Do We Really Need the Moon?
The Moon is such a familiar presence in the sky that most of us take it for granted.
But what if it wasn't where it is now? How would that affect life on Earth? Space scientist and lunar fanatic Dr Maggie Aderin-Pocock explores our intimate relationship with the Moon.
Besides orchestrating the tides, the moon dictates the length of a day, the rhythm of the seasons and the very stability of our planet.
Yet the Moon is always on the move. In the past it was closer to Earth and in the future it'll be farther away. That it is now perfectly placed to sustain life is pure luck, a cosmic coincidence.
Using computer graphics to summon up great tides and set the Earth spinning on its side, Maggie Aderin-Pocock implores us to look at the Moon afresh: to see it not as an inert rock, but as a key player in the story of our planet, past, present and future.
I commend you for keeping an open mind @Intbel.
Do you know the difference between a "Scientific Theory" and a colloquial "Theory"? They are not the same thing.
they never went 2 da moon my freinds... and thats why until today no one has try it (no country no us no china no japan no one has plans 2 do so...big fake like 9/11 wake up sheeples
We should go back to the moon and build structures on the surface. We can learn more about the solar system by pushing further out into space.
The Moon Matrix Base that watches over waterland earth.
At first change your title. Do you really have any control on and over its existence and always remember that science tells the cause but you do not know the cause of cause.every existence has its role to play and better to know the limits. got it.
Cool docu, but I don't agree about the transmission of energy via microwaves, the earth will surely suffer if you bombard it with constant energy.
Pink Floyd said it best: I'll see you on the dark side of the moon.
BRILLIANT! (no I am not English... just wanted to say that) :))) :P :-)
@ Intbel
Ha ha ha! If it pops out put some jam on it and call it toast.
I don't if it's a planet and a planet, or a planet and a moon, but we're in a specific relativity to two bodies that inspired Grecian/Roman mythology as guardians, which it is now discovered that they are actually guardians, by force of gravity directing much of the cosmic debris away from Earth.
jack1952 - I'm pleased to have been of some usefulness.
However, it never happened quite like that:
The scenario yiu describe was in China and one of the scientists said "I do believe it is a Jack in the box" and they manufactured billions of 'em and exported 'em worldwide to unsuspecting children thus realising the American Dream of the manufacturing companies which were American anyway, they having moved to China to take advantage of low labour costs in order to maximise profits.
When the mrket was saturated and they could sell no more of these toys, the US government suddenly announced these things were harmful to children and banned their import.
The manufacturing company, with a minimum of re-tooling (for packaging and labeling) later sold them as er ... toasters.
So what you have to day is, a product made by US companies based in China, being used to make toast out of bread made with genetically mutated wheat which harms the children.
So the end result is the same anyways.
@ Tomregit ...
Prizes, rewards? Nah. I am able to offer you a small gift if you are willing to receive it.
Not something of little value, either. Not something which will end up in the dumpster in a few weeks or years.
Y'see ... many folks spend lotsa cash on training courses and seminars and DVDs, and CDs and tapes all to no avail.
They are all wanting to live a life which is happy, of peace and of love.
I offer an answer as a free gift. No religion or anything like that, no 'spiritual' doctrines of any kind,just plain common sense born of experience.
Free. No catches. No follow ups. No obligations. Accept or reject - I don't mind either way.
Of course, respecting your privacy, I'll not ask for your e-mail or anything like that, so I'll just post it here, if you accept.
Of course, everyone else will also read it and that's okay. What I get for free I'mm happy to share for free.
Oh ... btw, begging is not asking nicely ;-)
@ Intbel
Your posts have shown me a new way of understanding the scientific process. I picture a group of men in lab coats standing around a table scratching their heads and staring at their latest creation. One of them speaks out in awe "I wonder what it is?". To which another replies "Well, lets plug it in and see". After watching the thing in operation for a while one of the men exclaims "I believe its a toaster! Someone get some bread!" After successfully making a slice of toast they congratulate each other on their brilliance and dream of how they will now spend the millions that this invention will bring them. Its the American dream.
@ tomregit
Thanks man, I wish more people were I lived felt the way you do. I live in the Southestern US, which has always been the least scientifically literate area of the US, but now its really getting bad. The average person down here thinks Obama is a secret muslim and that global warming is an issue made up by the left. They defend there position on global warming by saying that god controls the earth and man can never have any significant effect on it, can you imagine that? I mean look around, man has effected the earth in uncountable negative ways. The truth is that the republican far right has denied global warming because cutting carbon emissions cuts into their profits, threatens to put in place more regulation, and spurrs the desire to get off of fossil fuels- which is something they can not abide as they are in bed with the big oil producers and so forth. They want complete freedom to make as much money as they can no matter what it does to the environment or how many people they kill or make sick. They have jammed up the current administration through filibuster after filibuster to block any useful or positive legistlation.
Even if they had not of blocked everything, we are in a tight spot here. The US currency and economy depends on oil trading and production, as well as the use of fossil fuels and petroleum by products to keep almost every industry we have going. We produce carbon emmisions to grow our food, for manufaturing, to make electricity, for almost every meaningful thing we do. The trade of oil in US dollars has made our currency what it is today, it holds together the delicate house of cards that is the global power structure. I am not blind to these factors, and I do not expect us to just stop using fossil fuels over night. All I ask is that we start taking this issue seriousely by being aggressive in our efforts to exclude fossil fuels.
This would have such a positive effect on the US's safety and stability that I can not imagine why everyone would not desire it to take place, even if they don't see the 2000 pound gorrilla in the living room called global warming. Right now the if the US wants to remain a global power we should be positioning ourself to lead the globe in alternative renewable green energy and replacements for petroleum derivitives. Instead we are positioning ourselves to capture all remaining oil and natural gas around the globe, even if we have to kill innocent people to do so. The powers that be are using religion to set the American people against these oil and natural gas producing nations by demonizing Islam and saying they have a plan for global dominance.
So how do we stop this, through scientific literacy and education. If more people here in the US understood the science behind these issues they would also realize the danger in continued use of fossil fuels. If more people here were educated to understand economics and political procedure then more people would see the lies and deciet taking place. More people would undersatand that the current system, fractional reserve banking and control by the privately owned fed, makes us all slaves to debt and traps us into a system were our legal entity is owned by the government. And above all, not only would education open peoples eyes to these things it would impower them to make positive changes.
@Intbel OK, OK fess up! I'm beggin you man! I'm on my knees. (No smart assed comments like "Oh, while you're down there)
@Waldo
I've read many of your well thought out and intelligent posts on this site, to the point that I feel that I am getting to know you in some small way. I share your love of science and the scientific method and feel that it is the only way forward for humanity. Reading between the lines I am assuming you are an American. This fact makes me feel more empathic toward you as scientific literacy declines in your country where it once led the world. Keep fighting the good fight; education is the key. I am from Canada. To paraphrase a former prime minister, being so close to you is like being in bed with an elephant. Every small twitch and movement sends shock waves through us. Thankfully our society is not yet as polarized as yours with religious zealots and their pride in ignorance rippling through society. My fear is that we're right behind you!
A decline in science leads to a crippling of its offspring, technology, followed by a smaller presence on the world stage. Although it's been hard to swallow the American swaggering through the Bush Doctrine years and the seeming powerlessness of the new regime to really change anything, there are other much darker societies ready to take center stage. Achems razor, this is directed to you too.
@Vlatco I visit and enjoy daily, thank you! If my post is too far off topic here, like so many threads seem to go, I'll understand if it's deleted. I wanted to communicate with people I feel are kindred spirits. (An odd turn of phrase coming from an atheist.)
@ Tomregit ...
Heh heh. You have to ask me nicely.
I'm betting that Intbel is just "taking the piss" out of everyone. He's too imaginative and well spoken to be that stupid! So.....Intbel for being the first to recognise it do I win a prize?
@ Waldo ...
I do not understand how my being allowed to vote or not has anything to do with this?
Still, as you raise the issue, I don't vote, much preferring peaceful anarchy to violent government. All governments have ever done is lead folks into debt, poverty and war so why anyone would vote for a government is beyond my understanding.
@ Intbel
Thats not how peer review works, for the most part. Sure their are some bad apples that work for certain publications- but for the vast majority of the time only ideas that lack enough evidence through experiment and observation are rejected. As far as global warming not being ture, you need to wake up man. I am not interested in debationg Al Gores program, I agree that he takes advantage of the problem for self glorification and to make money. But that doesn't mean there is no proof of global warming, there is tons of hard evidence that says it is true. The evidence that places it in question is taken out of context by deniers, and made to look as if it seriously challenges the prevailing theory that global warming is real, and man made.
I have even heard deniers say, "Well it has been unusually cold lately so global warming is an obviouse lie." Thats the most simple minded ridiculous statement I have ever heard. The climate is a very complicated thing, the phrase global warming doesn't mean it will get noticeably hotter every where. It means the climate will start to do unusuall things, caused by variables set in motion by the raise of global average temps- like the ice caps melting and shutting down the oceanic currents that bring heat up the atlantic sea board from the equator. It means the ocean levels will rise due to melting ice caps, hurricanes will get stronger and more frequent.
Surely you do not deny that the ice caps are melting, and that adding that much fresh water to the ocean will raise sea levels. Surely you are not denying that the temperature of the atlantic ocean is higher than we have ever seen it, causing phyto plankton to die off at an astronomical rate and hurricanes to be more severe. The data that proves all of this is not kept in some vault nor is it something beyond the reach of the common everyday person. Saying it is real but not man made changes nothing. We cant sit back and watch the world fall to pieces saying, "I didn't do it so I am not cleaning it up!" We know the earth is warming, we know what the result will be, we know that the gases we produce contribute to the problem even if they are not the soul cause (which they are in my opinion)- so we must find better ways to fuel our energy needs- period.
Ahh, forget it. wasting time with someone like you is just that- wasting time. Luckily a huge poulation of the world has the ability to think past the end of there own nose or the limit of their tax tolerance. Besides you were not rejecting contraversial nor abstract theories. You were denying the most simple standard knowledge, and asserting in its place a bunch of made up b.s. that has not one shred of data or one observation to back it up. And if you criticize peer review you criticize science in general, as it is the most integral part of the field. Otherwise we would have global warming deniers and ancient alien hypothesis getting the same respect and validation as Einstiens relativity. I give up, this is why I say scientific illiteracy and practicle effective education is what we need more than anything in this country. People like you should not be allowed to vote!!
@ Waldo ...
Again, I'm not supporting ANY theory.
In truth, we don't know.
Until we do know, any theory with a grain of logic is up for debate.
My only objection is folks dismissing any theory out of hand without examination.
Sure there's a lotta sound science.
There is also invalid science.
Al Gore's global warming nonsense, for example, is not sound science yet we are supposed to believe it. Not only that, we are expected to pay tax on the back of it.
Ditto the official story re 9/11. On the back of that one, many thousands killed and maimed.
I'll not criticise science in general. I do criticise the peer review system which rejects new ideas either on the basis of them being outside current scientific understanding or accepts them because of political pressure.
While many advances are still being made, it is mainstream science, heavily influenced by political and corporate interests which is inhibiting progress in some areas and this is why I'll not blindly accept what the scientific community tells me.
. @ Intbel
Nice try, but I never said correlation did equal cause. I said that all of the experiments, mathematical data, computer models, plus correlation is how they came up with the theory. Now you are just trying to play gottcha, grow up man. Until you have some valid data or other evidence to suggest the accepted theory is wrong, your hypothesis is based on faith- and nothing more. Does that sound familiar? How someone can sit and talk with me over the Internet and then turn around and say science doesn't work or has it all wrong, is beyond me. Wake up man; look around you- science works. The theories and conclusions that make your cell phone, microwave, computer, GPS systems, thousands of satellites, the techniques used to save lives and give people mobility and freedom through prosthetics, the very Internet that makes this conversation possible- was all made possible through the creative application of hundreds of different scientific fields of study. They used the same techniques and standards as the guys that came up with the theory you are currently belittling. Its fine to disagree with the theory, that’s what science is all about, but you shouldn't criticize or ridicule science in general.
@kamanchililyeagle
The title it pretty basic journalistic technique... It's not implying they wish to remove it... rather it is a debate on whether or not the moon plays any significance (as to not state one position over the other; since this whole show is basically based on theory's).
Arnold Vinette,
I agree but you seem to be answering your own questions. The math does prove it. And the mass of the moon has been calculated and a hollow moon would not physically be possible on many counts. But then again defending that the moon is NOT hallow in the 21 century is kinda like defending the earth is flat. Whoever stated it was hallow was obviously trolling.
Define hollow... huge empty core? Wouldn't account for the mass. Objects follow very strict laws regarding mass and gravity. Pockets in the moon? That's a different concept all together. it's a stupid assumption. Most basic research and calculations would prove a hollow moon is just plain dumb.
Hmmm ... wordpress is being too PC.
It is peer review which has slowed the advance of knowledge and understanding.