I am going to post the whole story on this 'event' and a link to some video that coincides with this story.
The story is from: mina (Macedonian International News Agency), this is the link to the story.
http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/7216/56/
I received the link in an email from my mother.
Here's the story:
This is a gross exaggeration of the events. The US has used kinetic "weapons" several times to multiple celestial bodies and there hasn't been any violation of the law.
A kinetic weapon is simply a descriptor of an object with mass being used to either create a crater for deeper exploration or to alter the orbit of an object in danger of hitting the Earth (which has not happened).
It is not an actual weapon nor is it part of any military exercise.
I can't even believe that I'm replying to something like this. It's all rather silly.
We have every right legal and otherwise to explore the Moon and any other celestial body, the same right is extended to every free nation on Earth. The kinetic impactor is being used because it is much cheaper, safer and efficient than sending people to the Moon with masses of equipment to search for water.
I suggest you read NASA's information www.nasa.gov
All I can say is this: Outside of this article the only other media to report about ETs being on the moon are tabloids. There has been no credible report about it and if it were true there'd have been a bigger buzz by now. Not to mention that in times past NASA has produced video footage of the entire moon and nothing of the sort mentioned in this article was seen. There is no violation of the law for them to use a kinetic weapon for exploration, if they were doing nuclear tests that would be one thing but they are doing this for scientific research of the moon itself. If there were a real issue over this the U.N. would have stepped in already to put a stop to it or would have issued a warning but they haven't.
Is no one thinking about what a possible "bombing" of the moon may do to the Earth's gravitational pull? Its lunar equivalent? If the moon changes its position even the slightest milimeter, the conscequences could be astronomical for our planetary atmosphere, let alone weather conditions...
Soulshroude, the effect that kinetic weapon would have on the moon's orbit is irrelevent. As Upir stated, the moon is constantly bombarded by much worse. If a kinetic weapon is going to cause a problem than there would have been a major catastrophe long before any of us were born.
the article is interesting one. I dont think that its really going to do any harm to the moon. I say if they want to explore let them.
I find that interesting that there is a company that actually sells property on the moon. What would you do with it is my question?
"Kinetic Weapon"?
OMG, the orbiter is going to be allowed to fall to the surface of the moon as a result of the moons gravity.
Do you think the Earth suffers such devastaing dammage when a 747 crashes? The Earth's gravity is much greater than the moons' and the orbiter's weight is orders of magintude less than a commercial jet.
It's like throwing a pebble into a mud puddle to see the splash.
Great...thats just nice.--__--
lets blow up the moon..and send particals our way,
and then MAYBE it'll shift or burst into parts..
causing some distrution here.
I was wondering why they never whent back to the
moon.It's so boring to NASA..that they rather blow it up.
I know..its prob a small *boom*...inside the moon,
but geeze...what if..uggg...nevermind,
let them do it.
LMAO bloodmother. THANK YOU! i havent laughed so hard in some time.
and blowing up the moon? are you serious? think...plane crash, altho the object that will be crashing into the moon has less mass than a passenger jet, it will make up for that by its speed (hence its kinetic energy.
im a sceptic by nature, and while i may choose to suspend my disbelief to better enjoy this site, there is only a certain level that i can go to.
im still amused by the cries of outrage (and damp pampers) resulting from the cassini project.
people are such amusing animals at times.
~Wolf~
my father brought up a good point we dont know the total make up of the moons underbelly what if by chance we hit a fisher and cause a split (yea i know you said the moon gets hit every day with things bigger)
but if we hit something like a fault line we could be looking at extreme weather patterns and more
We don't know the total makeup of the Moon in the same sense we don't know the total makeup of the Earth. However, we have been studying it enough to know that there aren't any of these "super faults" etc. The Moon, Earth, Mars and pretty much every rocky body known forms in the same basic way. The only way an object could be split apart is if it were hit with an enormous object at incredible speed or if there were some massive explosion like a blast from the "Death Star". If the Moon was so weak we would be able to see the scars of the impactor that caused the fissures.
Just so everyone knows creating a crater even 5km in diameter isn't enough to break the Moon, alter it's orbit or anything that could affect it (or us) in a negative way.
The Moon is 3,474km in diameter a 5km crater would be like you getting hit with a BB. It might hurt a bit but you're not going to fall apart.
Heck the Earth was hit by a body around the size of Mars and we're still here. (That's how the Moon came to be)
soulshroud here's something you should know the moon gets farther from the earth every day and it is considerably farther now then when the astronauts landed on the moon so a few millimeters one way or the other won't destroy the earth. The only way we would really have to worry is if there was a MASSIVE impact the fractured the moon in to very large pieces that fell to earth or that caused the moons orbit to decay to a point where the entire moon crashed to the earth. With current technology the only way that might be possible is if a large number of high-yield nuclear weapons were launched at the moon. In other words not bloody likely. It would be more likely for a very large asteroid to strike the moon and cause this.
~Xzavier~
RE:"Heck the Earth was hit by a body around the size of Mars and we're still here. (That's how the Moon came to be)"
I believe that is only a theory of other three or four, probably the most adviced by scientist; Maybe with the geological similarities with those on Earth minerals and the 50% Oxygen composition of the Moon may bring light to the discussion of how came to be, yet is not a concrete assertion for you to respond as a default origin, To say it is how the moon came to be is to discard other possibilities and make this theory a factible datum( so it wouldn't be a theory but a documented reality). Although I think this investigation taking place in the future will help determine the validity and documentation to support this theory you brought in discussion.
As for the rest I agree with few responses: I don't think it can't harm the celestial body, that only works with more smaller cosmic junk in space as well with distance and speed to deviate the course of trayectory, it would take more than that to influence a shift in rotation around our planet, And i think they (scientist involved) know way more about us and would consider that "con" possibilities.
"Maybe is a disrespectful act for the 'wicca' practitioners, watching their beloved moon get pinched."
Yes it's a theory but it's the most accepted. The same with the Big Bang Theory..it's a theory but accepted. They both have issues. The collision theory, when compared to the other lunar origin theories, has the fewest "problems" and the most data (computer and otherwise) so having it as a default theory would be appropriate considering the thread is about impacts.
Of course I could get super technical and say that the Moon was formed by collision and leave it at that. From what we know of the universe that's very much reality. Now whether it was formed by something hitting Earth or by the collision and accumulation of countless particles of dust and meteors we don't know 100% but collision was involved nonetheless :) lol
But the origin of the Moon isn't the focus here so I'll be quiet.
Don't worry it has validity here, given that: NASA, MOON, ET's, UFO,s are main nouns in the subject, and "bombing" the course of action/value. Partly this "digging" will help conclude and reaffirm what scientist think is the best theory of the Moon's creation as well, Since it said that the Moon hold alot of Earth's charasteristics in base of minerals and oxygen in their composition, it might develope "certain possibilities" of life if there is water below ice-caps, this as well as other orbiting studies fond with the 'Bombing' experiment will help broaden many horizons. It may also be another thing and we thing it is for that 'scientific fines', you never know what is really happening when the US dig their hands on things.
About the comment, I only say that because its something I learned in Advanced Statistics =S when one speak must be careful what one use, because it may bring false identification on others ears, furthermore the spread of false information, thus when someone say "That is written in every biology book" you must read every biology book in the world to hold validity in your words. Its something that slightly bothers me but i understand your reasoning behind the post.
You're right and I do have a tendency to "talk" as though the reader either knows what I know or at least understands which is hard core fact and which is theory..so my bad.
I am very interested in what this mission will show. I would prefer however, to focus on things like mining the Moon for deuterium but looking for ice might turn out to be just as valuable.
This collision is supposed to produce around 390 tons of ejecta, correct? One thing that I haven't looked into is if there's a possibility of throwing off/ creating dangerous micrometeorites. That would be the only actual dangerous thing, I can see, relating to this study.
A bit of trivia: The Moon's total atmosphere weighs less than 10 tons.
Deuterium? as source, interesting viewpoint: As being part of the Earth and experiencing one of the major concerns of our times- the shift of our energy crisis, I can say there is a reason on looking for such elements, Helium 3 is an excellent source for fuel: its clean, potential, un-polluting, little to no radioactivity hazard; very rare on our planet but very abundant in the Moon. It could roughly be the 21 century cure for a major crisis and the most reasonable and fast in the market with present technology< I'd say.
The mining could in fact be for those fines, Knowing the interest of the US and the ability to search for other reliable source this could be in fact the main reason of the studies, but why polar caps then?...
As for micrometeorites, it would not harm us; little metals and dust particles, it will just vanish in space, and some maybe shower the atmosphere if its properly conducted I conclude, They wouldn't put at risk a mega suit if something occurs here on Earth, or probably execute it in the other side of the moon so the gravity of the moon attracts it in default.
Now I'm only going off what I heard but if I remember correctly there is enough He3 on the Moon to help power the Earth for around 1,000 years. I know several nuclear power plants in Canada use natural sources in their power production. And in Russia there is an He3-He3 reaction study on-going.
As for micrometeorites I wasn't referring to any damage to the Earth (remember I'm a scientist, I know they pose zero risk down here) but the possibility of damage to satellites. A well placed bit could cause a lot of damage. I would imagine NASA thought of this and the fact that most of the ejecta would be very small and that most of our satellites are many thousands of miles away from the Moon, but still it's a thought. Like I said it would be the only actual possibility for harm posed by this experiment out of the ones raised in the thread.
To play devils advocate if I may and to bring in ET's. Several years ago while listening to "Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell" I heard a few people talking about "crystal structures" on the far-side of the Moon. These structures supposedly were geometric in shape and of course weren't built by us. The impactor will be hitting the far-side of the Moon. It wouldn't be hard to imagine using this as a cover story to destroy proof of alien life.
Like I said, devils advocate :) lol
i really do not know what to say here. i do not like the idea at all there is so much wrong here on earth why spend all that money to put a crater in the moon i just think some priorities are out of place but that is besides the point my main point being if this is allowed to happen where is it going to stop?
I bet the conspiracy hacks, conjured new theories relating to their " we never went to the moon." I bet we will soon hear " They are bombarding the moon to later explain why the flag is gone." When are we going back to the moon?
We can't go to the moon Dabz, Aliens are jelouse about human touching their site..So now we are bombarding their city '5km' to make sure they never live again =P
One small additional fact, this impactor will only produce 317 metric tons of debris. That's hardly enough to create a 500 foot wide crater let alone a "5km wide deep" crater. It's rather funny.
See thats a rape right there..poor aliens what have they done to deserve it.. first Iraqui for oil now aliens for He3 =P
I just wonder what are the chance that this He3 source came to be required and available for the technology and times we came to need it, I meen i know it has always being there in the moon, but the probability of having the technology to properly extract it and use it at such required time. Makes it look like programmed, predestined, wouldn't you agree?< i know who wouldn't haha..
Im already into spectulating creative was to mine, and ship the minerals in astroids.
Xzavier
What kind of a scientist are you?
Speaking into the general thread:
I don't know about this experiment but there is nothing anyone can do. If they want to do something on the moon or to it, they will do so. After the WMAP and some other things I have read about happening in space and programs NASA is dealing with I am not surprised that they would be doing something like this. I would like to know the full true reason. NASA and the government always seem to have cover stories and the real truth comes out generally by accident and is usually thought of as some conspiracy theory. I am not too fond of science because it is only viable in each time period. One hundred years from now they will be saying something else and how wrong certain theories were of some scientist or other.
Xzavier,
While it is the current reigning theory that the moon was formed when a large meteor or other object struck the Earth with such force that it ripped enough mantle material from the Earth and into orbit so as to form the moon. Yet I find this theory fatally flawed given the simple fact that the moon's orbit is almost perfectly circular and not elliptical.
For something so massive and traveling at such velocity as to impact the Earth and still retain enough interia to continue on back into space carrying with it massive amounts of materials from Earth thousands of miles into space, the orbit such material would have settled into would most certainly NOT have been a uniformly circular one such as the moon possesses. Instead, the orbit would have been elliptical... if not very highly so!
When this supposed glancing collision occurred and billions of tons of Earth materials were catapulted into space (not unlike what happens in pool when a cue ball strikes a glancing blow against another billiard ball), all such material would have continued on into space until Earth's gravity slowed and turned the material around and back toward Earth. As the material approached Earth, it would accelerate toward and then past Earth until again Earth's gravity slowed it all and turned all such again back towards Earth... and on and on ad infinitum. This is what an elliptical orbit is, after all. And, unfortunately for those who champion this theory, it is an indisputable fact that unlike so many other "moons" (natural satellites) in this solar system alone, our Moon's orbit is not elliptical at all but instead almost perfectly and symetrically ... circular.
- Upir'
With the addendum that the Moon is slowly pulling away from Earth... also a known fact.
I believe in life on other planets; I want to believe that there are visitors among us, visitors that look over our shoulder and will intervene if we get too far.
But until proven so, there is all speculation... but I do not believe that us bombing the Moon will have some sort of "political" effects on the Universal Congregation... if there is life on Moon, if there are aliens around us and watching us, maybe the bombs will never detonate... or, maybe they will be annihilated...
There are some who said that the first words of Neil Armstrong were in fact "Who the Hell stepped on the moon before me?"...
I specialize in theoretical physics but I've done a lot of work with the Federation of American Scientists, in astrophysics, bio-mechanics and research for multiple companies and think tanks on various projects such as quantum field manipulation and futurism.
To the person who said they weren't a fan of science, what other option is there? Other ways of understanding the world around us are either totally faith based or rely on personal understanding with little to no real empirical (or objective) evidence. True over time science has changed but it only changes as our understanding grows. Not to mention the fact that real science as it has come to be has only existed for around 300 years. Newton was as relevant then as he is today.
In regard to the Moon's origin. The fact that it is indeed moving away from the Earth gives credence to it being formed from the Earth. The orbit of the Moon one might say is "perfect" to produce synchronous orbit, and the other things that seem "coincidental", but that can't be argued against the impact origin theory. The Earth itself seems to defy mathematics/probability as does life and yet here we are on this ball perfectly suited for the survival and creation (over time) of billions of diverse species.
The idea that matter from the impact would go back and forth for infinity isn't correct at all. One, the Moon-Earth system has had around 3 billion years to settle, coalesce, fling debris out etc. two, the area between the Earth and Moon isn't free of matter, there are still clouds of debris.
A "yo-yo" effect of gravity cannot exist when there are two objects of different mass set in a solar system of larger and smaller objects as well. (Remember the orbits of the planets are derived not just from their respective masses and speeds but also by the other planets) In a two-body system of different mass there are only 3 possible outcomes 1) Steady or Elliptical orbit, 2) Collision, 3) One or both objects being flung out of the system. In this case we have a near perfect and steady orbit with the Moon moving away from the Earth at a known rate with an known rate of orbital decay (resulting in the Moon being flung into space many many years from now).
The study of gravitation and orbit is extremely complex and doesn't always follow what would seem to be "common sense" or even logic. In fact it is almost impossible to fully predict the movement of a 3 body system and as I said earlier we're dealing not just with the Earth and Moon but also with the Sun, Jupiter, Venus and Mars as they all had and continue to have a role in the Earth-Moon system.
As time goes by we may well discover that this particular theory of the Moon's origin isn't correct however, currently it's the best we have. I assure you that problems of the Moons orbit have been looked at and although there are still some issues they aren't based on a yo-yo effect. Computer modeling clearly shows the formation of a new Moon within weeks of a collision and the Earths wobble established. After a few years the Moon is nearly fully formed and the Earth-Moon system (similar to how it is today) created.
Xzavier, are you meaning to say that the aliens are not deliberately moving the moon away from us in hopes to steal it for themselves?
I get the feel the "bombing" will come and go with no intergalactic war. Why? Because it is not a bombing and there is no proof of aliens on the moon.
Xzavier,
I think you misunderstood my attempt to describe in layman's terms how ejected material from the theorized glancing-blow collision would have created a near-perpetual elliptical orbit of that material. And such orbits are examples of "free-fall" of material that would continue so long as gravitational forces exist maintaining such.
Whether we speak of the Earth's orbit around the Sun, the Sun's orbit around the Shapley Center (galactic hub)... or the moon's orbit around the Earth... these are stable orbital relationships that continue into relative infiinity. And that was exactly what I was describing regarding what would have happened had the Earth been struck a glancing blow by a large meteor or other object and had much of its mantle material first thrown into space and then been pulled back by the Earth's gravity into what would have to have been an elliptical orbit given the the initial trajectory of such material and the subsequent influence of the Earth's gravity on such.
Thus, had such an event actually happened, the moon's orbit would have been and remained an elliptical one... which it so very obviously is not.
You also seem to hint at an opinion that elliptical orbits are not stable and that after millions of years an ellipctical orbit would naturally become a symetrically circular one. This is simply not true unless outside forces such as drag (e.g., atmospheric braking) or other gravitational influences were introduced into the orbital paradigm. Without such outside forces, an elliptical orbit is as stable as a circular one and would continue into infinity as we already witness given the many highly elliptical orbits of comets and other astronomical objects in our immediate solar neighborhood.
- Upir'
Interesting video pertaining to the subject:
http://www.captionater.com/images/daily/2008-04-18.jpg
Hhe when, I was in Architecture, I wanted to start at space architecture but was to expensive and only NASA's schools had the degree, so I was at architecture and planning to take the master in space architecture, and had this ideas of making bases around craters and many other awesome ideas..Now I see Aliens stole ma idea...Betchez lol
If they do bomb the moon, I hope they don't shift its orbit, or it may drift off into space or spiral into our planet. This would be our armageddon either way, being that the moon is what creates the tides and whatnot. It supports life here and if it were to vanish, we'd have a tough time for sure.
As for that photo in the poster's message above, that alien is no longer a concern, so perhaps NASA needed to switch agendas to the next most important thing. :)
I was just Reminded of the unofficial company that was gearing to project
Logos, or Icons on the moons visible surface with lasers.
Rumor had it that Pepsi was actually funding the project with potential for " dibs'" on a bill board.
Im sorry the picture was meant for another thread in the sandbox area, I think i didn't copy/paste the link properly..
this is the video i was referring in my last post:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2mY2bbaumI
who cares what NASA does.....we can always have Bruce Willis and his drill team go and defuse the situation and drill for cheese,oil,water,HAHAHA
Upir- You're free to think what you wish but there really isn't any proof to suggest that orbits must keep within an elliptical state or what you bring up a matter of realistic theory in this case. Like I've said I'm not just some blow joe off the street I can assure you the orbit of the Moon falls within accepted science. This theory has been in the works for over 25 years and mathematical and computer models clearly show that the way things are now fits.
The biggest possible "death nail" difficulties with the giant impact theory have nothing to do with orbit but with mineral proportions.
On the topic of aliens I seriously doubt any are on the Moon be it "ET" like creatures or bacteria. We've studied the Moon extensively with visual observations, radar, lasers and satellite mapping. If there was something there (at least something that could attack Earth) we would have known about it sometime ago.
I'd also like to assure everyone that NASA, the US Military, even the whole of human power/technology/weapons etc. couldn't destroy the Moon or push it near/far whatsoever.
I guess the valid question is why haven't we returned to the moon?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAp2Ni9frJE
Xzavier,
Let's try to stick to the question at hand and the facts of such as any true scientist ought. After all, attempting to vindicate one's views through an appeal to one's education and experience is hardly scientific and certainly not very convincing.
Getting back to those facts, if I may ...
Regarding elliptical orbits remaining such, the Earth's own stable elliptical orbit around the sun is only one of almost countless observable examples in our galaxy alone that provide the incontrovertible proof for my statement. Again, there is absolutely nothing inherently unstable about elliptical orbits, Xzavier, and nothing that would tend to have them become circular over time.
As for the computer models you mentioned, I've seen them... and found them the result of very sloppy science given that almost half of the programming parameters needed for such a computer model are entirely... unknown.
We have absolutely no idea today of this phantom object's mass, its velocity, its composition, its claimed angle of "attack" (the angle relative to the Earth at which it struck), or anything else about it. In fact, we've never found any empirical evidence for its existence. So without any such information, any computer model claiming to represent and mathematically quantify and characterize such a phantom "object" is going to be the result of complete speculation regarding same. This makes whatever conclusions arrived at by such a computer model entirely spurious and speculative.
And speculation is not science, Xzavier... regardless whether forwarded by scientists or any "blow joe off the street."
- Upir'
You have to remembers that this was at earths "early" years around the major collisions, I don't go concretely on a theory but is fuzzy when everything is near the creation of a celestial body, the moon being formed 4.25 billion years ago and the Earth several years back.
The pros that hold the hypothesis are:
"The Earth has a large iron core, but the moon does not. This is because Earth's iron had already drained into the core by the time the giant impact happened. Therefore, the debris blown out of both Earth and the impactor came from their iron-depleted, rocky mantles. The iron core of the impactor melted on impact and merged with the iron core of Earth, according to computer models.
Earth has a mean density of 5.5 grams/cubic centimeter, but the moon has a density of only 3.3 g/cc. The reason is the same, that the moon lacks iron.
The moon has exactly the same oxygen isotope composition as the Earth, whereas Mars rocks and meteorites from other parts of the solar system have different oxygen isotope compositions. This shows that the moon formed form material formed in Earth's neighborhood.
If a theory about lunar origin calls for an evolutionary process, it has a hard time explaining why other planets do not have similar moons. (Only Pluto has a moon that is an appreciable fraction of its own size.) Our giant impact hypothesis had the advantage of invoking a stochastic catastrophic event that might happen only to one or two planets out of nine."
I could say probably the moon was created of the same remaining cosmic debris around the Earths after its creation, rather than saying something barely destroy the planet before properly springing or cooling, said that I think it wouldve have some serious mark on the planet's rotation or something.. if the hypothesis is the correct one, maybe thats why we have a different axis or minor slope.
Revenous,
I am well aware of the evidences forwarded for the theory that the moon possesses apparently similar and, occasionally, even identical composition to that of Earth. I am also aware of its lack of an iron core. However, this is hardly sufficient by itself to support the phantom-object collision theory.
As for the moon having no iron core, there is far stronger evidence to suggest that the moon might not possess much of anything at all at its core.
As I had occasion to personally verify with James Lovell (Apollo 8 and 13) in personal conversation with him, during the Apollo missions where we actually landed on the moon and after the return of the lunar module to the command module, the lunar module was jettisoned thereafter and fell to the lunar surface. Upon impacting the lunar surface, the seismometers left by the astronauts recorded the impact, which was expected. What was entirely not expected was the fact that the impact waves produced from the impact of the lunar module reverberated on the lunar surface for over 3 hours thereafter. After collision with such a puny little object as the lunar module, the moon literally rang like a gong for more than 3 hours! Even without an iron core, a planetoid the size of the moon still would not have vibrated for more than a few minutes at most, except there were ... no core of any kind at all.
After he verified this as entirely accurate, I asked Mr. Lovell why this might have occurred. He gave me a small smile for a moment and then replied, "It is quite the mystery, isn't it?" He would say nothing further on the matter.
There is much regarding the moon that is astounding and confusing. While the moon supposedly has little to no iron, yet the Apollo missions reported the discovery of magnetic anomalies in various lunar areas that indicated large quantities of magnetic metals beneath the surface of sufficient magnetism as to register from their orbiting spacecraft. Might this be... iron? We don't know.
The one thing we do know is that the moon is an amazing anomaly in our solar system. And its mysteries have only begun to be discovered... much less understood.
- Upir'
A hollow Moon? I've heard everything now lol. Lovell or not. The Moon has "moon-quakes" and they have been studied, results, the Moon is solid. If the Moon had such a void in it's core as to "ring like a gong" from the lunar lander then it would have crumbled when the multiple "Mt. Everest's" hit it (aka mile wide+ asteroids etc)
I never said elliptical orbits were inherently unstable even though they can be. Depending on how elliptical they are such an orbit can become exceedingly unstable. I'm not going to say anything else on the Moons orbit because it is what it is and there is no proof that it should be something else nor is there any proof that collisions can only create elliptical orbits and no proof whatsoever that matter bounces back and forth in the way you described in the context of celestial bodies.
Upir and Xzavier, I am very much enjoying your heated debate and learning from both sides. It's very interesting. I'm also, very glad with everyone else's responses.
But another one of my questions went unanswered.
Do you think 'the civilization' is INDEED 'ET's' or is Russia being REALLY secretive about what they know about the moon? Or as Xzavier said, there's nothing at all, except for the moon itself?
bloodmother12208- I'm glad you have enjoyed Upir's and my discussion, I only hope he's enjoyed them as well lol.
One of the first jobs I ever had was working for a private think tank that dealt with things like global security which did involve projects for militarizing space etc. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Russia has been and continues to be extremely secretive about the Moon then again so does the US. From what I know and what I believe there's little chance of any sort of secret base or equipment on the Moon left by humans (of any country) that isn't already common knowledge.
Of course I can't provide a document signed by every member of the KGB attesting to that but that's only because, well, such a document doesn't exist lol.
As Upir' said the Moon is a very mysterious place and until we place more people and equipment on the Moon our knowledge base will remain rather small.
I'm not saying there IS nothing alien or human on the Moon that we don't know about but I really doubt it. I will say however that the far side of the Moon (where this "bomb" will be going) would be the perfect location for any sort of secret base, city, equipment etc. The far side of the Moon offers not only visual darkness but also radio darkness, meaning it's pretty much impossible for us to see, learn, hear, know anything about that part of the Moon without either going there or having a satellite to relay information.
In regard to the "news" article what they're claiming, violations of law, militarizing space, using weapons etc NONE of that applies to the mission they're referring to. This isn't a weapon at all and we've slammed things into other celestial bodies before, generally with much acclaim. This "news" article and in my opinion the "news" group itself isn't news at all but far-flung exaggerations, hype and opinions just to sell papers.
Xzavier, sorry for putting words in your mouth.
I honestly, see nothing wrong with the mission. Although, if we do somehow colonize the moon in the future. I do hope the government has strict,rules, and regulations about the problems we face here.
Pollution,violence,and etc. Although, none of that can be maintained under a 'policy' forever'. Hopefully, mankind,doesn't have to worry about past mistakes for AWHILE, and not look like an ignorant species that can't benefit from past history.
I hope I'm making at least a little sense.
As for aliens,ET's, and etc.
Like I have said, "There is NO possible way, we are the ONLY life in the universe, or even in our own galaxy."
But I don't know about something/someone being so close.
In Logistics, the moon is the best area to study Earth from a "safe" place, if the case is of ET's or UFO's around, And as ~Xzavier~ said the farside of the Moon is the most unknown zone in the moon, all in all I wouldn't discard possibilities of a coverup between all explorers of Moon missions abput anything pertaining to this, still we haven't visited the Moon again and we have gone way further in space the past 10 years, so there is more there that meets the eye, as well as in Mars, And if there are aliens in the 'Farside' and we are drilling it looks like we are getting ourselves in another conflict =D.
If there's intelligent life on the Moon one might imagine they'd have the technology to know what's going on down here and they'd know about this mission. One would also hope that if our little thud disturbs them they wont be so cavalier as we are when it comes to armed conflict.
Hehehe maybe, We will see what's goes on when the time comes, maybe they know and they are sending an equivalent to us too. i just don't get the exageration of drilling 5km for study purposes; The study being against spacial law, All that ejecta, debree and then what? send probes to scavange for water? and in the 'farside' of the moon? couldn't they do it in a more subtle way? perhaps an actual drilling machine like those we use here to make subterranean lines for trains and subways, but way bigger and or better?... makes you think-.
Well from the facts (an impactor creating 317 metric tons of debris, not a drill or anything like that) it's clear the article is nothing more than "tabloid poo" to use a technical term :) This article, while perhaps entertaining, is pretty much just science fiction set in a fictional world. It's hard to find anything in it that's truth except that their spelling is correct, NASA is sending something to the Moon and that it's illegal to militarize space. Again the reality has nothing to do with the military or weapons.
NASA is trying to uncover water, not blow it into the sky. By hitting the Moon it will hopefully remove several vertical feet of dust and reveal ice. Plain and simple. Not everything the government does is some cover-up, that's just absurd.
You won't be laughing when Elvis Presley comes back to visit the earth when the bomb is launched.
(Maybe Michael Jackson didn't die, he's the leader of 'the colony',lol)
Anyways, maybe there's nothing and it's more propaganda.
evilkitty
going back aways you said "when will this end"
i very much hope it never does...when the human race stops reaching out, exploring, and moving beyond its cradle, it would just like a human baby stuck in its cradle eventually outgrow it ...and die.
there is much knowlege to be had and much hope for the future if we dont fall into some medieval mind set ie: "god doesnt want us to move into space, otherwise we could breath vacumn".
as for the money spent...the apollo program was billions of dollars that we have throw into the toilet of johnsons great society (which seems to have made matter worse in the inner city...but i digress).
i teach my students (im a physics teacher) about all that was gained from apollo...not just moon rocks, but amazing technology...without the moon program we prolly wouldnt have desktop computers, digital watches, calculators, ipods, teflon, or any number of other things we use every day and take for granted.
ok...sorry folk...just had my rant for the day...
carry on
~Wolf~
Wolf- You are 100% correct. The technology we, the private and free citisens of not just America but the world, have gained from NASA and their programmes is immense! Without things like going to the Moon, slamming things into the Moon and asteroids, and even the satellites we've lots going to Mars we would be today where we were in 1979.
NASA, ESA, etc. is a part of modern society and one of the few parts of government(s) that gives us all wonderful and at times awe inspiring technologies. "NASA making life better since 1958!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3LI5xnLnbU&feature=related
Xzavier -
I've been out of town and, thus, haven't been able to respond until now.
While vibrations currently characterized as moonquakes do exist, yet even here we learn that many such last for 10 minutes or more at a time. As reported at NASA's own website, Dr. Clive Neal has stated, in fact, that during such the entire moon "rang like a bell", thus, confirming the earlier Apollo observations when the tiny (by comparison) lunar module impacted the lunar surface each time during each of the successful Apollo missions.
Thus the obvious question: Are these actually moonquakes, or meteorite strikes that... like the lunar module impacts... cause the moon to vibrate due to its lack of a core and thus resemble the quakes here on Earth? Or are they something else entirely that, again, are mistaken for "quakes"?
Whether the moon is hollow or has no core, or if there is some other explanation, the fact remains that a planetoid the size of the moon ought not to ring "...like a bell" anytime something happens to collide with it or cause vibrations within it. And yet... this is what happens.
I'm not attempting to pin the answer down to the moon being hollow, Xzavier; those were your words, not mine. But to simply brush aside the possibility simply because of "quakes" which may or may not be any such at all seems very premature.
Again... for the moon to "ring like a gong" upon impact with our own little lunar module and also to "ring like a bell" whenever anything else causes vibrations thereon ... or in ... is quite striking evidence that SOMETHING is not quite as it seems with the moon.
And that "something" is what I hope we eventually are able to discover should we actually return to the moon someday.
- Upir'
So as to better parry an obvious rebuttal, while Dr. Neal explains away the prolonged shallow "moonquakes" by stating that this is the result of the lack of water on the moon (sidenote: do we not now suspect the moon of having sub-lunar water?), thus causing the moon to ring on and on like a tuning fork, yet this provides little explanation given that a tuning fork, while solid (as the moon is claimed to be) vibrates specifically due to the open space present between the tines of that fork. Were you to hit a wooden ball or a solid ball of any material whether metal or styrofoam even, no such lasting vibrations would be present. However, were such a ball to contain an empty space within by which such lasting vibrations could occur, the results would more closely resemble those recorded on the moon.
Further, while Dr. Neal stated that the shallow "moonquakes" lasted "... more than 10 minutes", yet the graph on the right (found at the above-given website provided in my last entry) shows the vibrations lasting for at least an hour (each time period between the "tick" marks is given to represent "10 min"). As the graph ends while the vibrations are still being recorded (on LPX and LPY, especially), we are not given to know just how long the vibrations continued to be recorded.
Also, in that same graph, notice that... as only would be expected with a sudden impact... the vibrations all start with a sudden explosive surge of vibration and then dissipate slowly thereafter. As we all know... actual geologic seismic activity does not act in this manner at all! True seismic quakes are usually generated continuously as the internal geologic workings move and shift inside the planet. This is why you often find quake vibrations starting small and growing more and more violent... then receding away. Yet in the graph provided, we find near-identical readings as would be found were we to attach a seismometer (or equivalent device) to a tuning fork or a bell, and then hit same with a metal hammer.
This is exactly my point... these "moonquakes" do not seem to be any such at all, but instead sudden impacts that then cause the moon to "ring like a gong" for over an hour at a time... even when the impacts are very small.
For a better graph as well as a side-by-side comparison of the vibrations experienced both in what they call "meteroid impacts" and what they call "moonquakes"... click here: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2004/pdf/2093.pdf. Here you will observe exactly what I stated previously... there is absolutely no difference between the meteroid impact vibration signature and that of what they call "moonquakes." In every case, there is a sudden "explosion" of vibration that then ... dissipates thereafter. This would seem to discredit the characterization of "moonquakes" as such; they are all impacts or other as-yet-unknown sudden strikes occurring either on the surface or inside the moon somewhere.
As Dr. Neal admitted, they have no idea where on or inside the moon these "quakes" occurred given that the Apollo seismometers were only placed in a few areas relatively close to one another that did not permit them successful triangulation of the "quake" sources. I would also imagine that, given the relatively primitive technology of the 1960's would also not lend itself to having the Apollo seismometers be especially accurate or reliable instrumentation for any such task, either.
- Upir'
You said the Moon may be hollow not I. I also didn't read where it said the lander caused these quakes. The answers given by the NASA headline, 2006 fit with accepted science and gave no credence to a hollow Moon or a large quake caused by something the size of a car.
Tidal quakes are something that can last quite some time. And quakes can last for 10 minutes or more, including here on Earth.
Are you by chance an expert in geology or planetary formation? You denounce the possibility of a collision because the Moons orbit isn't elliptical, you say that matter would have (in essence) floated back and forth in a yo-yo like manor (something that has no evidence at all) and you at least proclaim the real possibility of a hollow Moon, regardless of whether you yourself believe it. I'm just wondering if this point of view is based on expertise or your own theories based upon personal opinion?
As for your fork and ball analogy it's a matter of density not exactly large empty spaces. The Moon is less dense than the Earth so it would preform in a different way, that doesn't mean there are massive hollows in it. Heck the Earth has tons of empty spaces and yet usually quakes die rather quickly. Depending on the density and makeup of an object it can act in a "ringing" fashion but be nice and solid. Not to forget either that the reason a tuning fork rings isn't just because of spaces between prongs.
Have you not considered that the phrase "like a bell/gong" might not be an exact representation but a metaphor?
Anyway's the discussion of a core-less Moon is getting rather boring to me so I won't be replying to the subject any more. Anything dealing with ETs UFOs, the mission etc (as the thread is about) I'd be more than willing to discuss further.
I think this is just another step in the wrong direction. I dont really believe that any reason is good enought to bomb the moon. Just pure arrogance if you ask me. We have damaged earth with our stupidity and now we are going to move onto the moon. Mankind cannot help itself gotta go and destroy anything.
What right have we got to bomb another plant. We do not own it. Yes I believe we need to explore and search other plants not just to see if there are other life forms beside humans but also to see if the human race can live on other plants.
I am sure there are other means to find out then to bomb the moon thats a lame excuse.
I dont think the fact that this event may or may not cause harm to the moon is relevant. The human race cannot help itself. Once we do something once we keep doing it til it is to late and the damage we have done is unrepairable or takes billions of years. Yes explore all they want. But go only that far. Let nature take it cause in regards to the moon being hit by astroids etc.
I remember not long ago everyone kicked up a stink because the French tried to create a black hole here on earth. So it is alright to do experiments off the plant but not here. No one knows what the outcome of either of these can cause yet we say yes to one and no to another.
Folks we are NOT bombing the Moon!! There's got to be at least 20 posts attesting to that fact. Read a few replies here and there or better yet research the validity of the article.
NASA is removing 2 large dump trucks worth of material to see if there is water on the Moon. Two dump trucks on the far side of a moon that's 3,474km in diameter!
Why are we looking for water? Because 1) Water is the key to life. If the Moon has water it may hold microscopic life which may help prove parts of evolution and give us insight into how we became. 2) If the Moon has the same proportion of water in it's rocks as the Earth does it may help us understand how the Moon formed. 3) If there is a large amount of water on the Moon it would make human colonization much much easier. 4) In the course of this mission we may find/ create new technologies that help life on Earth, such as the hundreds of inventions already developed.
Why would we NEED to colonize space? Because this planet will not last forever, not because of us but because of natural disasters and natural planetary decay.
Come on this is just silly, bombing the Moon, "destroying" another world, evil government, evil humans, arrogant blah blah. Some of those things may be correct some of the time but not this time.
Am I the only person who supports NASA these days? haha
Elliptical orbits are not the only outcome of a collision, period. If you think that then you have fully discredited yourself and shown a gross misunderstanding physics, math and high school geometry.
As for attempts of self-aggrandizement I haven't been trying to do that at all. It was a legitimate question to you. You make statements with no substantiation that a particular education would provide and the evidences you do give (the 2 links) only say "hey we have a mystery here" not that the Moon lacks a core, couldn't have been formed by collision or that the seismic findings declare anything other than, 'we need to do more research'.
Assumptions are very dangerous.
With regards to my boredom it was only caused by your repetition of an observation and an opinion, the observation not backing up the opinion. If you can provide more hard debate against a collision origin other than "the only way it could have happened is if the Moon had an elliptical orbit" (again which has no basis in reality) then I'd be much more interested in further discussion.
ET's interests me more in this thread simply because that's a large portion of the subject.
One last thing, not that I discount the findings and/or claims of the 2-3 experts you've cited, but 2-3 experts don't make a fact. Looking at a more recent controversy, there have been plenty of experts saying global warming is caused by man, or not caused by man, or caused by nature etc but that doesn't mean a hard fact either way. You can find "proof" of anything with a few experts signing on. Just a side note :)
One last thing. I seem to have gotten off on a bad tangent and away from specifics when it comes to facts.
The Moons orbit is NOT circular, it is elliptical. In fact it's orbital eccentricity (away from perfectly circular) produces an orbit with up to 19,000km in difference.
"Why does the Moon move on a circular orbit?
It's orbit is actually slightly elliptical. Perfectly circular orbits are almost impossible due to gravitational perturbations between the planets. The 'eccentricity' of a perfect circle is 0.00 and for the Moon's orbit, this ratio between its 'major' and 'minor' axis difference ( major-minor/major) is only 0.05...5%. Since the average Earth-Moon distance is about 384,000 km, this means that there is only a difference of about 0.05x384,000 = 19,200 km between its major and minor axis.
As I said, exactly circular orbits would be expected to be the exception when you consider that there are an infinite number of other 'non-circular' orbits compared to only one kind of pure circular orbit ( with an eccentricity of exactly 0.0000). In fact, in practical terms, what one calls 'circular' is actually a matter of how accurate you mean. In an exact definition, the lunar orbit is close to circular, but is actually elliptical.
Physically-speaking, elliptical orbits are noted for the changing speed of the orbiting body as it comes close too, and far from, its primary body. When you have satellites close-in like the Moon or the satellites of Jupiter and Saturn, the primary body can cause tidal dissipation in the satellite by actually deforming the satellite. This causes a breaking effect on the satellite, rendering the orbit more circular as time goes on. It also causes the satellites rotation and revolution periods to get locked into synchrony. Circular orbits are prevalent among the closest satellites orbiting a planet, with more elliptical ones in the outer satellites where this tidal effect is less effective."
From: http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q2607.html
Now, like I said, elliptical orbits are not the ONLY outcome of a collision but, they are usually. The Moon was formed by collision some 4.53 billion years ago, it's orbit may well have been highly eccentric. Over the ~4,530 Million years!~ since, because of the tidal breaking effect, it's orbit has grown more and more circular.
"Lacking a substantial iron core" means it lacks a large iron core, not that it lacks a core at all.
According to you "there is far stronger evidence to suggest that the moon might not possess much of anything at all at its core."
Where is this evidence? A core of titanium is still a solid core even though titanium is not as substantial (a word used to describe weight) as iron.
The fission, capture and co-formation theories of the Moons origins all have a major flaw. After a lot of study and number crunching all 3 of those theories failed. Only the collision theory can accurately account for the unusually high angular momentum of the Earth-Moon system.
Quick and easy reads on the origins of the Moon can be found here:
http://www.psi.edu/projects/moon/moon.html
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/moon_making_010815-1.html
This is a bit of a longer read and doesn't include the more recent research but it does give a lot of nice info.
http://www.xtec.es/recursos/astronom/moon/camerone.htm
Again you have responded not with logical rebuttal or factual counter. Instead, the best you can do is to attribute to me ridiculous statements that I never made.
I never once stated nor suggested that all collisions result in elliptical orbits. I stated that the glancing-blow collision of the type put forward in the moon-creation theory you championed here would have resulted in just such an elliptical orbit and for the reasons I have twice given in some detail... and to which I notice you have never rebutted based on the facts provided in those actual statements.
As for your criticism of "no substantiation," how ironic you should attempt such of me when it was I who have provided at least two hyperlinks, one from NASA's own website and the other, the actual report on moon "quakes" in .pdf format in substantiation of my views... both of which provide strong evidence of my initial claims of the moon's extreme accoustical characteristics that support my theory.
For your part, on the other hand, all I've seen from you are claims of your vaunted education and employment in an important "think tank." Yet all you have offered here is a regurgitation of a theory you saw on the Discovery Channel (I saw it to... together with the computer model you mentioned) developed by others. That and the ad hominem and "strawman" fallacy attacks of my own observations are all you have offered to this discussion. And yet, the facts as contained in both the official report on moon "quakes" and the statements and observations of the astronauts and scientists involved agree with my own conclusions.
As this is all you have forwarded to this discussion and all you seem able to bring to the table here, I shall trouble you no further. My statements, the reasoning for same, and the official reports and records backing them up are now available herein for the perusal of all who might be interested. I have nothing further to say on the subject.
- Upir'
While I was composing my last post, you were obviously composing the most recent one of your own, as well.
It was very good to see you provide an argument for your point of view that didn't completely misrepresent my own in the process. Your only misrepresentation was in stating that I had declared the moon's orbit to be perfectly circular, which I did not. There is no known planet whose orbit is PERFECTLY circular... not even the Earth's. However, the Earth's orbit is more elliptical than the moon's. As the quote you provided from astronomycafe.com affirmed, the moon's orbit is almost perfectly circular... but not quite. That was exactly what I had said all along.
You are in error regarding your statement that the Earth-moon angular momentum can only be explained by the collision-creation theory. This is not true at all. The only accurate statement that can be made regarding the relationship between the angular momentum of the Earth-moon system and the theories of the moon's creation is that such invalidates an earlier theory that the moon somehow "spun" off of the Earth: "This idea would produce a moon similar to Earth's mantle, but it failed when analysis of the total angular momentum and energy involved indicated that the present Earth-moon system could not form in this way."
http://www.psi.edu/projects/moon/moon.html
However, there is nothing in this angular momentum that proves the collision theory as the only possible one. But, hey... it's great to at least have some factual feedback coming from you! Of course, nothing you have provided counters my original argument... one which I have presented to actual scientists on this very topic and with which they conceded was at least... noteworthy.
- Upir'
I quoted you word for word.
You might want to re-read the post above yours.
A glancing blow, sure it can form an elliptical orbit, over time however it's eccentricity may decrease becoming more and more circular. Orbits rarely remain unchanged.
Of course the collision theory isn't of a glancing blow but of a Mars sized object (named Theia btw) crashing into the Earth. Not fully head-on but not glancing off either.
You've provided 2 links none of which backs up the words in question which YOU made.
I've provided several links, as well as statements that a simple Google search could verify. I don't get where my education comes into the discussion other than my first mention of it. Which I always mention at the start of discussions as anyone would. If a person posted to a thread dealing with the history of vampires should they not mention if they have an education or employment in history, mythology, popular culture etc? If you find my innocent attempt to assure people that I know what I'm talking about threatening or offensive then that is your problem not mine. I remind you that you are the one who asked about my education, I didn't just volunteer info apart from my first mention. You have an issue with me please tell me directly not in the forums.
My first post here specifically stated that "...the moon's orbit is almost perfectly circular." That is exactly what I claimed to have said. It is almost perfectly circular, thus only slightly elliptical by definition.
The fact that you can find more google.com references that verify your point of view is no great task given that you parrot the most commonly held view of the moon's creation. As my view is substantially different, I can't as easily provide as many as you can. And I do hope that you do not confuse quantity of parroting sources with quality of actual scientific reports.
I shall also mention that neither could Copernicus or Galileo provide many precedents and validating references for their heliocentric view of the solar system. And before you try... no, I'm not trying to compare myself with Galileo or Copernicus, only making the point that anyone whose ideas go counter to the accepted norm is going to have a more difficult time finding numerous supporting opinions or views from which to quote, as you have.
However, what I quoted from is the actual published scientific report on moon "quakes" that included the raw scientific data from the actual Apollo seismometers that clearly show that in all cases evidenced therein, these "quakes" consisted of only one (1) sudden impact and absolutely no tremors or other such seismic activity thereafter consistent with any previously known "quake." Quakes don't just hit in one quick "bang" and then that's it. Yet the seismic readings found in that report show exactly that... and identical to the meteor strikes also found in that same .pdf report.
The other key difference is that following that one "bang" that started the vibrations... those vibrations continue on and on, slowly dissipating as they go... just like what happens when you strike a bell or a gong... just once.
That's what the scientists and astronauts have all stated and the example they used to describe such.
And finally, yes, there is evidence that titanium is found in substantial quanties beneath the lunar surface. Titanium, as you might recall, is a very strong lightweight metal that is commonly used in the construction of spacecraft. I'll drop the titanium angle... but as you mentioned it and as it is a key component to the truth regarding the moon, I did wish to acknowledge your mention of it.
- Upir'
im somewhat amazed...and highly amused by parts of this thread.
person a...."wow, they are bombing the moon, thats really bad...what gives us the right to bomb a dead chunk of rock that we could get info from....its terrible"
person b..." uh...we are not bombing the moon! we are basically letting a satellite crash land on it. it will do minimal damage...mostly just sending up some dust that we can analyze to see whats there. if there is some water in it, it will help humanity grow off this one planet"
person c..." well bombing the moon is just plain wrong! its bad and naughty and ...oops...i think i wet my pamper!"
person b..." what part of we arent bombing the moon arent you getting?! do you have any idea how much knowlege we might get out of this single mission?"
person d..." well damn...i hope that the moon doesnt blow up and fall to earth killing all of us when we bomb it"
person b... (person b just went nuts from the stupidity around him and slit his wrists!)
LOL
mirth
~Wolf~
all persons in this film were fictional and any resemblance to anyone living or stupid is purely coincidental.
I still agree with Livn... we DON'T know the total make up of the Moon, and there may not be no "superfault" on the moon but think of it this way rather than a fault what if the Core is the only thing hold the moon together, we go in through a small crack (like a sponge) and find the crevase gets bigger, not smaller, then we blow up the only thing holding the moon together,Balanced Rock in Garden of the Gods Colorado sits on just a few grains of sand and thats it if one grain were to shift in one direction or the other boom it will fall, same as the moon we hit the right spot with the right amount of Force and it could be all over, recently I have had dreams about the moon being ripped apart I didn't know why since I don't have tv so this could be why.....
Now you all say that the moon has been hit by larger objects traveling faster or what not, but think about a yo yo if you will its got two massive sides and a very thin middle you can throw rocks at the sides take a knife or razor and put gash marks in it but it stays together, however you take a hacksaw to the center (the US's kinetic bomb) and the whole thing comes apart
don't shoot me I'm just saying there is a point to everyones post but this is the one I agree with most
I've always said Humans are going to kill themselves but then The planet would be better off don't believe me watch the movie "Life after People" I'm 100% for the Earth taking back what we took to begin with this has no part of this thread though so I will stop here
It is human nature to explore because mankind has a constant hunger to find out the unknown. With the conclusion of these different test on the moon we may expand our understanding to expand space travel and the history or our own existance.
ok...ill be devils advocate...the probe hits the moon, and bang...it breaks in two...and then we are screwed because it will all just drift apart and we will either
A; lose the moon...and the tides (which are important to life)
or
B; it comes raining down on your heads wiping out mankind.
while we really do know the structure of the moon pretty well (apollo left seismographs behind to study the makeup of the moon), even if it split (and can you imagine texas splitting in half because of a plane crash?) gravity would hold it in pretty much the same position as it is now.
the kinetic energy of the crash wouldnt be enough to overcome the moons own inertia.
so relax...
oh...and for those secretly hoping that humanity gets wiped out to save the earth, you know everything must start somewhere, and while i dont advocate it, its pretty easy to remove ones self from the equation.
death...every little bit helps ROFLMAO!
~W~
I shot a monument with a bb gun once.. And the whole 3 to 4 ton monument split right down the middle!
I was warned..
How likely are most people to accept that statement as factual?
now i freely admit to keeping an open mind at times to the point my brain falls out...
but how small and fragile do people think the moon is anyway?
i dont think it would notice a nuke if it were set off on it...
ofcoarse thats just my opinion...your milage may vary..
~W~
oh...was it a very tiny monument???
LOL
In regards of UFO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6vHQbsrrEw&feature=related
as for extraterrestrials...i actually think its possible...
but if they have a base on the moon, i suspect they have the tech to make sure they are safe.
i dont really think they are...but i wont rule it out.
~W~
This should shed some light to the thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZ3wh2cjekE&NR=1
I think the Nibiruans would love a discussion like this.
Nibiruans: Planet X, Nibiru, Planet X is the planet three times the size of the earth, located just beyond Pluto of which is now considered after 2008 not to be a planet any longer but a dwarf star instead. Which in turn made society re-write that part of the book.
As far as the name Nibiru, they first settled on earth before Atlantis was built. A race of advanced beings that supposedly gave the human race the enlightenment of technology and spiritualism. Don't quote me on that.
Well moon is not concerned with UFO and first time Indian science journalists and news agencies these years admits of UFOs are true and in 2012 there constellationa of 88 and sunwill be the center and earth's orbit will be the perfact circle to the constellation of 88 stars will lead UFos overflow on earth. Human too rising universally as ufos and marry meet of Ufos and human. the rest articles are in my journals.
I do believe that UFOs are not on moon butthey are far from sun.
The NASA LCROSS (Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite
Exactly what does the "R" stand for? NASA would not captialize such a letter if this information was from Nasa if it were pertainent.
A Director from Nasa would be in serious jeapordy for placing such info over any nternet site, let alone "Twitter"
The Apollo mission was under scutiny for being frauded and done at area 51, just so the US could claim being first on the moon in a ridiculous race against USSR to being the first on the Moon.
National News Agencies would be covering this like wildfire if it had any truth to it.
Even if there was water in the moons core, it would be more harmful than the water in Yellow Stone. Toxic.
The only coverage of legitament resource I saw covered by national news was related to "Mars" that there is water on the surface, but highly toxic in nature. That was more than amonth ago.
I wouldn't exactly worry about the cause that the experiment may have with ETs, the matter at hand should be why the Law that prohibits the modification to the moon and other celestial bodies isn't being honored. If the US has altered the moon and other celestial bodies, why hasn't any action been taken? Who would even take the action? It's not like the world would imprison NASA for ignoring the law.
This is not to say I don't agree with the 'bombing' of the moon. If the reason they are doing this mission is for the benefit of humanity, then I agree. But altering the moon for experimental purposes, or just to gain knowledge as to whether the moon is hollow, or if the moon had water at one point to harbor life, isn't worth altering the moon in anyway. Now, if NASA wanted to go through with this mission to use the water they found on the moon for Earth, or if it helps with the studies of He3 to power the Earth then I suppose it's okay.
As for the article that was posted about Neil Armstrong saying there was life on the dark side of the moon and what not, I haven't heard anything of this. If this was the case, they would most likely send a probe to the dark side of the moon instead of blowing a hole on the opposite side of the moon. That is what sounds logical.
If NASA as to go through with all of this, they would have to make sure nothing else would be harmed by the explosion. Like Xzavier said, satellites could be affected.
I sort-of remember a news article saying that President Obama didn't clear NASA for funding a mission to the moon planed 2020. I'm not too sure Obama would fund this sort of thing if he didn't fund the other. Personally, I'm beginning to think the entire article is a hoax.
The R could possibly be defined as "Research" but don't quote me on that. Just makes sense.
As far as moon bombing, I recently learned through my research that the moon may not be a moon per-say, but a natural satellite. Since it does not orbit the Earth as all the other planets do, but in a circular fashion just as a regular satellite would.
Thus if the moon were "bombed", it could have no significance at all in relation to E.T. behavior.
Well My opnion no Govt. Directly accept their work on UFO and Extraterrestrial kins
But when reliable news agencies and high level science journalist says, then it matters.
In India, I can depand on science mags and news agencies such as India Daily.
They keep us in touch with what is the science andscientists aiming at in the world.
Yes 4-5 nations are advanced in this case and may have communicated and came in the association with ufos. But human brain solely is able to grow to heights and human will notdo mistake aggressing ufos.
USA and world is not silly that without knowing their level of scientific growth, bombarding at them and moon is not the case of this coz in my opinion so many missions headed moon including india and none resulted to identify its the territory of alliens. yes the news of Et everywhere is nearmost to truth coz its from science editor. And Indian scientists might have observed it in their test of uncovering stealth shield and now they are going on rise of human in associating with ET my opinion the Et was responsible for saving human from Rama Atlantis war and Et is millions of years ago reached peak of science civilization and its foolish to think of onfronting them without knowing their level of growth and science.
This means stealth bombers are not stealth to Indian forces within couple of years.
It's an interesting article, long, lol. I just think like anything anyone decides to do in space there will be those that get highly agitated about it. I would say that the moon "could" be an observation site for some if they exist but I don't think anything more.
It's not like they are going there to start a war with anyone. They don't believe anyone is on the moon. They are merely doing scientific research. They could make mistakes, wouldn't be the first time but this doesn't sound like anything too drastic or you wouldn't have just a few articles, you would have legal actions taken.
I have kind of skimmed over this and I have to say, NASA would play things down. I believe that when they decide to do something significant in space there are always military reasons behind it. NASA will play down the harmful aspects of what they are doing for vested interests and the other side will over-react.
If there is a base on the moon, trust me they KNOW we are coming, lol. The government has always used denial tactics and ways to make people who claim ET involvement in anything to be loony at best. This is an area we just don't know because the government will not be forthright about it even though they work for us supposedly.
Scientific American has an article from June and I am not going to post all of it but one thing I noticed is it said this:
Scientists expect the blast to be so powerful that a huge plume of debris will be ejected.
The attack on the Moon is not a declaration of war or act of wanton vandalism. Space scientists want to see if any water ice or vapour is revealed in the cloud of debris.
The spacecraft will not head straight for the Moon. First it will orbit the Earth a number of times while its precise target is identified. Finally, it will send the missile into the Moon at twice the speed of a bullet on October 8.
The orbiter will circle the Moon for at least a year searching for potential landing sites for astronauts when they return there in the next decade. It will also look for suitable materials that might support a colony.
One of the people opposing this has quite a bit of stature and that is Alfred Lambremont Webre, J.D., M.Ed. He is by no means a fly-by-night person or loony from what I read about him. He is just very conservative about what should or shouldn't go on in space and belongs to many organizations that deal with laws governing or trying to goven actions in space. So you have both sides of the spectrum fighting over this and they all sound rather nuts to me. It makes it difficult to figure out what is truth from fiction because one side is under reacting and pushing for what the government wants and the other side seems to be going ballistic the other direction. The people will most likely not be heard so all anyone can do is state opinions but it will probably happen either way and I don't think it is a laughing matter. These people are very serious about this.
This is his bio: futurist, peace activist, environmental activist, and a space activist who promotes the ban of space weapons. He was a co-architect of the Space Preservation Treaty and the Space Preservation Act that was introduced to the U.S. Congress by Congressman Dennis Kucinich and is endorsed by more than 270 NGO's worldwide. He helped draft the Citizen Hearing in 2000 with Stephen Bassett and serves as a member of the Board of Advisors. Webre is also on the Board of Advisers at the Exopolitics Institute , is the congressional coordinator for The Disclosure Project, is a judge on the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, and is the International Director of the Institute for Cooperation in Space.
The "R" stands for R...as in cRater. It's a very common practice to use multiple letters of the same word in an acronym for the sake of "readability". Thinking there is some secret awaiting to broken out is just silly.
LCROSS "Lunar CRater Observation and Sensing Satellite"
I would like to know where your getting your source info so I could do some more research on the subject. If you could I would appreciate it. You can send it to my messages, thanks.
I just saw on the local news tonight, channel 4 in Oklahoma, that the British government released sketches of seen UFO's and USO's.
So I'm wondering if anything drastically is going to happen, and turn our attentions to the celestial.
Especially, since the article I posted, what others have posted, and what the news showed.
Actually there are rumours through my research that by 2011 it would seem as though a "first contact" on the media level could be iminent. Don't quote me on this as some of my research is based on a bit of conspiracy theory.
Well water reserch and its extraction varies nation to nation...
it is still in search and report phase...
one hypothecation about moon is that it been part of earth during begining of plates mounting and suddenly the over load of weight of plates created anty gravity in plates and plates exploded and went away in single line from earth and formed an orbit around earth and then that form of rocks plates sand and matters started gathering since it was in shape of chain in the orbit of moon and gathered these matters again gravity created them united as moon in round shape...
this is my opinion only looking over oceans. my opinion is once the oceans were heavy plates at thickness more than many everests would in single height. it exploded coz antigravity and load over lava.
you can do it by one top having 50 pockets and each carrying gum.
roll that top and see whether the gum come out of top. stickiness of gum is gravity
and next then cover those pocket full of gum with one thin paper and then move the top. I think the paper will be exploded out of moving top more than the gum caame out of moving top.
Or example of birthday balloon. when you pin it it explode. pin was the pressure of gases and lava which thrown plastic cover away from the core.
I believe that they UFO's shit is complete and utter bullshit. The biggest issue i see from this is that it would disrupt the moons orbit, and send it careening towards the earth, or make it drop from the earth's orbit entirely. How do we know that the moon isn't going to fall to pieces? Have we ever confirmed that it is a solid mass? The other major concern is that the debris that is going to come off is going to be massive. This debris is going to hit earth, and while it may be an awesome meteor shower, it can also do some damage if it is very large pieces.
No, the Moon isn't solid, not completely. Its core is semi-solid magma. Seismic studies & the lack of a strong magnetic field have confirmed this.
NASA is your friend.
Well thats a matter of technicalities. The Moon is solid as the Earth is solid. Both have molten cores but under such pressure as to make the liquid a solid.
A similar "mind boggler" is the fact that the liquid hydrogen core of Jupiter is under so much pressure the hydrogen is actually a metal. It underwent a fundamental phase transition crossing over from a liquid gas to metallic hydrogen.
oh, I know.. I just wanted to throw out a little input from an astrophysicist at NASA to prevent this thread from becoming a hive of conspiracy theories involving NASA's desire to destroy the moon or kill aliens or confuse owls... or whatever.
The fact is: the moon won't be destroyed, it won't fall out of orbit, Earth's tides won't be affected, and the moon won't crack open to release angry alien hordes. The chance of any of these things happening is so infinitesimally small as to be indistinguishable from zero.