip by the earth's gravity only to land on the moon.

reply to post by justadood

Um, yeah, paranoia maybe. I guess all these liberal satellites are new, otherwise why didn't Bush shoot them down? And since Homeland Security and the TSA as well as all the other new agencies and groups were started under Bush, wouldn't you think they might prepare for the future and prevent the possible election of an administration of liberals to prevent liberal control or find a way to maintain control despite a liberal administration? And if there are ruins or technology on the moon, and since China intends to send manned craft multiple missions to the moon, do we either already have control of the ruins and/or technology, don't care about the ruins and/or technology, intend to sabotage a Chinese attempt, try to get there first (again) and preempt them taking over, or simply resigned to giving up knowledge of the ruins and/or technology to the Chinese?

Originally posted by GhostLancer
HOWEVER, *optically* --as visually seen by our eyes from this planet-- they are *identical* in celestial size. They are not off by a small percentage. They are identical. What are the chances of that? Truly ASTRONOMICAL. We really don't appreciate the sheer size of that "coincidence" because, as we might say, "But that's how it's always been!" Well, for us, that's true, but it doesn't eliminate the fact that to have our primary star and singular moon share the identical optical size is very, very rare. It depends on the sizes and distances of two extreme objects in our visual sky PERFECTLY occupying exact distances.

This is a misconception that just won't die.

The moon's size in relation to the earth and the sun is nigh irrelevant. The moon is not a miraculously, perfectly sized object situated in specie for the sole purpose of hiding the sun during eclipses.

Here is a diagram illustrating how this works: Eclipse Diagram

Remember that the moon is smaller than both the sun and the earth. So there is no way that the moon can cast a shadow from the sun over the whole earth. In fact, because the moon is smaller than the sun, the shadow is like a cone that gets smaller at it gets further away from the moon. So if the earth and moon were touching, the shadow would be about the size of the moon. But since there is a distance, the shadow is smaller than the moon.

I suppose you could imagine it like this. Take a basketball (the earth) and try to make it all dark (shield it from the sun) by putting a tennis ball (the moon) in front of it.

Looking at things from a distance, the shadow of the moon on the earth's surface appears as a tiny black dot which travels along a narrow path. The people within that path are the ones who see the total ecclipse, not anyone else. The moon doesn't have to be some specific size for this to occur.

There's nothing suspicious or weird about any of it.

Originally posted by Adept_Zero
The moon's rotation is the same as its revolution. This is called tidal locking and almost every natural satellite in our solar system does this. The aliens-on-the-moon crowd depend on these basic facts not being available to their audience and are generally pretty adept at making mundane questions like these into something mysterious.

The striations you see are simply enormous ejecta blankets spreading outward from the craters they originated from.

Again, this is all very basic astronomy. ET on the moon theorists are very dependent on you not knowing the fundamentals when it comes to space exploration.

This is how ignorance is *truly* denied.

I would have to agree with the above statements completely science has disproved this time and time again... not to say that the natural rotation of the moon is proof that it wasnt an artificial sattelite but more along hte lines of that if it is not natural there just isnt anything about it making it easy to tell given it is doing what it should naturally do.

Originally posted by zarp3333
I borrowed a telescope from a friend the other night and actually looked at the magnified moon for the first time. I was immediately struck by the striations.

Are you talking about the South Pole-Aitken basin? Shortly after the moon formed, it got whacked, big time resulting in the enormous crater. It's almost 1,500 miles across and more than five miles deep.The impact punched into the layers of the lunar crust, scattering material across the moon and also into space. The 'striations' you mention is nothing but material scattered across the surface due to the tremendous impact.

They reminded me what the moon would look like if it had been dragged across the universe and heated up in the atmosphere of other planets and been bombarded by asteroid fields along the way.

Well, this doesn't conform to celestial mechanics! It isn't possible for the Moon to have got heated in the atmosphere of another planet. That close and it would have either crashed into it or gone into its orbit due to gravitational pull.

The patterns of craters are round. How could they scrape across the surface for hundreds, if not thousands of kilometers.

Most of the craters on the Moon are circular. The few craters that are not circular, like Messier and Messier A (see below) in the Mare Fecunditatis, are an exception. None 'streaked' across the surface of the Moon as you suggest! What you are seeing is nothing but material (ejecta) scattered across the surface due to the tremendous impact.(I suppose you are terming this as 'striations').


Messier and Messier A
Courtesy: enchantedlearning

I remembered reading Sitchin's explanation that the Annuki had brought the moon into Earth's orbit as a base.

That's sci-fi at its best!

And why one side of the Moon always faces us is due to 'tidal lock'. Most moons in the Solar System are tidally locked to its parent body. Its plain and simple celestial mechanics and nothing to do with 'alien influence'!!

In other words, the Moon ain't no ET space station! Period!

reply to post by Stewie


the moon does spin, and the model is a perfect application. This doesn't mean that the moon is not a satellite though, so I don't see what the big deal is.
If anything, you could argue the spin was set up perfectly by an outside influence... or you can just tail correct people that they fail and make yourself look a lot less credible... up to you bud

I just thought I found this quite intruiging

look at the astronomy picture of the day yesterday




Yes , what has a bucket excavator got anything to do with astronomy exactly !

And look at it today




What they are suggesting is , that they plan to put one of these bad boys on the moon , or give another year or so and hey ho what do ya know , there is one already on the moon , what a stroke of luck.

what do you all think

Why would someone make a satellite out of cheese?

Originally posted by rajaten
reply to post by i am just saying

 

oh hai dere fellow crimefighter

The moon is acting really weird lately. There is a huge media blackout on the subject right now.

Media Blackout Regarding Earth And Moon Orbital Changes:

______beforeitsnews/story/229/227/HUGE_media_blackout_regarding_Earth_and_Moon_orbital_changes.html

Thats like quoting something from Weekly World News as 100% the truth so do you guys not actaully think before you believe some of the things you read on the net>

Quick run for the hills look at this headline

weeklyworldnews.com...

Originally posted by rajaten
reply to post by i am just saying

 

oh hai dere fellow crimefighter

The moon is acting really weird lately. There is a huge media blackout on the subject right now.

Media Blackout Regarding Earth And Moon Orbital Changes:

______beforeitsnews/story/229/227/HUGE_media_blackout_regarding_Earth_and_Moon_orbital_changes.html

Ta' for't link, cool post.