THE MOON
THE MOON
A few nights ago I watched a show that was suggesting some very odd characteristics about the moon. Which, if true, is rather startling. Such as, despite there being a vast range of circumference sizes of craters, they’re all the same depth! That makes no sense. Furthermore, the precise size, distance, and orbit of the moon, to allow eclipses with the sun, are phenomenal odds. Also notable is that we only ever see one side of it. Finally, when the Apollo mission (I think that’s the one) was returning to Earth, it released part of its equipment to fall back to the moon. Their sensors picked up that when the equipment hit the moon, the moon “rang like a bell” for a full minute! They couldn’t explain this, and so on another mission they released a larger load to fall back on the moon, and that rang like a bell for 3 minutes! The soft surface of the moon should not cause anything like that... and apparently scientists can’t explain that either. Are these false claims?
One theory suggests that the moon is actually a metal structure with a false surface... which could possibly be used as an observation base for someone. It was also suggested that it could have been towed into place... into precise position... a very long time ago -- perhaps to watch and interact with this earthly/humankind experiment?
Opinions or insights, anyone?
One theory suggests that the moon is actually a metal structure with a false surface... which could possibly be used as an observation base for someone. It was also suggested that it could have been towed into place... into precise position... a very long time ago -- perhaps to watch and interact with this earthly/humankind experiment?
Opinions or insights, anyone?
- Hobbes' Choice
- Posts: 8364
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am
Re: THE MOON
The co-incidence of the perfection of the eclipse is temporary, and will change as the bodies change in distance. There is noting odd about this. Whatever the present distance would have low odds as the orbit is changing. It's only of apparent interest as we like to see the sun blotted out occasionally and have myths about it.Lacewing wrote:A few nights ago I watched a show that was suggesting some very odd characteristics about the moon. Which, if true, is rather startling. Such as, despite there being a vast range of circumference sizes of craters, they’re all the same depth! That makes no sense. Furthermore, the precise size, distance, and orbit of the moon, to allow eclipses with the sun, are phenomenal odds. Also notable is that we only ever see one side of it. Finally, when the Apollo mission (I think that’s the one) was returning to Earth, it released part of its equipment to fall back to the moon. Their sensors picked up that when the equipment hit the moon, the moon “rang like a bell” for a full minute! They couldn’t explain this, and so on another mission they released a larger load to fall back on the moon, and that rang like a bell for 3 minutes! The soft surface of the moon should not cause anything like that... and apparently scientists can’t explain that either. Are these false claims?
One theory suggests that the moon is actually a metal structure with a false surface... which could possibly be used as an observation base for someone. It was also suggested that it could have been towed into place... into precise position... a very long time ago -- perhaps to watch and interact with this earthly/humankind experiment?
Opinions or insights, anyone?
Not sure about the depth of craters and I doubt this is true.
I hope you were not watching the "Discovery Channel" because generally it is shite.
Can you tell us how the moon "rang like a bell"? In what way?
The moon cannot be hollow. It is not in a 'precise position', as its relation ship to earth is changing. It's now pretty well understood that the earth was more massive and the moon comprises of what was once part of earth separated by a massive catastrophe; being made of almost exactly the same stuff as the earth. Many of the craters related to a long time past when both the earth and the moon were in constant bombardment by the aftermath of that collision; they are now filled up with millions of years of dust (maybe why they are thought to be the same depth).
On the other hand maybe its just a massive DEATH STAR, which will wake up when Trump is made president.
Re: THE MOON
It looked like a seismograph machine... registering vibrations. That's the description they used.Hobbes' Choice wrote:Can you tell us how the moon "rang like a bell"? In what way?
Except that earth's craters aren't all the same depth.Hobbes' Choice wrote:Many of the craters related to a long time past when both the earth and the moon were in constant bombardment by the aftermath of that collision; they are now filled up with millions of years of dust (maybe why they are thought to be the same depth).
Yes... if such a clown can rise to such a position of power, the earth experiment has likely failed (or provided a whole lot of entertainment for someone).Hobbes' Choice wrote:On the other hand maybe its just a massive DEATH STAR, which will wake up when Trump is made president.
Re: THE MOON
This has struck me, in fact I nearly started a thread on it and I seem to remember bringing it up on another forum but no one else seemed to see anything remarkable about it. Personally, I think it is remarkably remarkable. If only I'd asked Hobbes in the first place I could have saved myself so much brain racking trying to think of a reason for it.Lacewing wrote: Furthermore, the precise size, distance, and orbit of the moon, to allow eclipses with the sun, are phenomenal odds.
- Hobbes' Choice
- Posts: 8364
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am
Re: THE MOON
Was this Discovery Channel?Lacewing wrote:It looked like a seismograph machine... registering vibrations. That's the description they used.Hobbes' Choice wrote:Can you tell us how the moon "rang like a bell"? In what way?
Except that earth's craters aren't all the same depth.Hobbes' Choice wrote:Many of the craters related to a long time past when both the earth and the moon were in constant bombardment by the aftermath of that collision; they are now filled up with millions of years of dust (maybe why they are thought to be the same depth).
Yes... if such a clown can rise to such a position of power, the earth experiment has likely failed (or provided a whole lot of entertainment for someone).Hobbes' Choice wrote:On the other hand maybe its just a massive DEATH STAR, which will wake up when Trump is made president.
You can see craters inside craters on the moon - I don't think they can be the same depth.
I did not know there was a seismograph on the moon, presumably with its own power and a radio transmitter????
- Hobbes' Choice
- Posts: 8364
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am
Re: THE MOON
Oh look moon craters with different depths.
- Hobbes' Choice
- Posts: 8364
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am
Re: THE MOON
Older dust filled craters (similar depth), with newer craters on top.
http://oldsite.david-tyler.com/uploaded ... olycus.jpg
Billions of years of dust settles into the craters, making them appear the same depth whilst others form fresh splashes
http://oldsite.david-tyler.com/uploaded ... olycus.jpg
Billions of years of dust settles into the craters, making them appear the same depth whilst others form fresh splashes
- Hobbes' Choice
- Posts: 8364
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am
Re: THE MOON
Here's another good example
- Hobbes' Choice
- Posts: 8364
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am
Re: THE MOON
The seismograph was taken on the first mission, to listen to the moonquakes.
The solidity of the moon seems to explain the sustained quake
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/home/15 ... uakes.html
The solidity of the moon seems to explain the sustained quake
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/home/15 ... uakes.html
Re: THE MOON
No! This was the very reputable program "Ancient Aliens" on the History channel. I know, you think that's shite too!Hobbes' Choice wrote:Was this Discovery Channel?
I'm guessing they have equipment (on the spacecraft) that can measure vibrations of planets when they're close to them. Does that seem far-fetched?Hobbes' Choice wrote:I did not know there was a seismograph on the moon, presumably with its own power and a radio transmitter????
Okay, well maybe their claim is that "generally-speaking, it's not what would be expected".Hobbes' Choice wrote:Oh look moon craters with different depths.
You've done a good job of addressing each of the claims! As Bill would say: Thank you for your participation in this most important thread.
Re: THE MOON
Okay, that's interesting. Could be a cover-up for their REAL reasons for their investigations and for going back to the moon. And Clive Neal admitted this: "What causes the shallow moonquakes? And where do they occur? We're not sure."Hobbes' Choice wrote:The seismograph was taken on the first mission, to listen to the moonquakes. The solidity of the moon seems to explain the sustained quake.
Perhaps the rumblings are from the industrial complex inside the decoy moon!
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: THE MOON
Reputable? I suppose it is, in the same way as 'Hunting for Bigfoot' is 'reputable.' Or 'Sensing Murder'.Lacewing wrote: No! This was the very reputable program "Ancient Aliens" on the History channel.
Re: THE MOON
Sure! Somebody's gotta report on this stuff!vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Reputable? I suppose it is, in the same way as 'Hunting for Bigfoot' is 'reputable.' Or 'Sensing Murder'.Lacewing wrote: No! This was the very reputable program "Ancient Aliens" on the History channel.
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: THE MOON
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTzV_f7hRqQ
Proof of 'Bigfoot' (Highly reputable). Did you know that the Moon landings were faked? Proven beyond a shadow (excuse the pun) of a doubt.
Proof of 'Bigfoot' (Highly reputable). Did you know that the Moon landings were faked? Proven beyond a shadow (excuse the pun) of a doubt.
Last edited by vegetariantaxidermy on Wed Aug 17, 2016 9:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: THE MOON
Okay, that was totally annoying. All the camera-zooming in and out, and then jerking around to try to disorient us, only to end up seeing what was clearly a guy in a hairy suit running. No other creature runs like that.vegetariantaxidermy wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTzV_f7hRqQ
Proof of 'Bigfoot'. (Highly reputable). Did you know that the Moon landings were faked? Proven beyond a shadow (excuse the pun) of a doubt.
If you're not going to take this seriously... I can't have this conversation!