Moon Theories

[AV1611VET]

Just for your edification, here are some theories as to how we got our moon:

Five serious theories have been proposed for the formation of the Moon (not counting the one involving green cheese):

1. The Fission Theory: The Moon was once part of the Earth and somehow separated from the Earth early in the history of the Solar System. The present Pacific Ocean basin is the most popular site for the part of the Earth from which the Moon came.
2. The Capture Theory: The Moon was formed somewhere else, and was later captured by the gravitational field of the Earth.
3. The Condensation Theory: The Moon and the Earth condensed together from the original nebula that formed the Solar System.
4. The Colliding Planetesimals Theory: The interaction of earth-orbiting and Sun-orbiting planetesimals (very large chunks of rocks like asteroids) early in the history of the Solar System led to their breakup. The Moon condensed from this debris.
5. The Ejected Ring Theory: A planetesimal the size of Mars struck the earth, ejecting large volumes of matter. A disk of orbiting material was formed, and this matter eventually condensed to form the Moon in orbit around the Earth.

SOURCE

A new theory suggests Earth may have once had two moons

Two Moons Theory

 

[TLK Valentine]

Just for your edification, here are some theories as to how we got our moon:
SOURCE
Two Moons Theory

Sounds like people hard at work to figure something out.

Try not to let the concept shock you too much.

 

[AV1611VET]

Sounds like people hard at work to figure something out.

Thank you.

The next time I see someone downplay my point about how we got our moon (according to scientists), I hope I'll remember to QV them to this thread, that shows scientists "hard at work" to figure this out.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Thank you.

The next time I see someone downplay my point about how we got our moon (according to scientists), I hope I'll remember to QV them to this thread, that shows scientists "hard at work" to figure this out.

You had a point about that? We all thought you were just yakking.

Oh, wait, you are.

 

[AV1611VET]

You had a point about that?

Indeedy do.

The next time I mention our moon theories, and someone comes back with something like this:

You're like a kid who holds onto his favorite toy, despite the fact that it's old and falling apart.

They need to be reminded what you said.

What they think is "old and falling apart," in reality is ... as you put it ... "scientists hard at work trying to figure something out."

 

[TLK Valentine]

Indeedy do.

The next time I mention our moon theories, and someone comes back with something like this:

They need to be reminded what you said.

What they think is "old and falling apart," in reality is ... as you put it ... "scientists hard at work trying to figure something out."

Why? They're working hard; you're not.

You still have no point -- just smoke and mirrors...

 

[DerelictJunction]

Thank you.

The next time I see someone downplay my point about how we got our moon (according to scientists), I hope I'll remember to QV them to this thread, that shows scientists "hard at work" to figure this out.

I guess I don't understand the point behind your bringing up the 5 (you said 7) different theories for the formation of our Moon.

I thought you were flashing that card in order to mock the ability of scientists to reach accurate conclusions based on observed evidence.

Was there some other reason for mentioning the various "theories" (actually hypotheses) for the Moon's formation?

 

[AV1611VET]

I guess I don't understand the point behind your bringing up the 5 (you said 7) different theories for the formation of our Moon.

Six.

I brought up six theories.

The sixth one being the Two Moon theory from another site.

I thought you were flashing that card in order to mock the ability of scientists to reach accurate conclusions based on observed evidence.

Was there some other reason for mentioning the various "theories" (actually hypotheses) for the Moon's formation?

The rest of the thread should answer this.

 

[DerelictJunction]

Six.

I brought up six theories.

The sixth one being the Two Moon theory from another site.

Ok, six....still not seven

The rest of the thread should answer this.

Then you don't know why you keep tossing this nugget of information into different conversations?

 

[AirPo]

Then you don't know why you keep tossing this nugget of information into different conversations?

.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

 

[AV1611VET]

Ok, six....still not seven

The seventh is that Venus gave us her moon.

Happy now?

Then you don't know why you keep tossing this nugget of information into different conversations?

Post 5, scientist.

 

[DerelictJunction]

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

But all his neighbors said he seemed like a normal nice guy. Sad...really.

 

[AV1611VET]

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

I expect different results, do I?

 

[DerelictJunction]

I expect different results, do I?

I don't have any idea what you expect since you don't even know why you keep posting the Moon formation stuff.

Is it a form of Tourette Syndrome?

 

[AV1611VET]

I don't have any idea what you expect since you don't even know why you keep posting the Moon formation stuff.

Read the thread, chief.

That's all I can suggest.

Is it a form of Tourette Syndrome?

Either that, or it's a reading comprehension problem on yours.

 

[DerelictJunction]

Read the thread, chief.

That's all I can suggest.

Either that, or it's a reading comprehension problem on yours.

Well, pal, I read the thread and the only thing I can come up with is that you don't believe that the scientists are hard at work in determining which hypothesis is the most correct.
Does your characterization of these scientists as lazy apply to all scientists or just cosmologists?

Perhaps you should just state your reason for posting, in different threads at various times, the existence of multiple theories for the Moon's formation.

 

[AirPo]

I expect different results, do I?

Obviously.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, pal, I read the thread and the only thing I can come up with is that you don't believe that the scientists are hard at work in determining which hypothesis is the most correct.

Now I'm starting to suspect subterfuge, Derelict.

I brought up the moon theories in another thread and was told:

You're like a kid who holds onto his favorite toy, despite the fact that it's old and falling apart.

1. These moon theories are not "toys."
2. These moon theories are not "old."
3. These moon theories are not "falling apart" -- in fact, they are growing.

Then, when I started this thread, my stalker buddy chimes in and mentions they represent scientists "hard at work."

(Now which is it? are they "old toys, falling apart;" or are they representative of "scientists hard at work")?

Anyway, I liked his assessment that they depict scientists hard at work, and I plan to use that in future posts (if I think of it).

Now, Mr Reading Comprehension comes in and says:

... the only thing I can come up with is that you don't believe that the scientists are hard at work in determining which hypothesis is the most correct.

You guys are real pieces of cake, and very good at trying to make me wish I had never expressed my thoughts on any given point.

And for the record, let's get this straight:

I did not post these as "hypotheses" ... I clearly ... clearly ... posted them as -- in their own words -- "theories."

 

[AV1611VET]

Obviously.

Get in line.

The mistakes and false accusations are flying like kites.

(I've learned to expect that from scientific methodists though.)

 

[AirPo]

Get in line.

The mistakes and false accusations are flying like kites.

(I've learned to expect that from scientific methodists though.)

As evidenced by 2.9 million posts.