07 Feb 2020 19:34:22
Never really thought about this before, until now.
Just saw some program (not relevant) that mentioned balancing.
When something is in balance its called the 'centre of gravity'.
This enforces the belief of the theory known as gravity. Henceforth if you hear it enough it becomes fact to the point you don't question it so in your world it is fact.
Worth a though for a moment is it not? . The only way to disprove gravity (if it is wrong) would be to have a mass greater than the Earth.
Arguments can be made of the planets movements (we are told they have more mass than the Earth), but I never see anything like an effect from them moving 'around us'. They are just luminaries?
{Ed033's Note - Until someone proves otherwise, i'll call planets and stars - luminaries.
06 Feb 2020 22:22:40
2 Serious Questions for NASA - Orange Juice and Sounds in a vacuum. During the Apollo Moon landings, the audio guys didn't get the memo that we shouldn't be able to hear sounds in a vacuum.
Agree1Disagree0
07 Feb 2020 01:44:13
Orange juice aside (I need to look into that) I have seen many NASA videos, where the physics of what they have told us about the MOON, just don't add up.
The footage of the astronaut asking for his colleague to push down on his (space) helmet, is a prime example. There are many more.
I have not heard the knocking sounds video before, though. Could that be added, FakeFX? . (again i need to look in to this) .
Why is the rum always empty? .
Oh.
{Ed033's Note - The answer is that they shot all the Moon video on Earth?
08 Feb 2020 22:22:55
I believe so, Ed.
Was that just to get the Russians to try? . I don't know. I don't think so.
The interesting thing is pretty much the only thing Russia and the rest of the World are in alignment with is space and the antarctic treaty.
Now why is that?
{Ed033's Note - Such a good point, that all countries are aligned with everything to do with Space and Antarctica.
05 Feb 2020 10:28:10
Where is the other half of the Moon?
Agree0Disagree0
05 Feb 2020 20:13:13
Hi. The moon itself doesn't emit any light like the sun. What we see when we see the moon is sunlight reflected off the moon. The phase of the moon is how much of the moon appears to us on Earth to be lit up by the sun. So here we can only see the half of the moon that is being hit by the sunlight. As the moon orbits the earth throughout the month then we see more Phases through to full moon. Hope that helps.
{Ed033's Note - I'm expecting to see some of the other half dimmed out. If i shine a light on any sphere so that half of it is illuminated, i would at least see some of the other half but it would be dimmer.
05 Feb 2020 23:45:42
Hi. but you are looking at the moon from Earth, the light is coming from the sun. So the sun is hitting the whole of the front side of the moon that faces the sun. The half we cannot see is the back of the moon from the suns perspective. So if you shone a torch at a pool ball it wouldn’t light up the back of the ball for example.
06 Feb 2020 07:35:31
The Earth is mostly covered in the most unreflective substance known to humankind. Water. So no sunlight would get reflected from the Earth to the Moon.
Oh, hang on wait.
06 Feb 2020 22:22:29
The part of the Moon that is lit is too uniform, we should see a brighter part lit and a dimmer part lit.
06 Feb 2020 23:54:20
I’m not really sure what you think you are seeing then? Throughout the month we see the moon go through different phases until full moon. If the video is saying there is only half a moon then where does the rest of it suddenly appear from and disappear to during the month. We see a small crescent all the way to a full moon, and the video doesn’t address that or make any explanation for just saying there’s only half a moon.
{Ed033's Note - If anyone has watched all of the videos i put up here over the last 9 pages, then they may be open to the idea that the Moon might not be a rock floating in outer space around 238,000 miles away and we've been lied to about it.
07 Feb 2020 02:18:36
Rhetorically.
The hotspot 'brighter' part:
Is that just what we could think because of the 'Mr Blue Marble' effects on the 3D version of a 2D scan?
Is that effect because of water or atmosphere on the Earth? . We are told the Moon has none. (Maybe a little water, but let's not be pedantic :) ) . So therefor no hotspot?
NASA has Moon dust. Why is the Moon so luminous/ reflective? . Has NASA run tests? I know they say its spiky/ sharp as hell. Isn't it what, apparently caused the 'Jade Rabbit 2' or rather 'Yutu 2' to malfunction? .
Why is there no proof of the reflectiveness of lunar rock. It looks dull to me. Maybe i need to put the images in Photoshop and flip the polarity? . (Ah, that's better)
These are questions I am asking myself as much as anyone because that's where the truth lies. (see what I did there? ) .
{Ed033's Note - I don't get how you could have uniform light then no light.
How far away can the Moon be if it brightly lights up the clouds immediately around it, but the clouds just a little further away from being immediately around it are not lit at all?
If you've seen other videos suggesting the Sun is a projection, could the Moon be a projection?
You uploaded a video where a guy in the early 60s said he thought the Moon was plasma.
Could it be that all the luminaries are plasma?
I'm not saying any of the above is correct, but we're being lied about the Moon somewhere along the line.
08 Feb 2020 22:10:08
I don't believe we have reached the Moon, Ed. I just want to make that clear. I am just trying to find proof that no one can deny.
I mentioned this before about the clouds in front of the Moon, from ones perspective, are more brightly lit. There is a 'theory' which has taken weight in the mainstream, called 'Mie scattering'.
This is just a theory, though. So, again it is a choice of what you believe. I have questioned a lot of late, what I believe.
This is one thing that I have noticed over the last few months, is that I have taken theories as fact. Because they are accepted in the mainstream.
That doesn't make them the truth. It just means they are accepted as such. And almost forced upon us.
As for luminaries being plasma. Is plasma not in a state of flux? which would make it hard to define a stationary surface? .
There is a debate. If you have two sextants at a measurable distance apart. A measurement from both calculates that the Sun has a 32 mile diameter and is 3000 miles away.
Now I bet Ernest Shackleton would say that a sextant is pretty reliable.
I do not know measurements for the Moon, but I guess that it would be similar.
{Ed033's Note - Yes, if the Sun was 93 million miles away we wouldn't be able to see it with our naked eyes, let alone the alleged 'stars' over 4 light years away Our eyes by themselves can't physically see anything millions of miles away.
06 Feb 2020 07:41:33
It is strange how common folk like farmers and the working class find giant humanoid-like skeletons. And then, schooled 'archaeologists' find dinosaurs.
Back in the day there was hundreds of articles of finding giants, in 'news' papers. Now with just get the propaganda sheets we don't see these anymore.
I seem to remember you posting about a red giant in Iraq, Ed. Found by a few US soldiers in the recent Iraq war. I am recalling that right? .
Interesting subject that leads nicely into the 'fallen Titan' subject.
{Ed033's Note - I think it was a 15 foot red haired giant in the caves of Afghanistan.
06 Feb 2020 07:58:05
Giant humans existed
07 Feb 2020 15:27:58
That picture is serious clickbait SM!
08 Feb 2020 22:18:30
Haha. But the thing is, Rian. They do not appear deformities of the human race as we know it. Their proportions are beautifully aligned with their size.
Does this mean that they must be a separate race? . A race of giants? Maybe the last dying genetic threads of an ancient race that once ruled this realm? .
04 Feb 2020 12:34:45
Antarctica - Sorry We're Closed!
Agree1Disagree0
05 Feb 2020 11:43:01
excellent.
{Ed033's Note - I take it you got something you were looking for out of it?
05 Feb 2020 14:59:40
Well the whole subject of the enormous secrecy around Antarctica is something I have been trying to find more about the last couple of years. It is so hard to find anything of substance. This guy at least confirms my suspicion that it is nothing to do with environmental concerns. I remember a couple of years ago you posted something about some very high profile people visiting a particular spot in Antarctica.
I'm also interested in the pyramids down there, and of course I expect you are interested from a flat earth perspective. There is definitely something being kept from us imo.
{Ed033's Note - I would imagine that lots of people would like to circumnavigate around Antarctica - just to explore.
And why couldn't anybody just go ahead with a boat and do that? The answer is, a military would physically stop you.
06 Feb 2020 07:45:17
How come they never find any plastic/ rubbish waste in Antarctica?
I mean its found everywhere else on the planet, even where humans don't inhabit.
You would expect the fact that, there are not many people down there to clean up the rest of the worlds waste, it would be a massive pile? .
You don't post much but you usually only posted to prove something wrong. I am not saying that's a bad thing. I guess I'd like to know 'your' opinion on things. You know this page well. please entertain me with your thoughts on where you are at? It would be appreciated.
Agree0Disagree0
03 Feb 2020 14:17:12
Ask away if there’s anything specific you want to know my position on SM.
Sorry, but I had to debunk the planes not moving video!
03 Feb 2020 15:33:19
Haha, I'm not calling you out because you debunked something. I am totally OK with that as I am just seeking the truth, whatever that may be. :O)
You never appear to come across as shocked, or of that nature, with any of the posts on these pages which suggests to me you are quite familiar with these topics and are firm in your beliefs.
I guess Just one question, as it is a big subject with multiple aspects to it.
What do you make of this realm we find ourselves living in?
This includes what's above and below and all the things around us. Flat? globe? Moon hoax? space hoax? what are the luminaries? etc.
Thanks for replying, Rian. I look forward to your response.
03 Feb 2020 20:07:00
You’re right I’m not shocked by anything, and I am firm in my beliefs but not so firm that I’m unable to change my point of view. I’ve changed my mind on a lot of things over the years.
I’ve never really thought much about flat earth before now, but observing the conversation you’ve been having with Ed033 has been really interesting, and certainly provides much food for thought.
I can’t really say if the earth is a globe or flat, but I’m open to the idea that either is possible. I’ve certainly got an interest in the subject now thanks to you both, and I will explore both sides of the argument as much as possible over time. I won’t make my mind up quickly. I try to remain open despite the noise all around. I have been trying to read up on the antarctic for a couple of years now, and I think there is something huge going on there that is being kept from us.
I think almost everything we’re told in society is manufactured propaganda. I stopped listening to the mm many years ago. I don’t really believe anything I’m told. I do think we are all programmed from day one, and mentally unshackling yourself from the pack is challenging.
My interest in alternative explanations started in childhood. Even when I was very young I never really believed LHO killed JFK. I still shudder at the thought that a lot of people still think he did it.
I never believed in the moon landings. Along with JFK and 9/11 this is a subject I have studied exhaustively. All three demonstrate the power of the mm, and how you can deceive people on a global scale quite easily.
So yes, if we are all living in the Truman Show, it really wouldn’t shock me.
Like you SM, I am simply looking for the truth. I just wish more people would start asking questions.
And hsf, you’re a little bit like my wife. She is afraid to believe because once she accepts that something big like 9/11 or the moon landings are a lie, she realises that she would have to re-evaluate absolutely everything.
And that is completely mind blowing and quite frightening for someone to contemplate. But you wouldn’t be sniffing around this site if it wasn’t for the fact that you’re beginning to have doubts yourself. You would have been long gone by now.
03 Feb 2020 20:58:57
Thanks for the insightful reply, Rian. It would appear we at a similar place when in comes to opinions of the discussions on this page.
Antarctica is an interesting subject. I have look into Admiral Byrd's expeditions and its difficult to work out what exactly he means. He makes some crazy statements about the North Pole too. The 'Lost Diaries' would be an interesting read if they existed and were found.
I was having a debate on flat Earth with someone on NYE and they facetimed a friend who happened to be working in Antarctica. Don't know what the chances of that happening were?
I was really pissed off that I was introduced with a mocking tone, as a flat Earther (because apparently even if you ask questions you are a flat earther and should be shamed for doing so haha) .
It was a short conversation, but he said the fact that he was near the South Pole, proved the Earth was flat? . Still not quite sure how exactly. I just laughed, told him to steal the biggest vehicle he could find, preferably a plane, and head South and stream it too me live. We'd no one way or another.
04 Feb 2020 09:54:28
You'll never win people over going straight into the flat earth conversation. Even if they're nice to your face they are not going to believe you. Better start with something like the gulf of Tonkin or WMD's in Iraq, because everyone knows now we were lied to about them. Then you can broaden the conversation a little over time. FE is too big a leap even for people who are naturally sceptical imo.
I do think something is happening in Antarctica and is being kept from us. Just what it is, I don't know. If anyone has any links I'd love to check them out.
06 Feb 2020 07:57:20
I don't just jump in with FE theory, Rian. I like to warm people up with what brought me to think about it. Moon hoax, flaws in macro-evolution, possibilities of proof of instant creation and the mainstream hiding, ignoring or ridiculing these facts with non-proof answers.
Then, once you got their attention. BANG, hit 'em with FE theory haha.
02 Feb 2020 21:25:40
Just finished watching the 2nd video you posted with the interview with David Paulides.
The evidence really is mind bending and makes no logical sense. The thing I am most sure about though is that the National Park's and FBI are hiding things. Whether they actually know what's going on or they are covering up the fact they don't understand what they do know, I am not sure.
The tracker dogs not being able to pick up any sort of scent is just weird. Have tracker dogs ever acted this way, with a control environment in place, or has it only happened on these cases? I guess it could be tested to some degree.
The suggestion that the 'wind noises' picked up on some of the phone calls and the possibility of it being the victim being lifted into the air, did cross my mind. But surely, no matter your age, that would make you scream or shout out? . You could freeze up. But all of the cases? .
As illogical as it sounds, vanishing into thin air seems more likely. Brought that video you posted on inter-dimensional beings and the US government, to mind.
{Ed033's Note - No doubt the National Parks and FBI are hiding things. It's likely that no one really knows exactly what's going on, but the 'authorities' want to keep it all quiet.
Below is a discussion about Dave Paulides' latest video - Missing 411 The Hunted, an expansion of his book Missing 411, Hunters Unexplained Disappearances, which focuses on 5 strange cases all involving capable hunters.
Agree0Disagree0
03 Feb 2020 07:14:26
Thanks Ed. Really fascinated by this subject, not heard evidence as portrayed by D. Paulidses before. Maybe because its suppressed?
I would like to get some of his books, but they are quite pricey.
I am always on the look out for high value info books though, on the cheap. Just got blacks law 7th edition delivered for £6 so happy with that. Only problem is now I am studying legalese and Fomenko, at the same time as all this other stuff. TBH, loving it! . Mind for filled.
{Ed033's Note - Yes, all these subjects we've covered on here over the last 3 months has made it a joy to get up and delve deeper. Much better than the mainstream keeping your mind in a tiny box with their dis info.
You could go into your local library and see if they could order in 1 or more of his books?
03 Feb 2020 19:46:32
I Listened to the podcast above and then went on to watch the film 'Missing 411 The Hunted' and I don't know what to add other than the fact I agree that none of it adds up.
At the end of the film there are a couple of cases that are not missing people but more paranormal experiences.
One of these cases was at a camp that Ron Morehead set up at a secret remote location in the 1950's with four of his close friends. The went every year to hunt together.
They started to hear strange noises at the start of the seventies and on a return trip they took recording equipment with them.
All of the audio has been checked for it being fake and 'experts' in the field said there was no way it could have been.
There is actual video in the movie but there is nothing of note to be seen in these, it is what you can hear that's important. I found the actual audio recordings. Be interested in others opinions on this, but it has freaked me out a bit. Cold shivers.
03 Feb 2020 20:08:19
Sasquatch Sierra Sounds Part 2 by Ron Morehead & Al Berry
{Ed033's Note - i can't make a determination from the audio, sounds frightening.
03 Feb 2020 21:11:32
I am not the people that made these recordings. But if I was camping somewhere deep in the middle of nowhere, and heard sounds like these. I assure you the last thing that I would be doing is going back anywhere near the place.
These sounds have been analysed by a professor ( I will find his name out if you want me too) and his expert opinion is that these creatures are around 7 and a half to eight and a half feet tall, with a vastly superior vocal range to humans, by going higher and lower in pitch than human frequencies.
You can definitely hear what appears to be a language amongst the sounds.
02 Feb 2020 17:48:57
Ed033 and anyone else who'd like to chime in, I was just wondering what is your stance on God and/ or religion. I have a series of questions relating to this if you wouldn't mind?
1). Do you believe in God?
2). In what sense do you believe in God? Are you monothiestic, polytheistic or something else?
3). Given that there are a number of different religious ideologies around the world, with a lot of them having multiple Gods, are they all real Gods, fake, or misinterpretations?
4). Are you open to the idea that you could be wrong about your views on God? Whether you believe or not.
5). If you are open to the idea of being wrong, what would it take to prove you wrong?
For example if you don't believe in God, you may say something along the lines of "I want to see God personally". Or if you do believe in God it may be something like "finding life on another planet".
6). Assuming you were wrong in your beliefs, what would you turn to instead?
This applies to both believers and non-believers.
{Ed033's Note - These are all mainstream ideas / concepts. This is not a mainstream site.
Anyway, i now default to us living inside a non moving, closed system creation where the closest model that might be correct is the Flat Earth model.
If i see better evidence that the Geocentric model is correct then it's still a Creation in my mind and i move to thinking the Geocentric model is correct.
If i see better evidence that the Heliocentric model is correct then it's still a Creation in my mind and i move to thinking the Heliocentric model is correct.
Whichever the one above, as it's a Creation, then there has to be a Creator or Creators and religion doesn't come into it.
Agree0Disagree0
02 Feb 2020 21:19:35
You said wrong 4 times HSF. How can anyone even begin to consider the the concept of God within such a rigid and narrow mindset? You have such a black and white view of the world it’s a wonder you even bother to come on here.
02 Feb 2020 21:24:17
What are your answers to these questions you write, hsf?
1. I believe there are things at play that are beyond my comprehension and if I say anymore it will be pure conjecture. I guess I believe in seeking the truth.
2. conjecture
3. Not a direct answer but there seems to be similar concepts in all religions the main one I think of is the 'Great Flood'. I'm of the belief antediluvian history is being hidden from us all. I can only assume hiding anything has an evil purpose and it is controlling information which creates a lack of trust.
4. I will happily admit I am wrong when shown to be so. As I have previously stated. I seek the truth.
5. The truth, if against my opinion, would prove me wrong.
The only person to have supposedly met God in mortal form is Enoch. Maybe read his book. Although it is non-canonical. (Why is that? )
6. I always except and humbly turn to the truth.
03 Feb 2020 11:03:40
Rian, I'm just interested in the other side of the fence's views, why they believe in them and what would they do if they are wrong. There is nothing narrow minded about that, I'm not looking to try and prove people wrong. Maybe I'm wrong but I figured narrow minded views were ones which fail to acknowledge the concept of there being a different answer/ view/ theory etc?
SM.
1). No.
2). None.
3). Misinterpretations. I think there are a lot of stories from holy books that are very similar to one another, from different time periods and different parts of the world. I personally think that the majority of stories may well be true, but I think a lot can be explained by things like asteroid or comet impacts and extra-solar phenomenen.
For example, approximately 13,000 years ago a comet impacted Greenland. This caused mass flooding on several continents, caused the whole of north america to set fire and almost ended human life on the planet. It's estimated that we may have gone down to as little as 100,000 in population globally!
4). Of course.
5). I'm not going to lie, it would take quite a bit to convince me that God is real. Simply because of how Gods are depicted in the different cultures. So for this I would say I need to see God do something from one of the holy books, like part the sea or bring something that's been dead for 3 days back to life.
There are things which would make me more open to the idea, seeing some genuine paranormal activity like a ghost that just randomly throws my quilt off my bed, would definitely make me think twice.
6). If God came to me and parted the sea before my eyes as an example of proof, my next step would be to ask what I need to do in life. Then whatever was said to me would be exactly what I'd do. I mean I'd have no choice really.
But if it was proven that God isn't real and what I believe in also turned out to be false, then I'd just wait for evidence to point me in the right direction.
03 Feb 2020 21:59:09
Just to point out something regarding your example in your response to question 3, hsf.
You are just replacing ancient stories apparently told for thousands of years and believed by most of the inhabitants of this planet, with stories from MS science.
There are no cold hard facts to either. You either believe what you are told or you don't.
You will probably reply with something like "they explain this and that and it all makes sense". (this and that is poetic license to shorten this post :) )
But there are people that have done studies on crazy possibilities, like for instance, the recent study on fallen Titans that Ed033 posted. Watch that series of 6-7 videos. You may not believe it but the evidence is there if you want to believe.
That is kind of my point really. You have to take a leap of faith, of sorts, in whatever you believe. It's just that I think the people in charge of the stories in the mainstream have the most to gain from whatever they want to tell us.
04 Feb 2020 08:18:28
What if you’re wrong hsf? Have you considered the possibility? Free yourself from the programming. Most people here are looking for the truth. Right or wrong doesn’t really come into it.
04 Feb 2020 17:53:47
I have considered the possibility Rian. And regarding things like God there is no right or wrong answer, yet. And I am free of the programming.
I don't adhere to most things commercial or conformist. For example I rather enjoy Death Metal and wear baggy clothes. I don't watch TV, listen to the radio or read mainstream news papers. I also differ in opinion to the MS archaeology when it comes to ancient Egypt, I think there is very good evidence to suggest that they weren't built 5,000 years ago but refurbished during that time period and built much earlier.
Here is a link to one of the bits of evidence for this, if you wish.
wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphinx_water_erosion_hypothesis
SM. The Younger Dryas theory has only been mainstream for a year or two and was vehemently dismissed until the discovery of a 31 kilometer wide crater under Greenlands ice. Randall Carlson has been at the forefront of this theory and almost lost his career because of it.
youtube.com/watch?v=R31SXuFeX0A
I know it's Joe Rogan and he's not exactly popular on here, but Randall Carlson is very interesting to listen to.
What is it you believe the mainstream have to gain from saying these things? Just curious to know, not going to try and trash you reasoning or anything.
{Ed033's Note - Joe Rogan has been mainstream for quite a while now.
06 Feb 2020 20:26:11
hsf. You do realise a theory is just that. A theory.
A theory, whether supported by the MS or not, is still a theory and not truth. Believing in that would be no different than believing in a God, that you so brashly dismiss.
And how do you know how old the pyramids are? . 5000 years? Isn't this too, a theory? .
And if you don't understand what is to be gained by the elite who control the MSBS, there is no hope for you, my friend. These are not the pages you are looking for.
{Ed033's Note - hsf throws out numbers like 13,000 years ago and 2 billion years ago as though this means something - It's all made up mainstream theory b.s.
01 Feb 2020 16:03:50
Do you still believe we went to the moon song / info / animation
Agree0Disagree0
01 Feb 2020 16:24:56
Yes.
Because we have mirrors up there that we bounce lasers off, so we can accurately measure the distance between the Earth and the Moon. These were planted into the Moon on the very first Moon landing.
{Ed033's Note - But can't you only bounce lasers off of something over a short distance because the laser light spreads out the further it is from the source?
If the Moon is 225,623 miles away, the laser light would be miles across and so it wouldn't work.
Also by NASA saying there are mirrors on the Moon doesn't mean there are mirrors on the Moon.
If there are mirrors on the Moon why can't we be told exactly where the mirrors are so we can have a look at them through telescopes and why can't we have a go at bouncing lasers off the mirrors if it's possible?
01 Feb 2020 18:07:01
I know nothing of lasers so I couldn't comment on that.
It's actually publicly available where the locations are. It's the landing sites for Apollo 11, 14 and 15. As well as Luna 17 and 21.
And the reason we can't do it from home, is because lasers that powerful are not available for commercial use. As I said earlier, I know nothing of lasers but I did find this reddit post from someone who worked on the APOLLO (observatory, not the rockets) project.
03 Feb 2020 10:21:06
On one of the vids either Ed033 or SM posted recently there is a reference to a laser test successfully being done in the early sixties by both the US and the Russians. Who put the mirrors up for that test? Or is it the science that is flawed?
If it comes from NASA, it’s propaganda. Next you’ll be quoting Neil de Grasse Tyson.
03 Feb 2020 19:48:37
1. So does that also mean Ruscosmos, European Space Agency, Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency, China Nations Space Agency and the Indian Space Research Organisation are all propaganda tools too? Because these agencies are regularly pumping out news stories that corroborate what NASA say, even though they do their own research and development.
2. On April 8th 2002, I watched the space shuttle Atlantis take off from the Kennedy Space center - was that fake?
3. And aside from being slightly annoying like a hyperactive child, what's wrong with Neil de Grasse Tyson? He's one of the top scientists of the 21st century, along with Sean Carroll, Brian Cox, Carl Sagan, etc.
{Ed033's Note -
1. There is no difference between NASA and the other Space Agencies
2. I don't doubt you saw something leave the ground and go into the air
3. They're not "top scientists", they're top dis info agents
03 Feb 2020 23:37:49
hsf, Neil de Grasse Tyson tells us the world is "pear-shaped" yet all the photos he shows us are spherical.
01 Feb 2020 11:10:12
One quick question for people who think the heliocentric model and all that goes with it is real is, where did all the water on Earth come from originally?
Agree0Disagree0
01 Feb 2020 15:49:18
Kuiper Belt and Oort cloud are the most likely candidates. The most widely used and believed theory is that it all came from comet impacts, there is a lot of evidence to suggest this.
It's not conclusive and it's something that they've been trying to get a definitive answer for quite a while now.
There is also another theory that was gathering pace a few months ago, that suggested our planet got it's water from a major collision with another planet. That planet being the hypothetical "Theia" which smashed into us a few billion years ago. This collision is also widely believed to be the reason our moon formed too.
youtube.com/watch?v=RB5eUdHub8M
{Ed033's Note - Thanks for the response hsf, it would be good to get to the bottom of this because we are talking about a huge amount of water here.
I'm not a mainstream space guy, but there seems to be a few questions to ask.
Comets?:
1. Don't you think the water/ice on the comets would be vaporised in the atmosphere before reaching the ground of Earth?
2. How did the water get onto the comets?
3. How many comets would it take to fill up the Earth with water?
4. How did the comets know when to stop bringing water here after the Earth was full up with water?
5. How do the comets know to come to Earth?
6. Where is the water originally created?
Another planet?:
7. How did this hypothetical "Theia" get water on it in the first place?
8. If the water flew off hypothetical "Theia" into space wouldn't it instantaneously freeze in space?
9. How did the water get through the atmosphere without being vaporised?
10. According to the heliocentric model, wouldn't Earth still be molten rock a few billion years ago?
11. Wouldn't gravity on the other planet keep the water on the other planet?
12. If gravity can't hold water onto the sides of the planet, wouldn't the water have already been sucked off by the vacuum of space?
There's probably loads of other questions if people thought about it.
01 Feb 2020 17:33:34
At this point in time I am pretty sure you will only get conjecture as answers for all these questions.
They only thing that I can say is fact, is how they try to figure out where the water came from.
They use a deuterium/ hydrogen isotopic ratio. Water from comets have 3 times the ratio of Earths water, which is why they think it came from the asteroids which have a similar ratio to that of Earths.
Every theory for these questions would be so hard to prove or even disprove. Make's me think of that quote from Tesla.
01 Feb 2020 17:45:32
These are all fair questions Ed. Some of them likely don't have definitive answers as of yet.
1). The water would likely vapourise on impact yes, however Earths gravity would stop the gas phase water from leaving our planet and it would end up being stored in the atmosphere. Over millions of years the planet would be showered with intense rains, eventually forming oceans.
Water can also be stored in the mantle on a molecular level, so not all of the it would be vapourised on impact, but instead forced into and absorbed by the mantle.
2). Supernova. During a stars life time it's core is fusing atoms to create new atoms, the older the star the heavier the atoms being fused. In the beginning, the stars will fuse atoms to create light elements such as hydrogen and helium, toward the stars end, it will be creating heavy elements such as Iron and Gold. When the stars core has "filled up" so to speak, it succumbs to it's gravity and goes supernova. This releases all of the fused atoms out into space at 99% the speed of light and creates giant nebulae that span light years across. It's within these nebulae that everything is formed. Stars, asteroids, planets, comets and moons.
3). Lots, that's the only way to put it. The standard model suggests that during the "proto" phase of the solar system, every single planet that formed was finding it's correct orbital path in relation to other planets. During this time the Oort cloud and Kuiper Belt were disturbed by huge gravitational forces like Jupiter and Neptune, this caused large volumes of comets to come inward towards the Sun.
Using the Moon as evidence (based on crator impacts), it's thought that we were hit with thousands of comets in a few million years.
4). The comets stopped bombarding us once the orbital paths of the gas giants were settled. The best way to explain this is to show you a simulation of a solar system formation.
This video is from the California Academy of Sciences, and shows how we believe solar systems are formed.
youtube.com/watch?v=yXq1i3HlumA
5). Can be explained via the solar system formation simulation above.
6). Inside a Stars core. See #2
7). I've not looked into the Theia hypothesis too much, but I did read that it was thought to be an ocean world. So that could mean it formed in a Hydrogen and Oxygen rich area of a solar system. As those are the two atoms needed to make water.
However, that would just be using my own logic as I haven't looked into it.
8). Yes, some of it would. The Earth used to have rings around it, much like Saturn did, and we still do have a very, very faint ring around us. This was caused by the collision between Earth and Theia, with large amounts of rock, ice and mantle being ejected into space, then coalescing in our orbit due to gravity and forming the Moon. Which by the way has large deposits of water ice, as well as an iron core.
Samples of Moon rock taken from the Moon showed that the composition of the Moon is almost identical to Earth, which means it must have been a part of Earth at some point.
9). Large amounts of it would have been vaporised. But it's an enormous body of water that's bound to a rocky planet estimated to be between Mars and Venus in size.
Comets are an example of water making it through the atmosphere and they are much smaller in size.
10). Yes, Earth was more or less a molton ball of rock during its early stages, it took a billion or so years for it to cool down enough to form a crust over the mantle.
Funnily enough, it's thought that the first moment life could appear on the planet, it did. Which bodes well for people who believe we're not alone in the universe.
11). Yes, but Theia was obliterated on impact and Earth is a bigger volume of mass, so has stronger gravity.
12). I'm not sure if I'm understanding the question properly, is this a follow on question to #11? If so, then it being obliterated would explain why it couldn't hold it's water.
{Ed033's Note - Ok, thanks a lot for the replies.
01 Feb 2020 22:39:10
hsf. You very well 'educated'. Have you any personal experiences on these matters? or is it all spoon fed?
{Ed033's Note - You mean very well schooled.
If you just take question 1 of mine, In the heliocentric model there is no way any water at any time can get through the atmosphere to the surface of Earth because the atmosphere constantly burns everything up/vaporises it.
02 Feb 2020 07:49:57
They will just say. " Back then, there was no atmosphere to burn off the water" as they park the Delorean out back.
{Ed033's Note - good point
02 Feb 2020 07:57:35
"10). Yes, Earth was more or less a molton ball of rock during its early stages, it took a billion or so years for it to cool down enough to form a crust over the mantle"
A very definitive answer, hsf. So can you explain why there are polonium 218 halos frozen inside of the granite? As polonium 218 isotopes only have a half life of 3 minutes. If granite took 'billions or so years for it to cool' they simple would not be there.
02 Feb 2020 12:16:49
I prefer to call it educating myself rather than being spoon fed. I didn't learn this at school or college, I took the time to research it all myself because I'm an enormous nerd at heart. I use a combination of my own logic and the evidence that's put in front of me to decide whether I think it's true or not. I don't just blindly follow whatever NASA or which ever governing body is in charge says.
I don't know what you mean by "personal experience". I can only assume it's a rhetorical or sarcastic question, as clearly I'm not an astronaut and I'm not old enough to have witnessed the creation of the universe, obviously.
Also I know nothing of Polonium 218, I did quickly look up what you were referring too, but didn't find anything to answer your question. I will have a look a bit later and see if I can come up with anything that might explain it.
02 Feb 2020 19:00:01
Look, hsf. Firstly I want to apologise for a comment made below somewhere. "it's not like i was expecting to actually learn anything from hsf. ".
I am still bitter from a conversation with an 'engineer' that said my thoughts are worthless, for he has been trained. I am sure you understand why? (still no excuse)
This has however flowed into our conversation and turned me in to some what of a hypocrite and for that I am sorry. Although we may disagree on things, this does not subtract from the value of your opinion.
OK, now that's out there. By personal experience I mean have you learnt any of this first hand, through your own experiences or are you excepting what you are told? . I know with the above questions this would be hard, I was generalising really.
You remember when Ed ask if we wanted the Space/ Astro page? . I was as excited as you about space and the new missions and all the amazement they find. (planet size diamonds, a possible Dyson sphere, vampire stars etc etc) .
I have always struggled believing the Moon landings and Apollo missions, there was a lot of stuff I had seen that suggested the possibility of it being fake. Then Ed mention or rather posted a video by Bart Sibrel showing NASA and the Apollo astronauts faking being half way to the Moon. And this fake shot is the same as the picture of the Earth from the Moon. It was used in textbooks etc and its fake. Why fake it when you have been to the Moon? . You just wouldn't fake it.
NASA and other space agencies have launched countless equipment in to space to the outer planets that they could have used to take a full view picture of the Earth. But they haven't. They have photoshopped 2d data over a globe model and then make it look pretty. Why? .
Then we have the whole Van Allen belt problem, which NASA still hasn't figured out how to get a human past it. All except the Apollo crews, that is. Probably because 1960's bacofoil had some very peculiar properties, especially when it comes to deflecting solar radiation and comic rays.
I am not even sure we have got a craft of any sort past the VA belts if I am honest, so that put's everything in the 'space' category in to question. Things that reinforce this logic is when MS science women ( I forget her name) start putting out videos saying "the air around the Earth is millions of degrees hot, and that's fact".
I eave it at that for now as this, is turning out to be an essay and i don't want to delete it out of this tiny box, which I have done before.
P. S. Please don't think 1960's bacofoil has any special properties. This was sarcasm. :)
03 Feb 2020 12:01:38
That's fine SM, we all have our bad days.
I won't deny there are cover ups a plenty in the world, but I personally just don't see the Moon landing being one of them. The major holes in the mainstream view of the Moon landing can all be explained. But a lot of the things that can't be explained, don't really hold enough weight to say "it was faked". That's just my personal view of course.
The VA belts are interesting, Mr. VA himself did indeed say that it would be impossible to sustain life in these belts, but that quote was actually cherry picked. The entire statement is referring to a 2 year manned mission in the VA belt, to which he said it's impossible. He has never said it's impossible to pass through them, just it's impossible to sustain life in the belts. He also publicly denounced the conspiracies about the VA belts killing the astronauts.
Here is a link to an e-mail conversation with James van Allen himself, talking about the belts.
forum.cosmoquest.org/archive/index.php/t-3885.html
The thing with radiation it's all about the length of time spent within an irradiated area. A good example is Chernobyl, you can drive through Chernobyl in a car wearing shorts and t-shirt, without developing any issues due to radiation exposure.
Me personally, I'm looking for anything to show signs of Alien life. So things like HD 101065 (Przybylski's Star), which is a star that has plutonium with in it's spectrum, are fascinating to me. Same with KIC 8462852 (Tabby's star), which had strange dimming patterns and the mainstream media went into a frenzy, claiming it was a dyson sphere.
As much as I find some conspiracies entertaining, I just find the stuff I listed in the previous paragraph far more interesting.
03 Feb 2020 21:26:06
I am just going to repeat a section of my previous post, because it was one of the main things that really got me to see my views now.
"NASA and other space agencies have launched countless equipment in to space to the outer planets that they could have used to take a full view picture of the Earth. But they haven't. They have photoshopped 2d data over a globe model and then make it look pretty. Why? . "
I admit I need to do some proper research to know exact figures on the VA belts, and I do understand what you are saying regarding radiation. I am not sure it's a valid argument though. I don't know enough on the subject.
Wasn't the VA belts supposed to be 10,000 times higher than normal because of a solar flare at the time of the lunar missions?
And why have we got NASA saying that we need to overcome the problem of the VA belts before humans can travel through it? .
They say they have been to the Moon with 1960's tech, but have lost all the data and now need to figure out how to get past the VA belts when we are in 2020? Come on, none of it adds up.
{Ed033's Note - Until someone proves otherwise, i'll call planets and stars - luminaries.