The Official Hollow Moon vs. AGW Thread and Poll

[Thanatocoenosis]

From NASA: Furthermore, shallow moonquakes lasted a remarkably long time. Once they got going, all continued more than 10 minutes. "The moon was ringing like a bell," Neal says.

NASA - Moonquakes

I don't care what someone wrote. "Ringing like a bell" implies a ringing sound. Sound waves do not propagate through a vacuum.

 

[Thanatocoenosis]

If the moon and earth are so chemically similar, what happened to the Mars sized object that supposedly crashed into earth to spew out the material to make the moon, theres no trace of it left.

Think for a moment... what do you think happens when two objects the size of the earth and Mars collides? How much energy do you think are in those two systems? What do you think happens to that energy?

So then after the whack, the Molten moon was bombarded to make the Maria's that only face Earth?

Good God man, did you not read the part, above, about all binary systems will attain a tidally locked equilibrium? Again, it is an not unusual phenomenon, and other bodies in the solar system, and galaxy, are tidally locked. It is not some unusual occurrence.

Do yourself a favor and google "argument from incredulity". It is what you are doing.

And there's no other ejecta material floating in orbit? That's a lot of coincidences no?

If you really have an interest in learning about these processes, I will explain it to you, but I won't waste my time on something that is just going to go in one ear and out the other. Now, as a clue, read about the scientific definitions of a planet. You will find the answer to that question, there.

Moon rocks have been dated at over 5 B years, check it out

Citation needed.

Answer my question about your education. Have you ever had anything other than a basic introduction to science?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If the moon and earth are so chemically similar, what happened to the Mars sized object that supposedly crashed into earth to spew out the material to make the moon, theres no trace of it left.

Think for a moment... what do you think happens when two objects the size of the earth and Mars collides? How much energy do you think are in those two systems? What do you think happens to that energy?

So then after the whack, the Molten moon was bombarded to make the Maria's that only face Earth?

Good God man, did you not read the part, above, about all binary systems will attain a tidally locked equilibrium? Again, it is an not unusual phenomenon, and other bodies in the solar system, and galaxy, are tidally locked. It is not some unusual occurrence.

Do yourself a favor and google "argument from incredulity". It is what you are doing.

And there's no other ejecta material floating in orbit? That's a lot of coincidences no?

If you really have an interest in learning about these processes, I will explain it to you, but I won't waste my time on something that is just going to go in one ear and out the other. Now, as a clue, read about the scientific definitions of a planet. You will find the answer to that question, there.

Moon rocks have been dated at over 5 B years, check it out

Citation needed.

Answer my question about your education. Have you ever had anything other than a basic introduction to science?

Your explanation of the Big Whack falls totally flat. You're saying that 100% of the (non-existent) Mars-sized third body was converted into Energy and only the Moon/Earth remain? Again, like having a Moon the same apparent size as the Sun, what are the odds?

What's unusual about the Earth/Moon orbit is that the Moon is there at all in the first place. You can say they are tidally locked, but how did the Moon get there?

The first incredulity is that the Moon is there at all. It's too big!

Here's the point of this thread: NASA scientists conducted an experiment and crash landed the third stage of the Saturn 5 booster onto the lunar surface and then tried to make sense of the seismomoter readings

"Apollo 13 was headed homeward. Moments later the 15-ton spent third stage of the Saturn V launch vehicle crashed into the Moon, as planned.

It occurred at 8:09 p.m. EST, April 14. The S-IVB struck the Moon with a force equivalent to 11 1/2 tons of TNT. It hit 85 miles west northwest of the site where the Apollo 12 astronauts had set up their seismometer. Scientists on Earth said, "the Moon rang like a bell."

Back in November 1969, the Apollo 12 astronauts had sent their Lunar Module crashing into the Moon following their return to the command craft after the lunar landing mission. That Lunar Module struck with a force of one ton of TNT. The shock waves built up to a peak in eight minutes and continued for nearly an hour."

Apollo 13 Houston we ve got a problem. Page 15

That's a real life experiment, one that shows that the Moon may indeed be hollow. Where are the experiments linking a wisp of CO2 to AGW? There are none!

There's an experiment that shows the Moon may be hollow, where are the experiments show how increasing CO2 from 280 to 400 will cause warming or climates change? There aren't any

Hollow Moon 1 - AGWCult 0

 

[CrusaderFrank]

From NASA: Furthermore, shallow moonquakes lasted a remarkably long time. Once they got going, all continued more than 10 minutes. "The moon was ringing like a bell," Neal says.

NASA - Moonquakes

I don't care what someone wrote. "Ringing like a bell" implies a ringing sound. Sound waves do not propagate through a vacuum.

They're talking about the seismomoter readings

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If the moon and earth are so chemically similar, what happened to the Mars sized object that supposedly crashed into earth to spew out the material to make the moon, theres no trace of it left.

Think for a moment... what do you think happens when two objects the size of the earth and Mars collides? How much energy do you think are in those two systems? What do you think happens to that energy?

So then after the whack, the Molten moon was bombarded to make the Maria's that only face Earth?

Good God man, did you not read the part, above, about all binary systems will attain a tidally locked equilibrium? Again, it is an not unusual phenomenon, and other bodies in the solar system, and galaxy, are tidally locked. It is not some unusual occurrence.

Do yourself a favor and google "argument from incredulity". It is what you are doing.

And there's no other ejecta material floating in orbit? That's a lot of coincidences no?

If you really have an interest in learning about these processes, I will explain it to you, but I won't waste my time on something that is just going to go in one ear and out the other. Now, as a clue, read about the scientific definitions of a planet. You will find the answer to that question, there.

Moon rocks have been dated at over 5 B years, check it out

Citation needed.

Answer my question about your education. Have you ever had anything other than a basic introduction to science?

" They range in age from about 3.16 billion years old for the basaltic samples derived from the lunar maria, up to about 5.3 billion years old for rocks derived from the highlands.[1]"

Moon rock - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

1. James Papike, Grahm Ryder, and Charles Shearer (1998). "Lunar Samples". Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry 36: 5.1–5.234.
   

Will you agree that the Moon 5 billion is older than the Earths 4.6B years?

 

[Old Rocks]

The Moon Is 100 Million Years Younger Than Thought

The moon is quite a bit younger than scientists had previously believed, new research suggests.

The leading theory ofhow the moon formed holds that it was created when a mysterious planet — one the size of Mars or larger — slammed into Earth about 4.56 billion years ago, just after the solar system came together. But new analyses of lunar rocks suggest that the moon, which likely coalesced from the debris blasted into space by this monster impact, is actually between 4.4 billion and 4.45 billion years old.

The finding, which would make the moon 100 million years younger than previously thought, could reshape scientists' understanding of the early Earth as well as its natural satellite, researchers said. [The Moon: 10 Surprising Lunar Facts]

PSRD The Oldest Moon Rocks

Anorthosites, rocks composed almost entirely of plagioclase feldspar, are the oldest rocks on the Moon. They appear to have formed when feldspar crystallized and floated to the top of a global magma ocean that surrounded the Moon soon after it formed. Not all ages determined for anorthosites, however, are as old as we expected--one appeared to be only 4.29 billion years old. While 4.29 billion years sounds very ancient, a magma ocean ought to have solidified well within 100 million years of lunar origin about 4.55 billion years ago. One possibility is that the young ages reflect impact events, not the original time of igneous crystallization. My colleagues Lars Borg (University of New Mexico) and Larry Nyquist and Don Bogard (Johnson Space Center) and I studied an anorthosite (rock 67215) relatively rich in pyroxene, allowing us to determine a precise crystallization age of 4.40 billion years. But even that age might have been affected by the subsequent shock heating event that reset the low-temperature components in this rock about 500 million years after it formed.

By examining data for all of the previously dated lunar anorthosites, we were able to show that plagioclase feldspar is more prone to shock damage than are the pyroxenes in these rocks, so we plotted only the pyroxene data for four different anorthosites on a samarium-neodymium isochron diagram. These data fall on a well-defined line indicating a crystallization age for the anorthosites of 4.46 billion years, consistent with very early, widespread melting of the Moon. Other data for 67215 show that it comes from a relatively shallow depth in the crust, giving us clues to the structure of the lunar crust. Studies like this one are filling in the picture of how the initial crust of the Moon formed, which in turn sheds light on the formation of the terrestrial planets.

Reference:

Norman, M. D., Borg, L. E., Nyquist, L. E., and Bogard, D. D. (2003) Chronology, geochemistry, and petrology of a ferroan noritic anorthosite clast from Descartes breccia 67215: Clues to the age, origin, structure, and impact history of the lunar crust. Meteoritics and Planetary Science, vol 38, p. 645-661.

Recent articles on the age of the moon.

 

[Old Rocks]

From NASA: Furthermore, shallow moonquakes lasted a remarkably long time. Once they got going, all continued more than 10 minutes. "The moon was ringing like a bell," Neal says.

NASA - Moonquakes

I don't care what someone wrote. "Ringing like a bell" implies a ringing sound. Sound waves do not propagate through a vacuum.

They're talking about the seismomoter readings

Like the ones that show the earth ringing like a bell for up to 24 hours after a very large earthquake.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Moon Is 100 Million Years Younger Than Thought

The moon is quite a bit younger than scientists had previously believed, new research suggests.

The leading theory ofhow the moon formed holds that it was created when a mysterious planet — one the size of Mars or larger — slammed into Earth about 4.56 billion years ago, just after the solar system came together. But new analyses of lunar rocks suggest that the moon, which likely coalesced from the debris blasted into space by this monster impact, is actually between 4.4 billion and 4.45 billion years old.

The finding, which would make the moon 100 million years younger than previously thought, could reshape scientists' understanding of the early Earth as well as its natural satellite, researchers said. [The Moon: 10 Surprising Lunar Facts]

PSRD The Oldest Moon Rocks

Anorthosites, rocks composed almost entirely of plagioclase feldspar, are the oldest rocks on the Moon. They appear to have formed when feldspar crystallized and floated to the top of a global magma ocean that surrounded the Moon soon after it formed. Not all ages determined for anorthosites, however, are as old as we expected--one appeared to be only 4.29 billion years old. While 4.29 billion years sounds very ancient, a magma ocean ought to have solidified well within 100 million years of lunar origin about 4.55 billion years ago. One possibility is that the young ages reflect impact events, not the original time of igneous crystallization. My colleagues Lars Borg (University of New Mexico) and Larry Nyquist and Don Bogard (Johnson Space Center) and I studied an anorthosite (rock 67215) relatively rich in pyroxene, allowing us to determine a precise crystallization age of 4.40 billion years. But even that age might have been affected by the subsequent shock heating event that reset the low-temperature components in this rock about 500 million years after it formed.

By examining data for all of the previously dated lunar anorthosites, we were able to show that plagioclase feldspar is more prone to shock damage than are the pyroxenes in these rocks, so we plotted only the pyroxene data for four different anorthosites on a samarium-neodymium isochron diagram. These data fall on a well-defined line indicating a crystallization age for the anorthosites of 4.46 billion years, consistent with very early, widespread melting of the Moon. Other data for 67215 show that it comes from a relatively shallow depth in the crust, giving us clues to the structure of the lunar crust. Studies like this one are filling in the picture of how the initial crust of the Moon formed, which in turn sheds light on the formation of the terrestrial planets.

Reference:

Norman, M. D., Borg, L. E., Nyquist, L. E., and Bogard, D. D. (2003) Chronology, geochemistry, and petrology of a ferroan noritic anorthosite clast from Descartes breccia 67215: Clues to the age, origin, structure, and impact history of the lunar crust. Meteoritics and Planetary Science, vol 38, p. 645-661.

Recent articles on the age of the moon.

So the Mars sized object hit the Earth, and then the debris vanished into a black hole for 100,000,000 years and then formed the Moon?

How do the two concepts go together at all?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There's just no way to account for the Moon given our understanding of celestial mechanics.

Earth and some (non-existent) Mars sized object collided, left no debris nor any trace at all of the impactor, then formed the Moon 100,000,000 years later?

Does this make sense to anyone?

 

[Old Rocks]

Very little of what you say ever makes sense. We can listen to what internet fruitloops are saying, or we can read what the scientists have to say on the subject.

How the Moon Formed Violent Cosmic Crash Theory Gets Double Boost

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Very little of what you say ever makes sense. We can listen to what internet fruitloops are saying, or we can read what the scientists have to say on the subject.

How the Moon Formed Violent Cosmic Crash Theory Gets Double Boost

A few months ago Space.com posted as article saying that the chemical similarly of Moon and Earth after adjusting the isotopes made the double whack near impossible as there was no signature from the impactor

Frankly I'm at a loss to understand the significance of the tungsten isotope

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Very little of what you say ever makes sense. We can listen to what internet fruitloops are saying, or we can read what the scientists have to say on the subject.

How the Moon Formed Violent Cosmic Crash Theory Gets Double Boost

A few months ago Space.com posted as article saying that the chemical similarly of Moon and Earth after adjusting the isotopes made the double whack near impossible as there was no signature from the impactor

Frankly I'm at a loss to understand the significance of the tungsten isotope

Moon Formation Theory Challenged by New Discovery Moon History

"However, the scientists then corrected their data for isotope-ratio alterations that would result after cosmic rays from deep space collided with the moon. Cosmic rays, which are charged particles that speed through space, can generate neutrons that titanium atoms can absorb, changing their isotope type. After this adjustment, lunar titanium isotope ratios proved identical to Earth's within about 4 parts per million, said study lead author Junjun Zhang, an isotope geochemist at the Chicago Center for Cosmochemistry."

Here's a Space.com article stating the Theia Theory is probably incorrect because Earth and Moon are nearly geologically identical. Seems like the later study adjusted their models accordingly to show how Theia could have been chemically different, yet vanish upon impact