The moon may not be natural

The Moon Is Hollow And This Is Why

December 11, 2013 by .
“What in blazes is our Moon doing way out there? It’s too far out to be a true satellite of Earth  , it is too big to have been captured by the Earth. The chances of such a capture having been effected and the Moon then having taken up a nearly circular orbit about the Earth are too small to make such an eventuality credible. . . . But, then, if the Moon is neither a true satellite of the Earth nor a captured one, what is it?” – Isaac Asimov, Asimov on Astronomy,” Doubleday, 1974; Mercury Press 1963; also quoted in Don Wilson’s book, Our Mysterious Spaceship Moon (1975).
The Moon is the eye in the sky to the inhabitants of Earth. It provides us with the natural tidal cycles which are said to maintain the equilibrium of all species on the planet. Peculiarly, certain phases of the Moon cycle are even known to affect our moods and emotions. Most will likely never question the existence or makeup of the Moon as it does its usual routine of lighting up the night sky and circling the planet, however many scientists are not convinced that the narrative of its origin is as ‘solid’ as we are lead to believe. Much controversy exists around the origin and makeup of the Moon today, and one of the largest arguments surrounding the satellite is the solidity (or lack thereof) of its center and the process by which we got our Moon in the first place.
Currently there are around 5 widely discussed theories of Moon formation. They are as follows:
1.)    Capture – This theory proposes that the Moon was captured by the gravitational pull of the Earth. The one main problem is the capture mechanism. A close encounter with Earth typically results in either collision or altered trajectories. This hypothesis has difficulty explaining the essentially identical oxygen isotope ratios of the two worlds.
 2.)    Fission – This theory states that during a time when the Earth was forming and was still molten, the spinning of the planet projected out material which became our moon today. The Pacific Ocean was supposedly the area where the Moon came from, however this was debunked considering the immaturity of the ocean floor crust and the knowing that the moon formed much longer ago.
 3.)    Accretion – This hypothesis states that the Earth and the Moon formed together as a double system from the primordial accretion disk of the Solar System. The problem with this hypothesis is that it does not explain the angular momentum of the Earth-Moon system or why the Moon has a relatively small iron core compared to the Earth (25% of its radius compared to 50% for the Earth).
 4.)    Georeactor Explosion – A more radical alternative hypothesis, published in 2010, proposes that the Moon may have been formed from the explosion of a georeactor located along the core-mantle boundary at the equatorial plane of the rapidly rotating Earth.
 5.)    The Giant Impact Theory – This was the most commonly accepted theory up until recently. This theory suggests that long ago a planetary body the size of Mars crashed into Earth expelling a large piece of mass into space which became our Moon. While this hypothesis explains many aspects of the Earth-Moon system, there are still a few unresolved problems facing it, such as the Moon’s volatile elements not being as depleted as expected from such an energetic impact. Another issue is Lunar and Earth isotope comparisons. In 2011, the most precise measurement yet of the isotopic signatures of lunar rocks was published. Surprisingly, the Apollo lunar samples carried an isotopic signature identical to Earth rocks, but different from other Solar system bodies. Since most of the material that went into orbit to form the Moon was thought to come from Theia (the name scientists gave to the impactor), this observation was unexpected. In 2007, researchers from Caltech showed that the likelihood of Theia having an identical isotopic signature as the Earth was very small (<1 2012="" an="" analysis="" apollo="" as="" br="" composition="" conflicts="" earth="" far="" forming="" from="" has="" in="" isotopes="" lunar="" moon="" nbsp="" of="" orbit.="" percent="" s="" same="" samples="" showed="" that="" the="" titanium="" ublished="" which="" with="">
Unfortunately none of the previous theories provide the answers to the big questions surrounding the Moon’s origins. What’s apparent however is the number of strange facts about the Moon which conjure up many ‘hmms’ about its existence. Let’s take a look at some of them:
1. Moon’s Age: The Moon is far older than previously expected, maybe even older than the Earth or the Sun. The oldest age for the Earth is estimated to be 4.6 billion years old; Moon rocks were dated at 5.3 billion years old, and the dust upon which they were resting was at least another billion years older. Some argue that the Moon may seem older only because its surface never renews itself, whereas the Earth may have rocks that old but have since been recycled through the natural resurfacing of the planet. [4]
2. Rock’s Origin: The chemical composition of the dust upon which the rocks sat differed remarkably from the rocks themselves, contrary to accepted theories that the dust resulted from weathering and breakup of the rocks themselves. The rocks had to have come from somewhere else. [5]
3. Heavier Elements on Surface: Normal planetary composition results in heavier elements in the core and lighter materials at the surface; not so with the Moon. Don Wilson writes in his book Our Mysterious Spaceship Moon,
“The abundance of refractory elements like titanium in the surface areas is so pronounced that several geologists proposed the refractory compounds were brought to the Moon’s surface in great quantity in some unknown way. They don’t know how, but that it was done cannot be questioned.”
 4. Water Vapor: On March 7, 1971, lunar instruments placed by the astronauts recorded a vapor cloud of water passing across the surface of the Moon. The cloud lasted 14 hours and covered an area of about 100 square miles. [1]
 5. Magnetic Rocks: Moon rocks were magnetized. This is odd because there is no magnetic field on the Moon itself. This could not have originated from a “close call” with Earth—such an encounter would have ripped the Moon apart. There have been many theories that aim to explain this magnetism however they all still sit as theories.
 6. Seismic Activity: Hundreds of “moonquakes” are recorded each year that cannot be attributed to meteor strikes. In November, 1958, Soviet astronomer Nikolay A. Kozyrev of the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory photographed a gaseous eruption of the Moon near the crater Alphonsus. He also detected a reddish glow that lasted for about an hour. In 1963, astronomers at the Lowell Observatory also saw reddish glows on the crests of ridges in the Aristarchus region. These observations have proved to be precisely identical and periodical, repeating themselves as the Moon moves closer to the Earth. These are probably not natural phenomena.
7. Hollow Moon: The Moon’s mean density is 3.34 gm/cm3 (3.34 times an equal volume of water) whereas the Earth’s is 5.5. What does this mean? In 1962, NASA scientist Dr. Gordon MacDonald stated,
“If the astronomical data are reduced, it is found that the data require that the interior of the Moon is more like a hollow than a homogeneous sphere.”
Nobel chemist Dr. Harold Urey suggested the Moon’s reduced density is because of large areas inside the Moon where there is “simply a cavity.”
MIT’s Dr. Sean C. Solomon wrote,
“The Lunar Orbiter experiments vastly improved our knowledge of the Moon’s gravitational field… indicating the frightening possibility that the Moon might be hollow.”
In Carl Sagans treatise, Intelligent Life in the Universe, the famous astronomer stated, “A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object.”
Therefore, the Moon may not be a “natural” satellite at all.
8. Moon Echoes: On November 20, 1969, the Apollo 12 crew jettisoned the lunar module ascent stage causing it to crash onto the Moon. The LM’s impact (about 40 miles from the Apollo 12 landing site) created an artificial moonquake with startling characteristics—the Moon reverberated like a bell for more than an hour.
This phenomenon was repeated with Apollo 13 (intentionally commanding the third stage to impact the Moon), with even more startling results. Seismic instruments recorded that the reverberations lasted for three hours and twenty minutes and traveled to a depth of twenty-five miles, leading to the conclusion that the Moon has an unusually light—or even no—core. To put it into perspective, when the Earth experiences a large earthquake, the reverberations from the quake usually only last minutes due to the density of the planet.
 9. Moon’s Origin: Before the astronauts’ Moon rocks conclusively disproved the theory, the Moon was believed to have originated when a chunk of Earth broke off eons ago. Another theory was that the Moon was created from leftover “space dust” remaining after the Earth was created. Analysis of the composition of moon rocks disproved this theory also.
Another popular theory is that the Moon was somehow “captured” by the Earth’s gravitational attraction. But no evidence exists to support this theory. Isaac Asimov, stated,
“It’s too big to have been captured by the Earth. The chances of such a capture having been affected and the Moon then having taken up nearly circular orbit around our Earth are too small to make such an eventuality credible.”
10. Weird Orbit: Our Moon is the only Moon in the solar system that has a stationary, near-perfect circular orbit (although it is still elliptical). Stranger still, the Moon’s center of mass is about 6000 feet closer to the Earth than its geometric center (which should cause wobbling), but the Moon’s bulge is on the far side of the Moon, away from the Earth. It seems that “something” must have put the moon in orbit with its precise altitude, course, and speed.
11. Moon Diameter: How does one explain the “coincidence” that the Moon is just the right distance, coupled with just the right diameter, to completely cover the sun during an eclipse? Again, Isaac Asimov responds,
“There is no astronomical reason why the moon and the sun should fit so well. It is the sheerest of coincidences, and only the Earth among all the planets is blessed in this fashion.”
The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

9 Responses to “The moon may not be natural”

  1. Anonymous says:

    Green Cheese has different characteristics than minerals, that’s why the cow jumped over the moon, because it was soggy.

  2. stedra rulz says:

    Anything to do with the Apollo missions is suspect. They have to prove that they went to the moon.

  3. Anonymous says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  4. NPP says:

    Tap. A hollow moon? At least you are asking.
    How about the hollow earth?
    Admiral Byrd…
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/esp_tierra_hueca_20.htm

    At least ask, address, explore possibilities.
    David Attenborough is not necessarily the gospel on life on earth or beyond.

  5. Anonymous says:

    “Then God commanded, “Let lights appear in the sky to separate day from night and to show the time when days, years and seasons begin. They will shine in the sky to give light to the earth” and it was done. So God made the two larger lights, the sun to rule over the day, and the moon to rule over the night; he also made the stars. He placed the lights to shine on the earth, to rule over the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God was pleased with what he saw.”

    Genesis 1.14-18

    This may appear a simplistic view but I guarantee you it is the truth. ”Let God be true and every man a liar.” Romans 3.4 How can folk not see how it is set up to work for us as essential to food production, for nature, a harmony in the creation which is becoming more and more disturbed by those scum for whom in the 7th Trumpet we learn that “The time has come to destroy those who destroy the earth!”

    Such is the earliest record for the existence of the heavenly bodies but when you know Him as I do, you can trust His every move.

    One of these days Tap I’ll post some comments on the Trumpets and the overall plan which hopefully some of your readers may find interesting.

    Love the blog by the way: Totally hooked – just want to contribute the truth as I know it.

    RabbiT

  6. Anonymous says:

    I for one will look forward to your comments on the trumpet and overall plan RabbiT. That topic I personally am very interested in.

  7. Anonymous says:

    The circular logic of modern science regarding the origins of the Moon runs something like this:
    We know that extraterrestrials don’t exist but we do know that the Moon exists and has been mentioned throughout human history. We humans did not create it or place it in Earth’s orbit, so it must have been done by extraterrestrials.
    But since we know ‘they’ don’t exist, we will simply call it an anomaly and will not publicly say anything more about this.
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/luna/esp_luna_63.htm

    Now notice Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
    Signs = Witnesses; beacons of light. Seasons, days and years = calendar.
    Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: [he made] the stars also.
    These beacons of lights then are our witness of God’s calendar which rule the day, night, seasons and years.

    The Sun rules the days while the Moon rules the months (Moon = Moonth) but not the night because she is often seen in the day. The Stars rule the night and the seasons.
    According to God’s law there must always be at least two witnesses.
    Night commences not at sunset as we are accustomed to thinking but at the appearance of the first two stars.
    Day commences not as the sun comes over the horizon as we are accustomed to thinking but at the disappearance of the last two stars.
    A month commences not on the dark moon as we are accustomed to thinking but on the morning after the night of the sliver of the crescent moon and there can be 13 months in certain years were an intercalary month is inserted to compensate for drifting seasons. This year so happens to be one of those years, that’s why Easter and Passover were a month too early which I pointed out on the blog at that time.
    The year and springtime commence when the crescent moon is nearest the Pleiades (March-April)and the same (September-October) mark the end of summer, there being 26 weeks between them.
    Each season is marked off by 13 weeks.

    It’s fitting, therefore, that the hand of God should move the Moon and stars into there current positions to show man His calendar, the work of His hands. It’s also quite possible that the moon is a hollow space station for his angels (ED’s,-Watchers) to keep an eye on mankind and from time to time report back to HQ, the throne of God in another dimension.

    More detail of this can be read in The Book of Enoch. The Luminaries.
    Gordon.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Thank you anon @ 9.26.

    I have already shared with Tap the 4th Trumpet @ Rev. 8.12-13 which refers to chemtrails.

    This was a subject I was picking at a couple of years ago and am satisfied I have now cracked.

    Mr Carnicom asked he might publish my email and photos to him some years ago on targeting but I asked he respectfully not do so.

    I have shared with Tap I may share such with him now the plan has become more externalised.

    I hope to share further truths whom the Creator might wish to bring to the table now my confidence in Him is more established.

    RabbiT.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Omg ..ya forgot ..And the cow jumped over the Moon…and the dish runaway with the spoon …don’t cha know …

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.