U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Space
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-21-2018, 07:19 AM
 
22,785 posts, read 17,260,808 times
Reputation: 9491

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post

I have highlighted the word 'just' in what you wrote because this is not a natural event on the lunar surface. It is not natural for these to appear in a circular pattern around the edge of craters.

OK, firstly how do we know they are indentations and not protrusions? I really think you are stretching the limits of belief for an explanation of this structure.
Look at all of the craters in the photo, not just your imagined 'stonehenge.' Where are the shadows? And where aren't they? What does that tell you?

Quote:
Next question, what natural lunar event do you suppose would cause a regular circular series of "indentations" around a crater rim? A meteor shower will certainly not cause that.
Which is more likely? That aliens erected a 'stonehenge' on the moon, or that over time, random impacts resulted in the pattern that you see? You can see in some of the other craters in the photo, craters within larger craters.

As you said, ''We all tend to 'see' what we want to see.'' And you want to see something that simply is not there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-21-2018, 04:01 PM
 
Location: Heart of Dixie
12,446 posts, read 11,237,874 times
Reputation: 28225
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
...It is not natural for these to appear in a circular pattern around the edge of craters.
Sure it is, and it's due to angle of meteoric impact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
...Next question, what natural lunar event do you suppose would cause a regular circular series of "indentations" around a crater rim?...
High angle meteoric impact with large ejecta falling onto the ejecta curtain.

If you would enhance your knowledge of science and physics you could better understand the world in which you live.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 09:17 PM
 
Location: PRC
3,240 posts, read 3,362,706 times
Reputation: 2950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirt Grinder
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20
...It is not natural for these to appear in a circular pattern around the edge of craters.
Sure it is, and it's due to angle of meteoric impact.
If, as you say, it is natural for this to happen then maybe you show me two other examples of this where this bunch of tiny meteors have all fallen around the edge of a crater. It just doesn't happen.

As you know, most impacts are oblique and have tremendous energy. In order for the impacts to appear like this the rocks forming the shower would have to be the same tiny size(unlikely) and travelling at the same speed and at the same angle (also unlikely) which would have to be almost vertical(again unlikely).

In my opinion, what you suggest is a stretch of the imagination in your desparation to explain away this structure AND I am almost sure you cannot show me two other examples either. But, as you guys often say on these kind of threads, I would be interested to see the evidence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 09:40 PM
 
Location: PRC
3,240 posts, read 3,362,706 times
Reputation: 2950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Which is more likely? That aliens erected a 'stonehenge' on the moon, or that over time, random impacts resulted in the pattern that you see? You can see in some of the other craters in the photo, craters within larger craters.
Ahh yes, Appealing to reader logic. Good try, but not good enough.

Unfortunately will not work in this case because you would have to have a series of coincidences all happening at the same time to create the effect in this image.
The meteors have very low energy because the 'indentations' are extremely small.
The meteors would have to have been created or split apart at a very low height to achieve such low energy.
The meteors would have to have split up into a small number roughly 12-15 similar sized items.
The meteors themselves must have been tiny to achieve such small impact craters.

I CAN see 2 possibly 3 small craters at the 9 o'clock position within the red circle which suggests this is probably an ancient structure and has been abandoned already, otherwise it would have been repaired by whoever built it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 10:35 PM
 
22,785 posts, read 17,260,808 times
Reputation: 9491
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
Ahh yes, Appealing to reader logic. Good try, but not good enough.

Unfortunately will not work in this case because you would have to have a series of coincidences all happening at the same time to create the effect in this image.
The meteors have very low energy because the 'indentations' are extremely small.
The meteors would have to have been created or split apart at a very low height to achieve such low energy.
The meteors would have to have split up into a small number roughly 12-15 similar sized items.
The meteors themselves must have been tiny to achieve such small impact craters.

I CAN see 2 possibly 3 small craters at the 9 o'clock position within the red circle which suggests this is probably an ancient structure and has been abandoned already, otherwise it would have been repaired by whoever built it.
Oh good grief!!! You imagine meteor craters on the moon to be alien stonehenge structures. I'm done with you and this nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2018, 10:52 PM
 
Location: Heart of Dixie
12,446 posts, read 11,237,874 times
Reputation: 28225
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocpaul20 View Post
If, as you say, it is natural for this to happen then maybe you show me two other examples of this where this bunch of tiny meteors have all fallen around the edge of a crater. It just doesn't happen...
They aren't "tiny meteors" they are chunks in the ejecta.
You obviously don't have any scientific training, so I'll let you wallow in your world of aliens and government conspiracies. I'm really not interested in any further discourse with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2018, 01:45 AM
 
Location: PRC
3,240 posts, read 3,362,706 times
Reputation: 2950
Forgive me, but I fail to see how an asteoid landing on the moon (almost vertically since the 'ejecta' is almost circular) can eject chunks so perfectly all around it that it creates a whole circle of what-you-call tiny craters all around the edge of the 'larger crater'.

In spite of your assessment of my education and intellect, have we ever been told your own scientific training, by any chance? Perhaps it is a similar to my own armchair university training so maybe we have much in common in spite of our differences on this thread.

It is sad you are leaving so soon, because I notice you have not shown any other examples of your claim for similar REGULAR CIRCULAR mini craters made by chunks being ejected from the main impact site.

As far as I am concerned you have failed to provide a sufficient explanation for this structure (not that you have to, of course). However, if it IS a circular structure as I claim, then it would provide some evidence for a reason not to return to the Moon and it is relevant in that context.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2018, 11:21 AM
 
632 posts, read 490,443 times
Reputation: 1328
Yet another potentially interesting thread, hijacked and ruined by gibberish.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2018, 01:23 PM
 
5,115 posts, read 4,721,034 times
Reputation: 4380
If there were an extraterrestrial Stonehenge on the Moon, then there would be multiple installations established near said structure, placed there by competing nations to recover ancient alien technology. The Americans, Russians, Europeans, and Chinese would all be up there, striving to gain a technological edge over the rest of the world.

The reason the US stopped the lunar missions was because said missions were expensive, because later missions were not producing enough new scientific results to justify the expense, and NASA was moving on to Skylab and to space shuttles.

The reason why no one else even tried going to the Moon since the early 70's is because no nation wanted the bragging right for coming in second in the space race. China is now talking about lunar missions , but only as a stepping stone to a manned Martian mission.

Ocpaul would have us believe that the real reason humanity stopped going to the Moon is because space aliens put a No Parking sign up on the surface of the Moon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2018, 10:44 PM
 
Location: PRC
3,240 posts, read 3,362,706 times
Reputation: 2950
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf
The reason the US stopped the lunar missions was because said missions were expensive, because later missions were not producing enough new scientific results to justify the expense, and NASA was moving on to Skylab and to space shuttles.

The reason why no one else even tried going to the Moon since the early 70's is because no nation wanted the bragging right for coming in second in the space race. China is now talking about lunar missions , but only as a stepping stone to a manned Martian mission.
Hmmm... Expensive and boring. That does not sound like a good excuse for not continuing with scientific investigation of another world.

Particularly when the next thing that happens is that they move on to Mars and other space projects. That sounds like a kid who has got bored with his new toy and moved on to bigger and better things. Is that the kind of thinking the US scientific community want to promote?

Sloppy seconds? I have a feeling there are plenty of planerty scientists who would get excited over more Moon data, but have been denied it since the last man landed. Of course there is LRO and other lunar spacecraft data but that is only so good and does not answer many questions they must have which only an actual landing would solve.

The question which poses in my mind is why not send a robot lander to the Moon first before moving on to Mars? It is going to be cheaper, easier to get to, and maybe we could even develop a viable mission return of soil and rock samples to the Earth.

If people are satisfied with the explanations given, then fine. However, for me, there were not enough really good reasons why we stopped going to the Moon while we continued to persue other space exploration instead. In my mind the Moon is just so much more convenient for development of the space technology.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Space
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top