|
Post by brandt on Feb 27, 2012 15:10:29 GMT 9.5
Mathematical proof.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 27, 2012 17:30:57 GMT 9.5
As I recall mathematical proofs start with assumptions and apply rules of logic to expose the implications of the assumptions
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Feb 27, 2012 22:01:38 GMT 9.5
The Moon is a recent arrival: "Democritus and Anaxagoras taught that there was a time when the Earth was without the Moon.(1) Aristotle wrote that Arcadia in Greece, before being inhabited by the Hellenes, had a population of Pelasgians, and that these aborigines occupied the land already before there was a moon in the sky above the Earth; for this reason they were called Proselenes.(2) Apollonius of Rhodes mentioned the time “when not all the orbs were yet in the heavens, before the Danai and Deukalion races came into existence, and only the Arcadians lived, of whom it is said that they dwelt on mountains and fed on acorns, before there was a moon.” (3) " www.varchive.org/itb/sansmoon.htmPsalm 72 5 They fear Thee with the sun, and before the moon, So it seems that the Moon only arrived within human memory. How was it placed so exactly? Even its size is exact - in English miles. So you rely on mythology to explain science? Worse yet, a site written by such credible sources as this: by Ronald Regehr The Alien Chaser Don Ecker, Long Saga of Lunar Anomalies, UFO magazine, Vol. 10, Nol 2 (March/April 1995), p. 23 from InformantNews Website
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Feb 27, 2012 22:31:42 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Feb 27, 2012 23:54:27 GMT 9.5
Not simply an application of logic but an application of known truths.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Feb 28, 2012 0:32:57 GMT 9.5
I see little difference between the medieval religionist and the modern UFO believer, one has simply replaced the angels and demons of one with the aliens of the other, while still clinging to the superstition and irrational thinking of an earlier age. Knowledge tempered with wisdom trumps blind belief or idle speculation. One can ask "But what IF" only so much, before becoming firmly wedged in the dark recesses of the rabbit hole.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 28, 2012 5:45:26 GMT 9.5
Now we have seen that the dust on the Moon is older than the Sun, it seems rather likely that the Moon arrived from outside the solar system. So what evidence do we have of the timing of its arrival - other than eye witness accounts from the nations of the world?
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Feb 28, 2012 8:06:53 GMT 9.5
The Serpent at the End of Precession by Michael W.Weir A spinning top implies a single given momentum and a drag or torque against the axis of the spin. This is a misleading image of earth’s rotational relationship to its orbital plane. A gyroscopic effect model is closer to the real model and even this can give the wrong image of earth’s stability. Due to the presence of the moon, earth’s obliquity cannot go past the twenty three degrees of the lunar orbit.
What a gyroscopic model does best is illustrate the relationship of the moon to the earth’s equatorial bulge, a suggestion of the lunar tidal drag against earth’s speed of rotation, and the cyclical changes in the moon’s own orbital plane which in turn controls the degree of earth’s obliquity. But again, unlike a spinning top, Earth’s tilt pivots on the solar plane that dissects earth’s equator, not its bottom axis. The torque against the axis that a spinning top will experience is not a proper representation of what is happening to earth. The only torque on earth’s spin is caused by the moon’s influence against earth’s equator, an influence that absorbs and modifies additional influences by both the sun and Jupiter. Even with known cyclical variations affecting this planet, earth is very stable, its original spin’ maintained by a solid, magnetically charged core which is surrounded by a significant molten mantle. This liquid interior creates a strong and stable centrifugal force against the equator that is kept steady by the presence of the moon, with the moon subsequently acting as a climate regulator for the earth.
With the pivoting of the axis centered in the middle of the planet some degree of polar wandering (axial tilt due to surface imbalances) is possible but would be restricted within earth’s obliquity imposed upon the planet by the moon. Any suggestion that earth could have turned on its side would suggest a point in time when earth didn’t have a moon. www.scribd.com/Mikal/d/7118515-Serpent-at-the-End-of-Precession
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Feb 28, 2012 8:23:46 GMT 9.5
From the same paper... When the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change drafted the KyotoProtocol and presented it in 1997 to world governments as a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to curb global warming, an international consensus was made to turn away from earlier concerns over evidence of a looming ice age. Mini ice age coming up ... as those in the Northern Hemisphere might suspect. Did you know that the only way an iceberg can grow is if the oceans heat up? Global warming courtesy of the sun - icebergs melt Global cooling - not enough heat to evaporate water, less rain. Icebergs remain stable. Oceans heating up from below, courtesy of earth's core - icebergs melt, increased evaporation, taken to the poles via coriolis effect and dumped to build up the icebergs which brings on another cold period. (just a little aside )
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 28, 2012 8:45:53 GMT 9.5
..likely that the Moon arrived from outside the solar system. So what evidence do we have of the timing of its arrival... "approximately 9,000 years ago, as Earth emerged from the most recent ice age, there was a massive increase amplification in tides of the western Atlantic Ocean, ranging up to three times more extreme that currently exist today." planetsave.com/2011/08/03/ancient-tides-are-sometimes-dramatically-different-than-today/Such a "massive increase" in tides might indicate that the Moon was closer to Earth 9000 years ago. So are there any human accounts of that? Actually there are quite a lot of accounts of the sky/heavens having to be pushed higher. Since the nearest part of the heavens is the Moon, does this include pushing the Moon further away? "According to the aborigines of Australia, the sky at one time in the ages ago was not up high where it is now." www.sacred-texts.com/aus/peck/peck12.htm
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Feb 28, 2012 9:50:20 GMT 9.5
Funny how 'ice age' has crept into this thread... and, with another bit of synchronicity, after I posted the little aside above I made myself a coffee and read the headlines and this was amongst them... Melting Arctic link to northern snows MELTING sea ice in the Arctic may be causing the snowier winters the northern hemisphere has experienced in the last two seasons. The level of Arctic sea ice has reached a new record low in 2007, said the study led by the Georgia Institute of Technology and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Meanwhile, above-average snowfall has blanketed large parts of the northern United States, north-western and central Europe, and northern and central China.
The northern hemisphere has recorded its second and third largest snow covers in documented history in the last two seasons, spanning the winters of 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. Researchers believe the disappearing Arctic ice is sending more water vapour into the air, and is interfering with atmospheric currents and westerly winds that would typically have swept snowy weather northward.
Instead, more cold air is descending into the middle and lower latitudes, "leading to increased heavy snowfall in Europe and the northeast and Midwest regions of the United States", said Jiping Liu, a senior research scientist at Georgia Tech.
The research included scientists from the Chinese Academy of Sciences and New York's Columbia University, and was supported by NASA and the National Science Foundation. AFP www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/melting-arctic-link-to-northern-snows/story-e6frg6so-1226283689407
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Feb 28, 2012 10:02:32 GMT 9.5
Re: Moon being older that Earth and the moon appearing to be much closer to the Earth in days or yore.
Does a planet (and moons) expand as it ages and then contracts? Or are they just stars?
The moon might have been larger when the earth was young... thus it appeared to be closer. When the earth started to expand the moon was by then contracting.
;D Just popped into my mind.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 28, 2012 10:19:34 GMT 9.5
Certainly there are grounds for thinking suns expand as they get older but officially that does not happen to planets.
On the other hand the ocean beds of Earth are very recent (about 250 million years) and if the oceans are removed it is possible to fit the land masses neatly on a smaller globe.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Feb 28, 2012 10:55:18 GMT 9.5
Pangea ?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 28, 2012 10:58:37 GMT 9.5
If all the oceans are removed all the large land masses fit together on a small globe - with no gaps for oceans
|
|
|
Post by sekhmet on Feb 28, 2012 12:25:39 GMT 9.5
I have always thought that the pieces of the earth that are missing and currently filled with oceans are what the MOON is composed of! The earth missing its water would probably look like a cookie with BIG BITES out of it. So, where did those "chunks" go?
Oh, and without the oceans we would likely have a planet that resembles MARS.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 28, 2012 12:29:18 GMT 9.5
The theory that the Moon came out of the Pacific ocean is negated by the Moon being quite a lot older than the Earth.
The oceanic basins are very recent geologically. Where was the water before that?
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Feb 28, 2012 13:04:25 GMT 9.5
The most recent and best research points to the Moon coming about from a collision between the Earth and another body.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 28, 2012 13:13:26 GMT 9.5
I think I will wait for the next research - hopefully taking into account the greater age of the Moon.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Feb 28, 2012 13:44:15 GMT 9.5
What did Velikovsky have to say about the Moon?
|
|