Weird Things About The Moon...

reply to post by weedwhacker


I don't know if you know that.... some "scientists" has found and detected WATER on a very, very, very, very (Very=parsecs ) distant planets.....

But "scientists", from more than forty years, they don't have detected WATER (A huge amount of WATER) on the "sidewalk" right next our "home"!

Bad Scientists or Something Else? ..........

Originally posted by weedwhacker
"deny ignorance"??? R.I.P. to that motto, it seems, based on the content seen over about the last twelve months or so.

Well seriously Herr Wacker... we HAVE been trying to help you deny your ignorance and see the world a little better... but efforts have sadly failed...

I guess some people are just meant to see nothing but blurry rocks. But just because you cannot see... doesn't mean others can't. And no amount of you calling them names will ever change that. Face it, people live in different realities... sometimes you can see across, but mostly it ends in a futile attempt to make the other person see what you see...

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one"

"Imagination is more important than knowledge"

Those words were uttered by a great man, Albert Einstein. So WHO are YOU to contradict him and WHO are YOU to decide which reality is the correct one?

Originally posted by randyvs
I, like God, do not play with dice and do not believe in coincidence. I

I'm with you on the coincidence thingy... but God DOES play poker



Happy Holiday... despite the lurking Grinches

What I don't get is people saying NASA cover ups, NASA knows about aliens, NASA knows this, NASA knows that why do these people never mention China or Russia? are they in on it too? If not how did "NASA" cover it up to them? Do you people (not all of you) even know that Russia has a rover on the moon?

Russian Rover

And its not far from the Apollo landing site so they must be in on the fake moon landing too, even though at the time America and Russia were in a space race but I'm sure Russia accepted they had lost the race and went along with the whole cover up for a laugh.

And china... well I don't see them being in cahoots with the American government or NASA lol

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by weedwhacker
"deny ignorance"??? R.I.P. to that motto, it seems, based on the content seen over about the last twelve months or so.

Well seriously Herr Wacker... we HAVE been trying to help you deny your ignorance and see the world a little better... but efforts have sadly failed...

I guess some people are just meant to see nothing but blurry rocks. But just because you cannot see... doesn't mean others can't. And no amount of you calling them names will ever change that. Face it, people live in different realities... sometimes you can see across, but mostly it ends in a futile attempt to make the other person see what you see...

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one"

"Imagination is more important than knowledge"

Those words were uttered by a great man, Albert Einstein. So WHO are YOU to contradict him and WHO are YOU to decide which reality is the correct one?

[/quote

OOOO a goody....

Originally posted by roughycannon
What I don't get is people saying NASA cover ups, NASA knows about aliens, NASA knows this, NASA knows that why do these people never mention China or Russia?

Simple... because NASA is the 'catch all' default for anything space related. People still forget that Clementine was a DoD/US NAVY mission... So saying NASA is covering it up is like calling a tissue a Kleeniix or a snow mobile a Skidoo... it's just habbit

are they in on it too?

In a word... yes

If not how did "NASA" cover it up to them? Do you people (not all of you) even know that Russia has a rover on the moon? Russian Rover

Yeah Jack found the missing Lunokhod 1 which has been MIA since 1971. He got a laser flash from a location 200 km from where it was lost

www.thelivingmoon.com...

And its not far from the Apollo landing site so they must be in on the fake moon landing too, even though at the time America and Russia were in a space race but I'm sure Russia accepted they had lost the race and went along with the whole cover up for a laugh.

Well the space race and the hold cold war was a ruse to get money to arm up on both sides. Even von Braun told us about the manufactured enemy (1.Russia;2.Terrorism; 3.Asteroids; 4.Fake Alien Invasion We are currently working on #2 )

Go read a book... "Two Sides of the Moon: Our Story of the Cold War Space Race" written by Astronaut David Scott and Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov. Russia, since after Hitler... has been more of a friendly rival than an enemy... Even the old James Bond movies showed us that

And china... well I don't see them being in cahoots with the American government or NASA

Well the trick to SEEING is actually LOOKING.. it really isn't that hard to do...

Just a simple google search like oh say NASA China Agreement.... will get you...


Caption: On his first day of visiting China, Administrator Griffin presents a picture montage with a flown American and Chinese flags to President and CEO, China Academy of Space Technology, Dr. Yuan Jiajun. Click for Full Resolution. Credit: NASA.


You will notice the following files are direct from NASA

OASC and ITA represented the interests of U.S. launch and satellite industries during annual consultations with China, Russia, and the Ukraine on commercial space launch services. In October 1997, DoC participated in the negotiation and signing of an amendment to the U.S.-China agreement covering price guidelines for launches to LEO.

history.nasa.gov...

China's Space Industry and International Collaboration

Over the recent years, China has signed cooperation agreements on the peaceful use of outer space and space project cooperation agreements with Argentina, Brazil, Canada, France, Malaysia, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, the ESA and the European Commission, and has established space cooperation subcommittee or joint commission mechanisms with Brazil, France, Russia and Ukraine.

Now lets have a look at other agreements between NASA and...

ESA

ESA and NASA extend ties with major new cross-support agreement
www.esa.int...

Japan
NASA_Japan_Agreement
www.nasa.gov...

NASA_Japan_Agreement 1990 Press Release
RELEASE: 90-106
NASA AND JAPAN AGREE ON NEW AREAS OF SPACE COOPERATION
www.thelivingmoon.com...

NASA actually has an Office in Japan

NASA Team In Japan
NASA in Japan NASA Japan Representative Field Office
oiir.hq.nasa.gov...

Canada

NASA_Canadian_Space_Agency_Agreement
ftp.hq.nasa.gov...

Note: This file is on NASA's ftp server... link may not work everywhere. You can see a copy here
www.thelivingmoon.com...

India

NASA And India Sign Agreement For Future Cooperation
NASA PRESS RELEASE: 08-033
www.nasa.gov...

NASA To Work With India on Moon Mission
NASA PRESS RELEASE: 05.09.06
www.nasa.gov...

U.S.- India Space Cooperation
Fact Sheet: US Department of State
www.state.gov...

So I hope you can now see the BIGGER PICTURE

Also the Russian Company Energia just bought out controlling interest in the joint venture Sea Launch platform that was a Boeing/Energia project. The Energia chapter was Ukranian, the sea going launch platform has home base in Long Beach, California

Edit to add..

Almost forgot..

Buzz Aldrin... CEO of Starcraft Boosters;
buzzaldrin.com...

...is senior science adviser for Gravwave LLC, a company doing ANTI GRAVITY and Gravity WAVE studies in CHINA

Gravwave LLC
www.gravwave.com...

CHINESE & US GRAVWAVE JOINT HFGW (High Frequency Gravity Waves) PROJECT
www.gravwave.com...

Buzz Aldrin Page 9
www.gravwave.com...

If I were you I would consider learning to speak Chinese

Buzz Aldrin China Moon
revver.com...

reply to post by Arken


Thanks Arken, it's nice to hear that from someone like you, cheers.

Excellent point you made about the water on the moon, the same moon that has been studied, sampled, analysed and thoroughly investigated for over 40 years and all we ever got was a 'possible' for water from NASA?

If i remember rightly, (and please correct me if i'm wrong) there were 6 sample return missions carried out from the moon by NASA.

After the cheap, a mere $90m, but very successful Indian moon mission in 2008, Chandrayaan-1, it found on the very first try, an abundance of water molecules in the lunar soil..the official excuse from a red faced NASA, as to why NASA didn't or wouldn't confirm the presence of water in the returned samples collected during the *six* NASA missions involving returned lunar samples, was that a faulty sample return container ruptured or broke it's environment seal, contaminating the sample in the process...

NASA spent over $25 Billion in total on Apollo, around $180 Billion in today's money and didn't even confirm the *abundant* presence of water on the moon..India spent $90 Million, and confirmed the water right away..even if it was a NASA designed detector system the thing was carrying! Water, positively confirmed..1 for 1.

Mind you, you could have had nearly 14 whole Apollo programmes with the 2.3 Trillion 'lost' by the Pentagon, as announced by Rumsfeld on 9/10/2001, just before the data centre was taken out that held the records of the 'missing' money the very next day..on 9/11.

But i digress, what i find very hard to believe is that according to NASA, *all* six sample containers suffered the same or similar malfunction?! All different missions, all different sample containers, and all broke their seals apparently contaminating their contents, preventing a positive confirmation of Luna water..?

O...K..

Who was the bright spark at NASA, who then decided after the first two or three missions where containers ruptured, to carry on using the same, proven unreliable sample return containers?!!

$180 Billion and nobody at NASA can design a container that doesn't leak!? A container, that has failed previously, and that is intended to carry the most valuable cargo (apart from the astronauts themselves of course) imaginable, Lunar geological samples - almost priceless scientifically and in terms of financial worth, and it seems an agency supposedly capable of all the technological feats required to place humans on the moon and bring them home again..cannot design or obtain a box that doesn't leak..pigs will fly.

Good job the container designers didn't have a go at the space suits or the capsule...Apollo would have been a lot shorter programme!

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Need it be explained, yet again??

No not really your quote below makes it clear that the NASA 'scientists' didn't know why it "reverberated like a bell" But then these same 'scientists' are dropping bombs on the moon, exploding comets with again 'unexpected results', dropping plutonium laden space craft on other planets, reviving 12 million year old bacteria and messed up on 'discovering' arsenic based life in a mud pond on Earth. I am sure I missed a few

The 'ringing like a bell' business is a misquote from the Apollo 12 post-mission press conference. The vibrations from an impact, measured by a seismometer left by the Apollo 11 mission, went on for longer than the scientists expected. To make it understandable to everyone, the person reporting this at the press conference described it as being as surprising as striking a bell and still finding it ringing an hour later. It was an analogy intended to convey the fact that the result was unexpected.

answers.yahoo.com...


What is really funny is your 'official' rebuttal is from YAHOO Answers You ever checked some of those replies?

reply to post by zorgon

What is really funny is your 'official' rebuttal is from YAHOO Answers You ever checked some of those replies?

Well spotted zorgon.

Word for word actually wasn't it, and unless he's the author (a 31 year old...) that's plagiarism i suppose...

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

In order to bring some science, rationality and perspective......some visual aids: (links)

www.astrodigital.org...

That was just some very interesting science and facts that seem to be ignored, far too often, in favor of the "preferred" fiction....


Some more fact, sizes, perspectives:

www.freemars.org...

Of course, the coincidences are just that. And, as shown, the "coincidences" aren't nearly as "exact" or 'unusual' as assumed....not when the science is examined, and details paid attention.

There are many more ways to learn, get educated, and dispel myths...or, those who choose to do so may continue to reject logic and science, and fall for fantasies.....

Whats your deal?
Being skeptic is cool but demanding people follow your "facts" and if they dont they are a part of this sites decline is a bit rude.. this site to me is amazing because people have such open minds and theories.. Have you personally been to the moon?... a family member? perhaps a friend? or a friend of a friend? nope... you yourself are telling us something you read as well... for all any of us know.. there is no moon... there is no space... no ones been there in this thread... so your facts may vary from others beliefs.. and the beauty of this site is that all theories SHOULD be welcome and discussed...

reply to post by zorgon


NOW, it's down to complaining about a source of something that refutes one of your points? Because it came from "Yahoo Answers" makes it, what? Less credible? In what way, and why exactly? Is the fact that it was prioritized in the "Google" search to come up rather high on the list (due to, I suppose....oh, the number of HITS it got) mean that, because it's yahoo, it has no cred? OK, fine....let's look again.

Re-googling, there's the Yahoo link....and only ONE level of priority above it, is the PHYSORG.COM link that I skipped over, to use the Yahoo the first time....because YAHOO was brief and to the point, and isn't that what people want?! Either I see complaints about links because they're too long, or my post is too long, or the link is too technical, whatever....

...here's PHYSORG.COM....and it goes on about a few other things:

www.physorg.com...

So, even a recent scientist, studying the seismic activity records compiled by NASA in the 1970s (from equipment left by Apollo missions) repeated that "ringing bell" tripe (probably due to a lack of imagination, to come up with a different analogy?).

Of course, he also notes the MOONQUAKES, and their surprising (based only on comparisons to similar events on Earth) tendency to last longer then would have been predicted. Again, this does NOT provide indications for a "hollow sphere" Moon!!! In fact, just the opposite....it implies a solid structure, with reverberating standing waves that do not dampen....indicating a colder than Earth interior (likely) and MORE SOLID than Earth's!! Earth's, of course, being mostly molten below the cooler, thin crust.

Now, that "google" page hit....still on first page, and I had to reject several that had higher priority, based on popularity....like the ones from "GLP", because they are pure rubbish...promoting the fallacy of the "hollow Moon".

There's some silly diatribe from someone named "Jim Ostrowski" that is notable merely for its entertainment value as some incredible "out there" woo-woo, and repeated errors that are seen all over the Webz.


Here's a good one...but, it's just some anonymous mathematician. ("Dan Roper". Maybe he can be looked up?)
Since "Yahoo" was not good enough, guess this one won't be either....however, you will have to prove him wrong on the MATH:

A "MATHEMATICIAN" SPEAKS TO:
Bob H.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Re: DOES THE MOON 'RING LIKE A BELL' ???

The formula for spherical volume is: 3/4 Ï? r3

The diameter of the moon is about 3476Km.
Seismic experiments determined the crust to be about 60Km.

The volume of the entire moon would then be 21979 Million Km3.
The 'hollow' portion would be 3476-120Km in diameter.
The 'hollow' volume would be about 19780 Million Km3.

21979 - 19780 = Crust volume of 2199 Million Km3, only about
10% of the mass of a solid moon.

At present orbital speed, a hollow moon would be slingshot into the solar system. Or a hollow moon would have to orbit 90% closer to the earth in order to stay in orbit. And, tides would be 90% smaller than they are now.

Regards,
Dan Roper

www.rumormillnews.com...


zorgon, I thought you were a learned man, even a scientist? You puzzle me, with some of these "stances" you take on topics that are fairly easy to explain, and understand, science-wise.

reply to post by Arken


You're rather obsessed about this "water on the Moon" thing....

.....and it seems as if you really haven't studied the "how" of the process of detecting extraterrestrial elements and compounds....

... some "scientists" has found and detected WATER on a very... distant planets.....

Yes. (I skipped all the 'very's and 'parsecs'...). First, did you know HOW that is accomplished? Initially, starting with the planets in our own Solar System? Spectroscopy. This uses the light shining through an atmosphere of the planet to determine the general composition of the elements and gases in that atmosphere. As to, the "very distant"....it was only recently that extra-Solar confirmation was made:

The first evidence of water in the atmosphere of a planet outside our own Solar System has been discovered by U.S. astronomers.

Article is dated 12 April 2007. www.cosmosmagazine.com...

(And, you're right...150 LY is many parsecs away, and very, very, very, very far....)

The light source? Well, obviously couldn't use OUR Sun...but a star of known spectral type that was occluded by the planet (any planet, BTW) could be the "yardstick" used in the spectroscopy.

But "scientists", from more than forty years, they don't have detected WATER (A huge amount of WATER) on the "sidewalk" right next our "home"!

Knowing what (I hope) you now know about the methods of detection available, during those last "forty years"...how else would they have known, without doubt? Until they used.....as I think I've mentioned before, the spectroscopy technique. Except, lacking any atmosphere, they had to MAKE their own, so to speak. The impacting spacecraft threw up debris, and that "cloud" of matter is what was analyzed.

Turns out, too, in the last forty years ---- improvements in electron microscope scanning, or other detections methods, allowed more resolving of the Lunar samples from Apollo, and H2O molecules were detected. Until these confirmations, the existence of H2O, in any form, was postulated. But, most scientists don't publish or make press statements until they have SOLID evidence to back up their claims...not just "hypotheses".

Finally, again -- what's the fuss about water? Well, generally in terms of extraterrestrial planets, it's about the possibility of some sort of life that gets scientists' knickers all wet. The interest in potential H2O on the Moon?? Well, certainly no one will ever suggest life, given the known conditions....so, the latest focus was merely the planning and preparation for future manned bases up there.

We don't need the water on Earth, right? It's not "valuable" in that way, as a "resource"...it'd be prohibitively expensive!!! (Evian is pricey enough already!!). No, finding out it's handy already up there means much less will have to be transported FROM Earth, for the eventual Human colonies.....so that's why it's getting attention, lately. Only reason (other than scientific curiosity, of course..).


So.....learning the hows and the whys behind these things is a far better endeavour than merely jumping up and down and NASA-bashing at every turn......isn't it??

Seems to me that bashing NASA (without thinking it all the way through) is like intellectual masturbation. Might feel good, and be temporarily satisfying, but afterwards you haven't changed your level of knowledge and comprehension one iota......

reply to post by weedwhacker


You are too smart to not understand that, before the Indian Chandrayaan-1 discovery of WATER ON MOON, the boffins of NASA, they already know the existence of H2O in huge ammount on our satellite from many many years...

But the boffins Nasa scientists do not say nothing about that: WHY?

They are not stupids. They act like stupids!

And this is not good!

reply to post by spikey


2.3 Trillion 'lost' by the Pentagon
A bloody wound, spikey! A bloody and not yet explicable "wound" for american citizens.....

Mind you, you could have had nearly 14 whole Apollo programmes with the 2.3 Trillion 'lost' by the Pentagon, as announced by Rumsfeld on 9/10/2001, just before the data centre was taken out that held the records of the 'missing' money the very next day..on 9/11.

But as you surely know... "The Black Projects" needs more funds for their "Black Budget"!

Dark Places to transact Dark Business...

reply to post by Arken


I thought I took great pains to point out, already, the sheer lack of logic in assuming NASA had some nefarious purpose for "withholding knowledge" of H2O quantities, in any form, on the Moon from the public.

UNLESS, they were merely waiting to be precise, and have solid confirmation, so that any announcement would be irrefutable. Because, in realty.....the existence of water would serve their purposes very well, when the intent is increased funding, and a return to a manned Lunar Program. It might have been purely political poker...hold an Ace up their sleeve (water) for just the right moment --- again, because they are ALWAYS going to Congress, hat in hand, for funds.

I don't now what weird scenario you have as a "motive"....it's just water, for crying out loud! Not valuable for any reason, except for, as I outlined, potential future manned missions.

Also, side bar: The Pentagon accounting error of the trillions? Really, you should get a better grip on the facts about that....it was purely SNAFU, and typical of the convoluted and sloppy bookkeeping practices of decades by multiple Government agencies. I would wager quite a lot was siphoned into various....hundreds of thousands of....pockets too. Civilian contractors who were able to "charge", on an invoice for instance, $2,194.65 for one ball-peen hammer, when their production costs were more like $4.37 per unit.....and all the rest was "spread the wealth" gravy.....multiply that concept a million-fold. Those gaps in the accounting went overlooked for decades, and probably were only discovered as the result of the implementation of computer processing and record-keeping technology begun in the late 1990s....a huge back-load of data, finally "looked at" by computers, and the "missing" money was "found"....something so complex no Human could have taken it all in.....

The REAL "black budget" items and projects? They get their money, regardless. This other thing is a tempest in a teapot.....

BTW...."weird" things on or about the Moon? Yeah, there will always be, is likely. But, that's exciting, isn't it? heck, look how many things HERE on our planet are "weird".....the deepest ocean chasms, and the weird lifeforms never seen before....lots of stuff. That is Nature, that is Existence. And, an "alien" environment, like the Moon, will always have surprising aspects about it, to learn and discover. Doesn't mean there's anything "supernatural", or "ET-related"....it is a planetoid unlike the planet Earth in fundamental ways (somewhat the same in others) so, it is "weird" in that sense, I suppose.......

The orbit of the Moon is distinctly elliptical with an average eccentricity of 0.0549. The non-circular form of the lunar orbit causes variations in the Moon's angular speed. - wikipedia
There goes your artifical satelite theory.

I find the Moon very interesting, and I think it could very well be an artificial craft, and may be hollow, and beings may live there now. I think it could have water, breathable air, and gravity. I tend to think the NASA moon landings were hoaxed. I also think with ET assistance, the Nazis went to the moon, and have a moon base there, on the "dark side". Of course I don't have proof, but I find it very possible.

reply to post by weedwhacker


Dood look I too tired of your constant rebuttal against the fantastic. I too agree with you the moon DOES spin just a little as it goes around us..it does spin just enough to keep the one side to us for the most part. OK then but I have been doing research like many of you and going on a decade actually. I have been an amateur astronomer since I was a little boy. I now own a couple scopes one of which is a 12inch Newtonian with pretty decent optics. And I can affirm my words sir that without a doubt on 3 occasions I witnessed craft just above the moons surface. They could be black ops craft...I'll admit that.. that is IF we are now making crafts a few miles in diameter. Brother I hate to break it to you but your believing your own mess of tripe and I'm 100% positive of that. I can go on I have also witnessed some very strange things that was not mass paranoid delusional or any thing of the like and that's another thread. There is evidence that points to the moon being at the least used by some intelligence. If they brought it here that one heck of a tug-boat but none of us were here and they didn't seem to leave a trail so why argue about that. You are believing "what you want" just like your accusing others of. Yes some of the stuff is outlandish. It's frustrating when we both know good and well beyond the shadow of a doubt the moon spins just enough to stay tidal locked correct. But if you have seen the things I have and so on.. you wouldn't be such a skeptic. Obviously you have not be introduced to the fantastic on a personal level but in due time I'm sure you will. Can't wait to see what you have to say for yourself then.

To the OP: Bro the moons does spin a bit and I understand and believe many of the other things you have mentioned. I could even see it being possible that the moon was brought here by some extreme beings, but you need to check yourself on the moon spinning then. Take out a two coins from your pocket and pretend ones the earth and ones the moon. Imagine yourself sitting on the moon facing earth. Now rotate in orbit around earth. If you don't spin the coin slightly as you orbit your backside will eventually face the earth, which are moon never does. Understand sir?

Thanks guys
FG

reply to post by spikey

Excellent point you made about the water on the moon, the same moon that has been studied, sampled, analysed and thoroughly investigated for over 40 years and all we ever got was a 'possible' for water from NASA?

Yeh Spikey, its ridiculous. 40 years. Arken has the point.

reply to post by firegoggles


Some questions.

Why is it that we now believe the moon takes 27.32 days to rotate instead of the previously stated 28.1 as was taught in school in the mid 1980's? Is it a change in calculation or is it a change in the observation?

With that in mind, what effects does the change (if in fact there was one) have on time as we measure it? Since we now know that light is not at a constant rate, does the "pull" of the tidal effect affect our time constant? Does it affect the rate at which any particle with mass moves?

If this explanation as to why the moon rotates at the same rate as the orbit of the Earth is correct, then why does the same not apply to the planets, except Mercury in relation to the sun and then the Sun in relation to the Galactic core? I think the conclusion in the Moon Spin page is incorrect.