how did a planet as small as the earth capture such a large moon?

[selfinflikted]

lolwut?

 

[PsychoSarah]

lolwut?

Yeah I don't know either. It sounds like some poor summary of a science fiction novel spoken by a 5 year old.

 

[selfinflikted]

Yeah I don't know either. It sounds like some poor summary of a science fiction novel spoken by a 5 year old.

I retract my prior assessment of the need to explain things simply.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I retract my prior assessment of the need to explain things simply.

Yeah, I have learned not to base my own ability to understand certain concepts in how I think other people will understand (or misunderstand) them.

 

[trunks2k]

AH .... space where stuff floats and has enough gravity to form sphere with non liquids? stuff is floating around . it has no gravity .

Everything with mass has gravity. All other things being equal (other gravitational forces, momentum, etc) two atoms hanging out in space are going to attract each other via gravity. If there was a massive asteroid heading towards earth and we had sufficient warning, one of the strategies to avoid collision is to launch a space craft to it, let it float next to it, and allow the gravitational force between the craft and the asteroid to slooooooooowly alter the asteroid's path.

there is magnetism and it doesn't form anything solid into huge circles...

Magnetism isn't gravity. A magnetic field has a certain shape. You can see it with small metal flakes and a magnet.

especially since the moon isnt circling either. it always has a side that faces us !

The moon DOES rotate about it's axis. The moon is currently tidally locked with us such that one rotation is roughly the same amount of time to revolve around the earth. The speed of it's rotation and revolution are such that one side faces the earth.

Does the Moon Rotate? | Space.com

The rest of your post is pretty incomprehensible. I have no idea what you are even referring to.

 

[selfinflikted]

Yeah, I have learned not to base my own ability to understand certain concepts in how I think other people will understand (or misunderstand) them.

Apparently, I have just learned a new truism.

 

[RealityCheck]

Oh look. Someone in need of some help with science.

AH .... space where stuff floats and has enough gravity to form sphere with non liquids? stuff is floating around . it has no gravity .

Let's stop right there for the moment because there's enough wrong already that needs correcting.

Stuff doesn't "float" in space. "Floating" applies to an objects of low density being suspended by a medium of higher density, against a force tending to pull the low density object down.

"Stuff" by the way does have gravity. ANY object with mass exerts a gravitational pull on other objects with mass. (And that's just in the classic mechanical view - light, which has no mass, is still subject to gravitational forces exerted by objects with mass, but light itself - so far as we know - doesn't exert a gravitational force in kind.)

"Space" doesn't have gravity because it isn't mass. But gravity is exerted through space by objects having mass. In the General Relativistic view, gravity is not so much a force as a warping of space-time by masses within space-time.

there is magnetism and it doesn't form anything solid into huge circles..

Well no. "Space" doesn't have magnetism either. Magnetic forces, or more properly electro-magnetic forces, are exerted by charged particles or objects. Space can no more have "magnetism" than it can have "gravity."

". especially since the moon isnt circling either. it always has a side that faces us ! "

That's because the moon is not only circling the earth, it is doing so at a rate that is nearly the same as its rotational rate. That is, it takes 27-28 days for it to rotate around its own axis, and 27-28 days to orbit the earth. Net effect, same face always pointed to earth. (But in reality the synchronization isn't 100% perfect, so the moon face will appear to "wobble" over the course of its orbit, presenting approximately 55% of its surface to the earth rather than a strict 50%.)

if you are talking about the earths gravity and pressure on earth as it left , or peeled off of earth as it left. .. it would all the more prove it should look like a turd... you know your sphincter muscles/your butt if it came out of the earth like they say it did.

I can't really correct something this wrong. Let's just say, this is in no way how physics works.

it still doesn't explain how we have 4 to 40 ft of sterile moon stuff all connected and in some parts of the earth ( north america, south america and middle east and western europe) is gray sterile stuff , stuff that only matches the moon and there is 4 to 40 feet on top of that of sterile sand or sands with whole trees still not even petrified , it is still good wood.. how big a wave does it take to bury 80 ft trees in 40ft of sterile sand ? what does that wave look like exactly?

but that moon stuff is not other places and whole different configurations all over Australia and Oceania, going up into India and Tibet ....... but above all the sterile moon and or of rare earth ??? and nano diamond layers of burned earth is 4ft to 40 ft of sterile sand.. if the earth is billions of years old why is there so many feet and all that sterile moon and sand stuff under there except for a dead mammoth or two and they are only on top buried only a few inches down ?

Citation on the "sterile moon stuff" please. I really can't understand what you're referring to. As for "mammoths buried only a few inches down," all I can say it that's not correct.

why is there billions of tons of mammoth bones off Norway in the oceans?
why do they throw away tons of mammoth bones from dredging the sea floor off of Norway . what were those mammoths doing up there anyway sea fishing? Ice surfing ? yep that is what disney is selling to our kids in the name logic and science ! yep !

Um no. Disney sells in the name of money, not science, logic, or anything else. If you believe Disney is trying to peddle cartoons as science, we have bigger problems to deal with.

In any case, I have no idea whether your numbers of "mammoth bones" being dredged off the coast of Norway is right or wrong or sort of both, but it doesn't matter, because even if you were 100% correct in citing that it would *completely make sense* given that mammoths were adapted to very cold environments, and Norway would have been one of the last cold, icy places they were suited for as the last ice age came to an end. During the ice age mammoths (and mastodonts) would have ranged anywhere that glacial ice had spread and thus made for a suitable habitat for those animals. As the environment changed and ice receded, these animals would have continually migrated northward along with the ice.

Do any of you know how many lbs of food just a regular elephant needs every day in freezing weather , well maybe someone should have told Hannibal about those ice surfing mammoths ate and he could have fed his animals what ever they were eating...

Yes, and this is one reason mammoths were particularly suited to cold environments - *they* could forage off the scant food resources with virtually no competition from any other large animals because other large animals simply couldn't survive in such a climate.

The rest of the paragraph is just drivel and I'm starting to regret trying to help you understand reality more clearly.

you would need a whole tribe of sea faring neanderthals willing to go to faraway places for green stuff just to keep one fed before it froze to death from all that ice surfing disney has them doing in the frozen tundra or worse solid ice , where nothing green grows.. and they don't eat fish.

Um.. you do realize that "tundra" is not "glacial ice" as in Antarctica, but is actually capable of sustaining animal life because plant life *does* exist there?

What am I saying. No you don't realize that. Your insistence on believing that Disney movies portray modern scientific theories accurately should have tipped me off. Moving along....

and the moon if it came from the earth should look like a peeling or a turd.
Because it isn't spinning and it has no reason to be round. there is plenty in this universe that isn't round that the moon should be round .

Back to square one. Gravity tends to make things rounded. The moon may not be all that massive compared to other objects but it is massive enough that gravity would be strong enough within the moon's mass to pull it into a compact spheroid shape. Asteroids and other small objects lack the mass for gravity to force those objects into a spherical shape. (Although the largest asteroid, Ceres, has a more rounded shape than most asteroids.)

And finally, the moon IS SPINNING as I explained above.

 

[RealityCheck]

Yeah, I have learned not to base my own ability to understand certain concepts in how I think other people will understand (or misunderstand) them.

I worked as a software trainer for several years, so yeah - I learned that the hard way a long time ago.

 

[NannaNae]

mammoths on ice is fantasy just like gravity caused the moon to be round!
fantasy isn't science. and fantasy isn't provable.
NOW take an elephant to the tundra and or solid ice and dead of winter and tell me how long it lives ! without human intervention!
pure fantasy and all lies !

 

[NannaNae]

stop fluffing your feathers around me! electromagnetism is a form of magnetism , don't correct me when I wasn't wrong...

The Axel Heiberg Absurdities | MalagaBay
ps mammoth were never any place near ice. how can that be
because they were washed there !
by what??
any normal person except a scientist and their followers , who won't ask " " HOW" only a indian would..... we will never fully find out how because scientist will never ask nor answer that question.


it because they really don't want to know " HOW" .
they really don't want to KNOW what did that especially..

why, maybe because they they don't want to mess up their perfectly good fantasy with the truth!
yep that is probably it!
i'm done!

 

[RealityCheck]

stop fluffing your feathers around me! electromagnetism is a form of magnetism , don't correct me when I wasn't wrong...

Well you're still wrong. Electromagnetism is not a "form" of magnetism. There is no other kind of magnetism than electromagnetism.

ps mammoth were never any place near ice. how can that be
because they were washed there !
by what??
any normal person except a scientist and their followers , who won't ask " " HOW" only a indian would..... we will never fully find out how because scientist will never ask nor answer that question.


it because they really don't want to know " HOW" .
they really don't want to KNOW what did that especially..

why, maybe because they they don't want to mess up their perfectly good fantasy with the truth!
yep that is probably it!
i'm done!

So am I. You're clearly unwilling to learn.

 

[PsychoSarah]

mammoths on ice is fantasy just like gravity caused the moon to be round!
fantasy isn't science. and fantasy isn't provable.
NOW take an elephant to the tundra and or solid ice and dead of winter and tell me how long it lives ! without human intervention!
pure fantasy and all lies !

Elephants have evolved to live in a different environment than mammoths did, so how well they would do in an icy tundra has nothing to do with how well mammoths would survive there.

 

[1Cor22]

how did a planet as small as the earth capture such a large moon?

it didn't

God created the earth on the first day, and placed the moon, sun and stars in the firmament of the heaven on the fourth day, all of which orbit the completely stationary earth which is in the midst of them.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Gen. 1:1)

He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing. (Job 26:7)

Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved. (1 Chron. 16:30)

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 (Gen. 1:14)

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. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth (Gen. 1:16-17)

The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose. (Eccl. 1:5)

YouTube Malcolm Bowden Geocentricity 2nd version for the scientific evidence that proves God's truth

 

[RealityCheck]

it didn't

God created the earth on the first day, and placed the moon, sun and stars in the firmament of the heaven on the fourth day, all of which orbit the completely stationary earth which is in the midst of them.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Gen. 1:1)

He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing. (Job 26:7)

Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved. (1 Chron. 16:30)

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 (Gen. 1:14)

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. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth (Gen. 1:16-17)

The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose. (Eccl. 1:5)

YouTube Malcolm Bowden Geocentricity 2nd version for the scientific evidence that proves God's truth

Hey AV1611VET - I think it was you that was wondering if there were serious geocentrist fundies out there.

Well here you go.

 

[AV1611VET]

Hey AV1611VET - I think it was you that was wondering if there were serious geocentrist fundies out there.

Thanks, but you got the wrong person.

Are there any geocentrists here? We have a lot of people advocating a young Earth, but I'd be very interested in discussing the arguments for a stationary and/or non-rotating Earth.

So... anyone?

 

[RealityCheck]

Thanks, but you got the wrong person.

then it was probably dad.

 

[PsychoSarah]

then it was probably dad.

AV put the person in that post... It wasn't dad

 

[RealityCheck]

AV put the person in that post... It wasn't dad

Nah, I distinctly remember a serious bible fundie wondering about geocentrists....

 

[ForJesusChrist]

More proof of God's existence!

 

[florida2]

More proof of God's existence!

What is?