A HUGE fact that you missed, is that the moon was an asteroid, that hit earth spraying up debris that went into orbit around the earth. Hence forming the moon, so you point proves very little.
Water and an atmosphere are FAR from what is needed for life. There are multiple other fine-tuned processes involved (a far understatement). I would just critique your word choicing--it definitely isn't mean that there could easily be life on the moon by any means. (Please keep in mind I'm not arguing this for religious purposes--just one rational scientist to another rational thinker).
@brian0says I never claimed it was "all" that was needed. Obviously there are more factors, however, without those two things, life is ridiculously unlikely (as best we can tell at this time)
@KingHeathen Actually, some prokaryotic Monerans have been found to respirate CH4, which is quite interesting. This is readily available in many locations without the presence of an atmosphere. As for water, it appears to remain rather crucial, but far from its presence having a "likely" accompaniment of life.
Why would there not be water on the moon?? There's also water on Titan, one of Saturn's moons. The fact that there is EVERYTHING here on Earth so that life can exist is a miracle beyond the realm of chance.
@rickiec OK, you missed the whole point about this being something directed towards people who think that Earth is the ONLY place where water exists...
But to your statement...
What OTHER things do you think exist on Earth that AREN'T in other places?
@rickiec The fact that life has only been observed on Earth to date does not discredit that life is entirely possible on other worlds. The statement that Earth's conditions are "a miracle beyond the realm of chance" is entirely unfounded and ignorant of how chance statistics work, the conditions life exists in; and the simple fact that if we were a civilization on another planet yet to have observed life elsewhere, people would make the EXACT SAME arbitrary claim.
Oh, I forgot-Someone is dum'r than NASA=India spent 90 million for their Chrandrayaan 1 mission but I guess since NASA already had the rocket built might as fire it off, the money was spent. PEACE
I wonder if we read the same article on ur link here? cuz if you or anybody thinks that 24 gal of H2O is significant,costn 79 mil$ thats lunar-sea. LMFAO. But sea-riously scientist have speculated that exterior water could have came from super-volcano's mass plumes(60+% wtr vapor avg) eject to outer space outside earth's gravity and get caught by moon as orbits around earth and collects it as space debris. Check lastest in Iceland (iceberg blew into outer space 80+% h2o vapor co2 the rest. FACT
@KingHeathen I read the Space.com article you linked to me from Space.com and like I said, who thinks 24 gallons of water at a cost of 79 million dollars is significant that's stupid, not to mention India's-Chrandrayaan 1 mission Oct 08-Aug 09 had already confirmed on their mission of which NASA fail to give even an honorable mention=Wikipedia+countless vid's from News Stations Worldwide hereon Youtube. So what was the point of the link?
@JimmyCarol100 As I said...you missed the point. Standard creationist practice. Quote mine, misconstrue the information, and change it to mean what you want.
Nice try but it is very well understood that references to the "waters...above" refer to the fact that people of that time thought the "blue" in the sky was water. The heavens was the atmosphere.
@KingHeathen perhaps to some but not to any Bible believer it's not. We Bible believers are very well aware of three (3) distinct heaven(s) that God made and paul spoke about. (2Cor. 12:2) The waters talked about in Psalms are the ones past the "blue sky" (as you put it),that would ONLY be the first heaven.
@KingJamesBible Oh sure....to any "believer" the Bible could say that toothpaste makes good car fuel and they would swear that the reason their car wasn't running was because Satan was messing with them or that God was testing their faith...
@KingHeathen IF I give some names... will it change your mind? No, you'll find "some" excuse as to why they don't count. The same thing happens with the evolution religion in the "scientific community" As soon as someone goes against the propaganda being propagated, they are immediately LABELED as unreliable, unqualified, intellectually dishonest, etc.
@KingHeathen I gave you a clear verse teaching that water does exist ABOVE the heavens. Your problem is UNblief and has nothing to do with scholarship, it has to do with R E A D I N G and believing what you read. Can you read? Then go read it again and again until it sinks in. Some folks ar slow, I understand.
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so
That doesn't point towards the moon. Sounds as if the "sky" divided water with water lying directly above and below it, maybe a reason why Hebrews believed the heavens had a flood gate or window.
@KingJamesBible some folks ar????? slow i don't know what that means but because of our human rights, we can believe what we want. U believe a big man with a beard gave us life but what about all of the other evidence besides reading. if i belied what ever i read i would think vampires were real and they sparkle in the sunlight
I missed this video. Lets see..... why would God put water on the moon? I have no idea. I think we will, if we have time, find water other places in the universe. Comets are composed of dust, rock particles and ice. But not all ice is water. Dry ice is solid CO2. I think God during creation/big bang let water spread throughout the universe or at least the components of water. Earth has the environment to maintain a recyclable supply of water. No reason why there cant be water elsewhere.
Of course there is water on the moon. Where do you think all the water for the great flood come from? It somehow escaped the gravitation, froze into a chunk, traversed space, reheated in the atmosphere but not so much as to steam Noah. Then after it all flew back up into the sky to flood some other life forms many light years away.
People, it's really not that complicated. His point is pretty specific, and it pertains to the subset of theists that claim water to ONLY exist on Earth.
we have known there has been water all over the place. We have found it in comets, on other planets, and on other moons long before they found water in the moon.
not sure how this question would lead to a detailed debate from a person of faith . One would simply say that God is over the entire universe so if there is life on another planet...guess who is responsible for that. To the faith community this isnt as big as a discovery as it would be for the scientific "logical-well for the most part" community.
forget water on the moon, i fail to see how that contradicts Genesis at any rate. what i would like to see is more videos/discussions about Climategate, which, to me, seems more like a conspiracy then water on the moon.
I'll take your advice and think for myself, which means I don't really care what's on the moon or the religious debate so much.
What's in vaccinations, what are politicians/health officials on about mandating vaccines that are proving fatal for one too many people both short and long term.
And what as in that turkey I just ate that made me feel like I smoked some hash and if it's a natural byproduct of turkey than why don't I feel so nappy after eating cold cuts.
vaccines are in vaccinations. Peanuts are fatal for some people. There is bound to be someone with a genetic issue or other problem that will create an unforeseen complication. The fact is that the percentage of people that have these issues is so small it's not worth comparing to the threat of viral epidemic.
The turkey thing has been explained many times. Look it up.
Meanwhile, NONE of that is the concern of THIS video...so try to stay on topic.
What if peanuts were mandatory for you to keep your job or go to school and they were fatal?
Yesterday just happened to be Thanksgiving, I'm not even interested anymore (was I even interested on a bs day that's basically thanking natives for letting our ancestors slaughter them?) lol
I apologize if my requiring you to not be a host for yellow fever, measles, mumps, rubella, etc. means that you run the risk of .0000001% that you may have a bad reaction to a shot. That requirement isn't going away. Way more good comes from having it than catering to the minorities unwarranted fears.
That's all else I'm saying on it. If you'd like to continue the discussion on immunizations, then find a video about that topic. This one is about water on the moon.
Scientists should be careful about what they bring back from space. Diseases can live where there's water.
Also, getting an "immunization" shot makes you (at least temporarily) contagious and likely to get sick anyway. Just ask my father, my friend Steve, my mother's friend Bob, my father's friend who got the shot then her 5 yo who obviously caught it from her after injection.
Shall I go on? I'd hate to disrupt your percentage, I mean, these things could be coming from space. ;)
Oh, and the minorities. Minorities would be people who live on the moon, not the MINORITY of people who get the flu, then requiring the MAJORITY of people vaccinated, which is basically infecting them with what they would most probably not have caught.
But maybe all the diseases that exploded in the last 50 years came from the moon's water.
Okay, I'm done. I do hope this was OT enough for you.
It isn't known what the health risks are, especially for long term side effects. Those factors were never thoroughly studied.
And neither was the moon, apparently. They JUST found water on the moon NOW? I always thought the moon had an interesting effect on the tide, certain human cycles, etc.
I already thought the moon was probably mostly ice on the inside and full of rock and debree toward the surface.
Not a great piece, but obviously figured it out a long time ago:
Oh, sorry. Thought people actually walked on the moon. I didn't even know a device crashed into it. If it took crashing into the moon to find water, then maybe it is underneath the surface, not necessarily ice. Should've thought of that.
I'm sure the moon has something to do with the earth's tilt either by direct impact or gravitational distortion of some sort, or both.
But we were ON the moon and they JUST found water, NOW? Did they go there to jerk off under the US flag or what? I wonder.
Yes they walked on the moon. No they didnt see any ice. This is due to some of the properties of the moon. It has no atmosphere. Most of it receives sunlight at some point during its rotation. This means any water ice on the surface would sublimate. Therefore when people walked on the moon they wouldn't find any frakking ice.
Since I already knew everything you mentioned I guess I am very bright. The question is, how bright is science? You don't sound too bright assuming I didn't know any of this and you certainly don't seem to know much about the flu and its legally protected vaccinations, you know, stuff that REALLY effects us and matters.
And I thought you said there wasn't ice in the moon, now there is? That doesn't say much for science and its means to calculate density. Holla.
No, that makes NASA a moron. I never claimed to be a scientist nor should there be anything we don't know about something within relatively easy reach.
Why you're turning this into a personal attack on intellect, I do not know. If you can draw conclusions on my intellect, then maybe the institution of science is for you if the religious one isn't. I claim neither. Thinking for myself. Try it. Or let the latest "news" distract you more. Whatever floats your moon water.
No. NASA has finite resources and has only recently been able to send a probe to that crater. You are a want wit to think we should know everything about object we have only visited a handful of times.
Im making it into personal attack, I felt I should explain why your expectation that NASA should have already found ice on the moon to be ignorant.
No, I don't expect NASA to have done anything, but why did I (and others) already suspect something about water in the moon and that was discovered at least a decade later. WE MUST ALL BE GENIUSES!
If they're so interested in water and water on Mars, don't you think with all their FINITE resources they'd finish the easier job first?
Forget drilling, I thought they'd be able to see h2O with infrared type technology from a distance. Water should've been so easy to detect quite some years ago.
It was suspected alot longer than at least a decade. It has been suspected for several decades. No a pot induced "Whoa! What if the moon was filled with ice cream?" doesnt make you a genius.
No. Because only recently has there been interest in going back to the moon.
Yeah. They used the 'infrared technology' from the main probe to scan the debris kicked up by the other one crashing into the surface.
If you were paying attention. I stated there would not be ice on the moon where there is sunlight. Only in the protection of the craters at the poles, because they would be constantly in shadow.
No, it doesnt say much about your ability to comprehend.
You mean when mention that you just had the thought in your head that there should be ice IN the moon. Instead of on the surface in the shadows of craters like it actually. Not to mention the fact that rocks that they brought back are 'dry' in comparison to rocks on the wet earth. So no your wild guess is refuted by the actual evidence.
Ok, u're incredibly retarded about the conversation itself & u expect me to converse with u on something more complex such as space exploration? I find u useless & it's quite telling by now why u'd question my intellect -- because it's ur own that u're insecure about (that would be the science of psychology).
I never said ice was ON the moon. That was from ur head. Who the fcuk wouldn't know water wouldn't survive the intense heat of the sun with practically no atmosphere? No shit sherlock.
No, nor did I say you said that. What you did say was they should have found it when they visited the moon. No I says because where they went there wasnt any ice to be found.
Then why would you assert they should have found water? then assert that they spent their time masturbating.
So now u're agreeing to what I was saying about there being NO need for a WHOA moment on water ANYWHERE near the moon.
Especially since they already confirmed there is and was (a lot) of water on Mars with even more potential for (past) civilization. Does that mean that God is real and that God(s) were aliens. ???
It's like getting excited over marshmallows when Rice Krispies Treats are far more interesting. So who CARES!
Yes and no. It was fairly likely that there was water ice, the whoa comes from the fact that it makes a whole metric butt load easier to colonize the moon. among other things.
No on the god thing. The arguments was a very specific subset of creationists.
Yes, those subset of creationists which to me isn't the fact they believe what they do but that they think they know it all, just like some evolutionists, apparently.
We don't know much it seems. Okay then, thanks for the chat. Get your vaccine asap. :)
The problem with your comparison to mars. Only recently, like the past five years, did they find solid evidence to confirm there was water on mars. Up to that point it only looked like there was once water on mars, due to the canyons and such. We had to send probes and rovers there just to find a little bit of water.
They sent probes to Mars? Nooo. Stop! I bet it took them more than once to land them fancy machines on Mars. I never knew this. You're right, this poses a serious conflict to what I said. How did I not know this! My intellect and ignorance is astounding.
But I already put my closure in the other part of this convo. So messy.
If you knew this then why are you comparing mars to the moon?
You say we should have known by now since we can see ice caps, which isnt water ice, on mars. But it took years of sending probes to mars.
No, the fact that they sent probes to mars isnt a conflict to what you said. the fact they sent them there to find evidence of water is. the fact that it took over thirty years is.
You have zero comprehension of what I'm saying. I explained it. Distance, size, relativity, infrared technology that has nothing to do with how lit an area is? Any of that ring a bell?
If not, just explain to me something else I already know. Like, is there life on Jupiter? OR MAYBE ON ONE OF IT'S MOONS! Could it be..
I dont think the earths tilt is claimed to be caused by a meteor impact. Its tilt is however constrained by the presence of the moon.
Water gets knocked outside its atmosphere. hmm. well that would mean the water was vaporized in such a large impact. once in space the vapor would dissipate in the vacuum.
Well, it is the claim last i heard, and another theory as to why the dinosaurs became extinct. Pretty common knowledge.
The water can be knocked outside of earth as vapor, yes, but knocked out with chunks of rock would keep the water pulled toward the rock pieces, eventually combining together.
Look at the video again, the chemical reaction inside the bubble would somewhat represent the constant vaporization and recombining of the fragments, seeming to cause most of its craters, not comets.
No. I think you are getting it confused with uranus. Its tilt is the result of a large impact.
No. As any chunks launched into space would not have enough gravity to hold the gaseous vapors. The moon is larger than these chunks would have been and it cant hold any vapors or gasses.
The reactions were confined within the water, and you said the surface rocks and such came later.
Im sure your hypothesis will make sense in no time, and by that I mean at no time will it make sense.
I understand what you are saying. But it doesnt reflect what would really happen in such a large impact. A large impact like that would vaporize both water and rock of a large area. Then it would throw huge chunks of rock. These would make it into space. the vapor would disperse out into the vacuum and the rocks would not surround it these escaping gasses.
See it would be like the gasses streaming off a comet. once the water is in vaporized form it will expand out into space. The only reason a comets tail goes in one direction is due to the solar wind. It would be interesting if it could happen the way you suggest.
No, it would NOT be like gas streaming off a comment. Earth is in question here, not comets, and if knocked off the planet would eventually get stuck between Earth and the sun's gravity. Again, not complicated. Space is a lot less complex than in situations taking place within the confines of our atmosphere. There are less rules.
interesting video thanks for the link. does not really support your assertion though.
I would evaporate. liquids in lower pressures evaporate at much lower temperatures. So in a vacuum it would evaporate. Not that the water would make it intact into orbit. a collision that size would just vaporize the water.
Ok. Now stay with me on this one. Since the water went to the inside of the cup that means when the water vapor went in space it all went towards the cup that contains the universe.
Sorry for being snarky, but the water collected inside of it because of was confined in a container in space it would not.
Yeah, they should've used the drill, but like i said IF YOU'RE PAYING ATTENTION, they should have been able to detect it from a distance much sooner than October, 2009 if they could spot ice caps on something as far as Mars. Seriously.
And Its statements like these that make it so tempting to insult you. No they would be able to detect it from a distance. The ice was at the bottom of a crater at the pole. Thus they had to crash a probe so the other could take pictures of the resulting plume to scan it for the chemical signature of water. Which is different from spotting 'ice' caps on mars since in comparison they huge. and made of carbon dixoide.
You're not insulting me, you're insulting yourself by your needless defense on something that really has little to do with you or I as individuals. This makes you more dumb than you're inability to grasp the subject at hand, or at least what I'm saying about it.
You can see ice on Mars which is much further away even in its closest position to Earth, but they can't x-ray the moon to spot a little water??? Wtf?
Size is relative with such varying distances and technology.
You can see carbon dioxide, aka dry ice on mars, through a telescope because by comparison the ice cap is frakking huge. Fairly easy in comparison to trying to find water ice at the bottom of the crater at the poles and in the shadows on the moon.
So they'll confirm there is probably large chunks of ice under the surface of the moon in lit areas. I'd bet on that.
It's hard for them to see lots of things. Science isn't as smart as it makes itself out to be. They don't seem to get anything done, politically, scientifically, etc.
I like how we claim to have figured things out like electricity and such when that was apparently figured out a loooong time ago. Whole other subject but yeah. Have a good night.
Probably not. since the ice from the craters are from comet impacts. The interior of the moon is largely without voids, that is it is full of rock and not pockets of ice.
How did you (or anyone) conclude it was from comet impacts and not somehow related to the water of earth itself? How do they know that much about the interior of the moon. A rough measurement of its density (not mass btw ;) by gravity divided by something else? Seems to be a series of guesses and theories more than facts.
None of it matters so much though. Remember that science is an institution just like religion, only science is more relevant now. All the more reason to question it.
Because it is stuck in the bottom of impact craters.
They know a little about the interior of the moon because of seismic sensors left on the moon by the Apollo program. Then there is the chemical analysis of the rocks brought back from the moon. there was no water on the moon.
And if the interior was ice, it would have a different mass.
I think you mean "density" more specifically than mass. But if you mean "gravitational mass" (you have to be specific, science's definition of mass is more complex) then that would explain why walking on the moon or jumping is so much like as if walking on the bottom of water.
They don't know how much water is in the moon (yet) if they only just found some. Just 'cause they found it under the surface of a crater, doesn't mean it was just in that spot.
gravitational mass. The density doesnt matter, because whether it is more dense and occupies the space of a pea or is less dense it still has the same amount of mass.
Hmmm, that's not my understanding of it. Seems very simple to me that the water would change form, but wouldn't go anywhere. Even within Earth's atmosphere, the water evaporates but stays within the atmosphere. It's called rain. Look it up. lol
Seriously, tho. Evaporation esp with rock sediment around it would only keep it there in space, whether it's vapor, liquid, or ice.
no. the water would change form and it would go somewhere.
And you dont see the difference between the earth and the vacuum of space? here on earth it is kept by the gravity and is not in a vacuum. In space it is in a vacuum and is not being held to the surface by gravity.
Go look at the video again. A vacuum (pressure) is not the same as zero gravity, and btw, DENSITY has all to do with gravitation pull, I double checked. How you do not know this or can even imagine this I do not know:
Water in Zero Gravity:
watch?v=T4JrhW2aO6I
Not that complicated, esp with large enough chunks of rock keeping the water/vapor local like how EVERY planet was formed by separate rocks combining. Thank you.
no. it is mass. when you are going to make calculations about gravitation you take into account its mass. basic newtonian physics. * F is the magnitude of the gravitational force between the two point masses, * G is the gravitational constant, * m1 is the mass of the first point mass, * m2 is the mass of the second point mass, * r is the distance between the two point masses.-wikipedia on calculating gravitation between two objects
It is mass AND density. You just gave the formula for mass between two objects, which would explain why a moon made of at least half of ice water couldn't retain vapor but it can retain water. People are mostly water and we can walk on the moon. Don't know where you think you've disproved my "misconception".
No. Gravity is determined by the mass. Only thing that changes with the density is how much mass is within a certain volume. an equal amount of mass more dens will still have the same gravity.
of course they didnt float away. the difference between them and a mass of water blasted from the surface of the earth is that it would be vapor.
You say that like I cant tell the difference between a vacuum and a microgravity environment. What I am telling is that your hypothesis brakes down when the water vapor, it will be vapor with such an energetic impact, in space will dissipate in the vacuum. So despite that interesting property displayed in that video it just would not work that way in your proposed 'theory'.
the rock chunks would not have enough gravity to keep it local. the moon doesnt have enough gravity to keep water or water vapor local so why would these smaller chunks be able to do that.
The planets were formed by rocks coming together. But the water came from comets and meteorites from the outer solar system during the late bombardment.
And the reason you get several comments for your one is that it take alot to correct your misconceptions.
You're not correcting my 'misconceptions' but rather throwing questions at me that I already answered. You just can't comprehend them. You're the type of person that think louder or more means right. Not so.
The moon as it is now was not always in the orbit that it is in, again I explained that a tug-of-war between the earth and sun's gravity would help keep it in place. Unlike your explanation of a comet that leaves behind water, there aren't surrounding gravities in effect.
Good point about the moon not retaining vapors but just a few moments (mostly) behind the earth would have it freeze instantly if it is anything like the temp of the moon without light. In actuality, the moon could've been bigger but most of the water, escaped, perhaps leaving a layer of ice here and there trapped.
Also it is said the Earth was further from the sun, so it'd actually be cooler then.
The formation of most of the foundation of the moon could've happened in a very short time.
No questions. You say the water would be a blob in space. I tell you that is incorrect for several reasons. The impact to put a mass that large into space would just vaporize the water. Once in space the vapor would expand and dissipate.
Surrounding gravities dont figure into it. vapor in space will expand and dissipate. A comets tail forms from the thermal energy causing the comets ice to sublimate into gasses(water vapor) then it expands into the vacuum of space.
Not if it has a chance to freeze over and over again, and very quickly might I add. We're talking about water being knocked away from a planet with considerable about of gravitation, not some comet emission in the middle of nowhere.
The water, as it vaporizes into the vacuum of space, would still be in earths orbit and have many chances to freeze while non-water sediments combined them.
You only explained why there is no water ON THE SURFACE of the moon, and I agree.
Unfortunately it wouldnt matter if was the dark side or the light side of the earth it would still have a lot of energy in the water vapor and would escape into space. Due to it being a gas in a vacuum.
The only reason I mention the comet emission is that once the gas is in space its lost. So once your super heated cloud of water vapor was in space it would be gone too.
That would only put a whole in your "fantasy" because if comets with hydrogen or any element of water was the reason there is water on earth, and earth had no atmosphere, then that water would escape or be vaporized as well. Try again.
And if I remember correctly you stated that an impact like the dinosaurs caused this supposed water deposit. An impact of that size would not be able to place anything outside the roche limit.
In all honesty your little fantasy is full of holes.
The reason they crashed the probe where they did is because it was a crater deep into the surface of the moon and was at the southern pole so it was always in shadow. No sunlight means no sublimation of the ice.
Man, you missed the point. You gotta have faith, and god works in mysterious ways. Yeap :) just kidding.. and by the way, I put small g on the word because I think that that I should be grammatically correct.
Frank.... READ THE FREAKIN' DESCRIPTION BOX! Or, you could just listen to the video. I CLEARLY say that I KNOW there are other layers to this issue, but I wasn't mentioning them "FOR A REASON!"
THIS video addresses the CREATIONISTS who think that Earth is the ONLY place with water. I didn't say anything about what I knew or what science has already found.
You know there is no proof in what you say. And there is no connection to the video. But everyone must be heard even the low single celled ameba christian freaks who can't think past a 3 year olds mentality.
A: To get his crazy followers to be interested in outer space. So that they may one day preform Space Crusades. Forcing the Ewoks, Wookiees, and Vulkans to accept the owrd of god, OR DIE!
I'm pretty sure the printing press was invented to make books more available and cheaper. However, the inventor CHOSE to make the bible as his first mass produced book. Give me a week and I'll ask my teacher to be sure, but as a professor at UCF who does my history class in high school, I usually take his word for it.
Water is a common substance and I am not suprised whatsoever that water is on the moon, and on Mars, and all sorts of other places. Just not a big deal. Oh, anyone who actually thought earth was somehow exclusive to ANYTHING is a fracking smacktard and should be sent to the moon.
I don't see why creationists believe that water is exclusive to Earth. Think of what water is made up of, Hydrogen and Oxygen, which are the first and third most abundant elements in the universe respectively.
I'm sure they also conviniently forgot that comets are made of ice, and last I checked, comets don't originate from Earth.
First of all, the Bible does NOT say that the Earth, is the only place with water. But anyways lets say that it did, Is it not YOUR scientists that say that the moon came from earth? therefore the earth would be the only place with water, but since i know its not since i believe even mars has water, whatever. All i know is that God is real, or i can assure you that i would not be typing right now. Only i know what ive been through. God Bless.
Actually I think the current theory accepted is that the moon from a planet impacting earth and then coalescing into the moon. Most of that water is likely not from that. Most likely from comet impacts and meteor impacts.
Also I think this argument is directed at creationists who use an argument that the water from the rest of the solar system was used to flood the earth.
They are pretty positive that the moon formed from a massive impact of something into the earth, but the earth was a molten metal and rock slag heap, there was absolutely no water on earth at that point in time, so you're correct, none of that water is from earth.
Well it seems like you almost started to attempt an argument there, but then lost your train of thought and went to the 'Existence by Experience' argument, which doesn't work for anyone, it's absolutely useless to let that slip out, it just makes you look even sillier =\
im not attempting to argue crap, hahaha there is no argument that can possibly affect me or anyone i have spoken to, God is real i mean what more do you want? this is all i have to say....''God IS Real'' i dont need doctrine or crap i already know.
If it told you every reason i know God is real first of all you would not believe me, and second of all it would take me hours to type, why even bother. take it or leave it, believe in God with the measure of Faith you have, or do not believe. all i know is that i used to be an unbeliever but look at me now, hahhaha i cant argue it would be too funny or frustrating for me, i dont know, God Bless.
Sir, i told you that you were not going to believe me if i told you the reasons i believe in God, but OK ill tell you even though i have a pretty good idea of what you will say cause all of you are blinded terribly, ill tell you 3, number one, i have seen Gods signs wonders and miracles before my eyes at church and in houses all over Miami, i have seen water turn into wine, i have seen Gold dust appear inside of closed glass bottles, i have seen bones created before my eyes...next comment
i myself was healed of flat feet and arthritis, i have felt God so much so that i have been dropped to the floor because my physical body has not been able to contain it, i have seen cancer healed, i have seen deaf people hear, and blind people begin to see, i have seen asthma healed, and i have seen mental handicap people restored, and much more, in Jesus name with prayer.
Ah yes. Psychosomatic. If you believe hard enough the pain doesnt bother you so much.
Cancer cured? were they also taking some of that fancy medical care? Like to find out that it was actually cancer and if so treated with chemo or radiation?
jtyranus, you see why i can't tell people like you real stuff that happens in life? you are an unbeliever, the people that were diagnosed with cancer brought real medical papers, and another thing, i was healed of arthritis and flat feet, and i didnt believe i was gonna get healed cause i never saw God heal before that, someone prayed for me and it happened and i could not deny it because it happened inside of my body and i saw and felt it happen.
Ok. Im assuming that if they brought medical papers they also got that fancy chemo therapy or other cancer treatment.
You just said you started believing in god strongly after a depression induced hallucination. That strong belief in god is where the psychosomatic part comes in. And I am sure if you had arthritis and were examined again you likely still have it.
no there was no chemo therapy involved, see i go to a church called King Jesus Ministry, it is the biggest hispanic church in the nation, 200 new members or more join every month, they have professional doctors there that check the people after healings to confirm that no one is lying, if someone has asthma, and my pastor prays for them, he makes them run around the church various times to confirm the people are healed. ive seen women walk in church in wheel chairs and leave carrying it.
ok Reason 2, i have studied. i have studied various religions since i myself come from a family composed of atheists, Afro cubans, and unpracticing catholics, i used to be a mix of everything, i have found and listened to many scientific theories, i have looked at archeological finds, i have read history books, and especially the Bible, and have found that there is more than Faith evidence when it comes to God, but natural evidence, we can see his fingerprints in our bodies and nature.
Again, bull shit, get me a legitimate and big name human anatomist to tell me that instead of evolution. I rarely say it, but, jesus christ you're dumb!
Reason 3, i have a testimony, i used to go through depression, suicidal thoughts. addictions, Hate of society because i was bullied for 9 years, i went through rejection as well, and one day i was contemplating the thought of running away or commiting suicide, and i heard a voice inside of my being, asking me ''How much do you cost?'' That day i was dropped to the ground with laughter, i went to church for the first time in year
ive never met a person who thinks there is only water on earth
YourWrong951 11 months ago
A HUGE fact that you missed, is that the moon was an asteroid, that hit earth spraying up debris that went into orbit around the earth. Hence forming the moon, so you point proves very little.
xiii13lulz 1 year ago
Water and an atmosphere are FAR from what is needed for life. There are multiple other fine-tuned processes involved (a far understatement). I would just critique your word choicing--it definitely isn't mean that there could easily be life on the moon by any means. (Please keep in mind I'm not arguing this for religious purposes--just one rational scientist to another rational thinker).
brian0says 1 year ago
@brian0says I never claimed it was "all" that was needed. Obviously there are more factors, however, without those two things, life is ridiculously unlikely (as best we can tell at this time)
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen Actually, some prokaryotic Monerans have been found to respirate CH4, which is quite interesting. This is readily available in many locations without the presence of an atmosphere. As for water, it appears to remain rather crucial, but far from its presence having a "likely" accompaniment of life.
brian0says 1 year ago
Why would there not be water on the moon?? There's also water on Titan, one of Saturn's moons. The fact that there is EVERYTHING here on Earth so that life can exist is a miracle beyond the realm of chance.
rickiec 1 year ago
@rickiec OK, you missed the whole point about this being something directed towards people who think that Earth is the ONLY place where water exists...
But to your statement...
What OTHER things do you think exist on Earth that AREN'T in other places?
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@rickiec The fact that life has only been observed on Earth to date does not discredit that life is entirely possible on other worlds. The statement that Earth's conditions are "a miracle beyond the realm of chance" is entirely unfounded and ignorant of how chance statistics work, the conditions life exists in; and the simple fact that if we were a civilization on another planet yet to have observed life elsewhere, people would make the EXACT SAME arbitrary claim.
SilenceTheIDiots 1 year ago
The discovery of life on other planets would only strengthen by belief in a creator. BTW-I think there is life out there.
ScrapGoldBass 1 year ago
Oh, I forgot-Someone is dum'r than NASA=India spent 90 million for their Chrandrayaan 1 mission but I guess since NASA already had the rocket built might as fire it off, the money was spent. PEACE
JimmyCarol100 1 year ago
I wonder if we read the same article on ur link here? cuz if you or anybody thinks that 24 gal of H2O is significant,costn 79 mil$ thats lunar-sea. LMFAO. But sea-riously scientist have speculated that exterior water could have came from super-volcano's mass plumes(60+% wtr vapor avg) eject to outer space outside earth's gravity and get caught by moon as orbits around earth and collects it as space debris. Check lastest in Iceland (iceberg blew into outer space 80+% h2o vapor co2 the rest. FACT
JimmyCarol100 1 year ago
@JimmyCarol100 I think someone (you) COMPLETELY missed the point...on top of that, someone (you) needs to site a source for their claims.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen I read the Space.com article you linked to me from Space.com and like I said, who thinks 24 gallons of water at a cost of 79 million dollars is significant that's stupid, not to mention India's-Chrandrayaan 1 mission Oct 08-Aug 09 had already confirmed on their mission of which NASA fail to give even an honorable mention=Wikipedia+countless vid's from News Stations Worldwide hereon Youtube. So what was the point of the link?
JimmyCarol100 1 year ago
@JimmyCarol100 As I said...you missed the point. Standard creationist practice. Quote mine, misconstrue the information, and change it to mean what you want.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
This guy is an idiot!
Stomplou 1 year ago
But the water is frozen?
LisaisWay 1 year ago
your an idiot!!!
u think u know so much but really u don't know shit. heathen boy.
NASA lies about everything they do in space, they never even made it to the moon it was all a big lie, LOOK IT UP,
YOU R SUCH A HEATHEN. have u been to the moon? I think not and i would not trust the shadow government or the vatican because there working together.
no im not a christan i don't believe in religion but i do believe in GOD.
ycantitjustwoekthist 1 year ago
Nothing like the Bible the clear things up
Psalms 148:4
Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye WATERS that be ABOVE the heavens.
KingJamesBible 1 year ago
@KingJamesBible
Nice try but it is very well understood that references to the "waters...above" refer to the fact that people of that time thought the "blue" in the sky was water. The heavens was the atmosphere.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen perhaps to some but not to any Bible believer it's not. We Bible believers are very well aware of three (3) distinct heaven(s) that God made and paul spoke about. (2Cor. 12:2) The waters talked about in Psalms are the ones past the "blue sky" (as you put it),that would ONLY be the first heaven.
KingJamesBible 1 year ago
@KingJamesBible Oh sure....to any "believer" the Bible could say that toothpaste makes good car fuel and they would swear that the reason their car wasn't running was because Satan was messing with them or that God was testing their faith...
But any SCHOLAR will tell you how wrong you are.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen When someone makes statements like "any Scholar" a big giant yellow flag goes up and it tells me a few things
1) You don't know what you're talking about
2) "a" "scholar" could just as easily be found that would disagree
3) You put way too high a premium on "scholarship"
As Billy Sunday said ""When the Bible says one thing and scholarship says another, scholarship can go plumb to the devil." "
and I gave you the reference.
KingJamesBible 1 year ago
@KingJamesBible
2 - Ok...find one.
As to Mr. Sunday...willful ignorance is a horrible thing.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen IF I give some names... will it change your mind? No, you'll find "some" excuse as to why they don't count. The same thing happens with the evolution religion in the "scientific community" As soon as someone goes against the propaganda being propagated, they are immediately LABELED as unreliable, unqualified, intellectually dishonest, etc.
KingJamesBible 1 year ago
@KingHeathen I gave you a clear verse teaching that water does exist ABOVE the heavens. Your problem is UNblief and has nothing to do with scholarship, it has to do with R E A D I N G and believing what you read. Can you read? Then go read it again and again until it sinks in. Some folks ar slow, I understand.
KingJamesBible 1 year ago
@KingJamesBible
Still waiting.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KingJamesBible Using your Bible XD
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so
That doesn't point towards the moon. Sounds as if the "sky" divided water with water lying directly above and below it, maybe a reason why Hebrews believed the heavens had a flood gate or window.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@KingJamesBible some folks ar????? slow i don't know what that means but because of our human rights, we can believe what we want. U believe a big man with a beard gave us life but what about all of the other evidence besides reading. if i belied what ever i read i would think vampires were real and they sparkle in the sunlight
irishman295 1 year ago
@irishman295 Vampires don't sparkle.
; )
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen haha showz what u know dont u know that vampires sparkle and zombies love peanut butter!!!!! wow your such a bible believer!!!!... lol
irishman295 1 year ago
@irishman295 EVERYONE knows that zombies love peanut butter...but I challenge you to show me one single photo of a sparkling vampire!
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen I gave you a clear verse teaching from the book of stephenie that Vampires DO IN FACT SPARKLE lol
irishman295 1 year ago
Also, who says that all life in the universe needs water?
jimu57 1 year ago
@jimu57 isn't water one of the main ingridients of life?water and light,most basic things you need.if you know something we don't,let us know
ajokurvanyad 1 year ago
I missed this video. Lets see..... why would God put water on the moon? I have no idea. I think we will, if we have time, find water other places in the universe. Comets are composed of dust, rock particles and ice. But not all ice is water. Dry ice is solid CO2. I think God during creation/big bang let water spread throughout the universe or at least the components of water. Earth has the environment to maintain a recyclable supply of water. No reason why there cant be water elsewhere.
jimu57 1 year ago
Considering hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe it's not all that shocking.
SmoothInstigator 2 years ago
Of course there is water on the moon. Where do you think all the water for the great flood come from? It somehow escaped the gravitation, froze into a chunk, traversed space, reheated in the atmosphere but not so much as to steam Noah. Then after it all flew back up into the sky to flood some other life forms many light years away.
Neh, it still sounds stupid.
trekgeek1 2 years ago
People, it's really not that complicated. His point is pretty specific, and it pertains to the subset of theists that claim water to ONLY exist on Earth.
That's it.
magx01 2 years ago
we have known there has been water all over the place. We have found it in comets, on other planets, and on other moons long before they found water in the moon.
boonw 2 years ago
So what is your point, that there is water on the moon? Doesn't contradict the bible...
Why would he not put water on the moon? No one is as smart as god. There is probably a deep down reason for it that only he knows.
Look, no one will ever prove the bible wrong.
toasted2009 2 years ago
Can you please cite where I said that it contradicted the Bible? Try to pay attention next time.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
why argue if the water is there or not? why argue how it got there? it is there they found it. nuff said!!
slappysquirrel321 2 years ago
not sure how this question would lead to a detailed debate from a person of faith . One would simply say that God is over the entire universe so if there is life on another planet...guess who is responsible for that. To the faith community this isnt as big as a discovery as it would be for the scientific "logical-well for the most part" community.
chavon30 2 years ago
I'm not really surprised that they found water. It wasn't _that_ unlikely.
Brandt761 2 years ago
forget water on the moon, i fail to see how that contradicts Genesis at any rate. what i would like to see is more videos/discussions about Climategate, which, to me, seems more like a conspiracy then water on the moon.
ghostbirdsama 2 years ago
I'll take your advice and think for myself, which means I don't really care what's on the moon or the religious debate so much.
What's in vaccinations, what are politicians/health officials on about mandating vaccines that are proving fatal for one too many people both short and long term.
And what as in that turkey I just ate that made me feel like I smoked some hash and if it's a natural byproduct of turkey than why don't I feel so nappy after eating cold cuts.
That's what's on my mind.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
vaccines are in vaccinations. Peanuts are fatal for some people. There is bound to be someone with a genetic issue or other problem that will create an unforeseen complication. The fact is that the percentage of people that have these issues is so small it's not worth comparing to the threat of viral epidemic.
The turkey thing has been explained many times. Look it up.
Meanwhile, NONE of that is the concern of THIS video...so try to stay on topic.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
But I'm thinking for myself.
What if peanuts were mandatory for you to keep your job or go to school and they were fatal?
Yesterday just happened to be Thanksgiving, I'm not even interested anymore (was I even interested on a bs day that's basically thanking natives for letting our ancestors slaughter them?) lol
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
I apologize if my requiring you to not be a host for yellow fever, measles, mumps, rubella, etc. means that you run the risk of .0000001% that you may have a bad reaction to a shot. That requirement isn't going away. Way more good comes from having it than catering to the minorities unwarranted fears.
That's all else I'm saying on it. If you'd like to continue the discussion on immunizations, then find a video about that topic. This one is about water on the moon.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Okay, OT:
Scientists should be careful about what they bring back from space. Diseases can live where there's water.
Also, getting an "immunization" shot makes you (at least temporarily) contagious and likely to get sick anyway. Just ask my father, my friend Steve, my mother's friend Bob, my father's friend who got the shot then her 5 yo who obviously caught it from her after injection.
Shall I go on? I'd hate to disrupt your percentage, I mean, these things could be coming from space. ;)
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Oh, and the minorities. Minorities would be people who live on the moon, not the MINORITY of people who get the flu, then requiring the MAJORITY of people vaccinated, which is basically infecting them with what they would most probably not have caught.
But maybe all the diseases that exploded in the last 50 years came from the moon's water.
Okay, I'm done. I do hope this was OT enough for you.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Well the difference is that is that if you are known to have an allergy to the peanuts you wouldnt have to get it.
Herd immunity means not everyone has to get it, especially those that would suffer health risks from it.
jtyranus 2 years ago
It isn't known what the health risks are, especially for long term side effects. Those factors were never thoroughly studied.
And neither was the moon, apparently. They JUST found water on the moon NOW? I always thought the moon had an interesting effect on the tide, certain human cycles, etc.
I already thought the moon was probably mostly ice on the inside and full of rock and debree toward the surface.
Not a great piece, but obviously figured it out a long time ago:
watch?v=PwNggLCM4Eg
;)
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Yeah just now, how many times have they purposely crashed a moon probe into a crater on the moon?
what does the tidal effect of the moon have to do with water ice in a crater?
No it is not ice on the inside otherwise it would have a different mass.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Oh, sorry. Thought people actually walked on the moon. I didn't even know a device crashed into it. If it took crashing into the moon to find water, then maybe it is underneath the surface, not necessarily ice. Should've thought of that.
I'm sure the moon has something to do with the earth's tilt either by direct impact or gravitational distortion of some sort, or both.
But we were ON the moon and they JUST found water, NOW? Did they go there to jerk off under the US flag or what? I wonder.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
You aren't very bright are you?
Yes they walked on the moon. No they didnt see any ice. This is due to some of the properties of the moon. It has no atmosphere. Most of it receives sunlight at some point during its rotation. This means any water ice on the surface would sublimate. Therefore when people walked on the moon they wouldn't find any frakking ice.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Since I already knew everything you mentioned I guess I am very bright. The question is, how bright is science? You don't sound too bright assuming I didn't know any of this and you certainly don't seem to know much about the flu and its legally protected vaccinations, you know, stuff that REALLY effects us and matters.
And I thought you said there wasn't ice in the moon, now there is? That doesn't say much for science and its means to calculate density. Holla.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Knowing that people walked on the moon does not make you bright. Thinking they should have found ice on their trips their makes you a moron.
I didnt assume, it was indicated by your statement that they should have found it while on the moon.
jtyranus 2 years ago
No, that makes NASA a moron. I never claimed to be a scientist nor should there be anything we don't know about something within relatively easy reach.
Why you're turning this into a personal attack on intellect, I do not know. If you can draw conclusions on my intellect, then maybe the institution of science is for you if the religious one isn't. I claim neither. Thinking for myself. Try it. Or let the latest "news" distract you more. Whatever floats your moon water.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
No. NASA has finite resources and has only recently been able to send a probe to that crater. You are a want wit to think we should know everything about object we have only visited a handful of times.
Im making it into personal attack, I felt I should explain why your expectation that NASA should have already found ice on the moon to be ignorant.
jtyranus 2 years ago
No, I don't expect NASA to have done anything, but why did I (and others) already suspect something about water in the moon and that was discovered at least a decade later. WE MUST ALL BE GENIUSES!
If they're so interested in water and water on Mars, don't you think with all their FINITE resources they'd finish the easier job first?
Forget drilling, I thought they'd be able to see h2O with infrared type technology from a distance. Water should've been so easy to detect quite some years ago.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
It was suspected alot longer than at least a decade. It has been suspected for several decades. No a pot induced "Whoa! What if the moon was filled with ice cream?" doesnt make you a genius.
No. Because only recently has there been interest in going back to the moon.
Yeah. They used the 'infrared technology' from the main probe to scan the debris kicked up by the other one crashing into the surface.
jtyranus 2 years ago
If you were paying attention. I stated there would not be ice on the moon where there is sunlight. Only in the protection of the craters at the poles, because they would be constantly in shadow.
No, it doesnt say much about your ability to comprehend.
jtyranus 2 years ago
If *I* were paying attention? Scroll up and you'll find me bringing up the specific situation of ice IN the moon:
"I already thought the moon was probably mostly ice ON THE INSIDE and full of rock and debree toward the surface."
You then refuted what I said by saying this:
"No it is not ice on the inside otherwise it would have a different mass."
You were saying about comprehension ability? Pay attention.
I suppose rock drills were invented post-60's? They sure knew how to get a flag in it.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
You mean when mention that you just had the thought in your head that there should be ice IN the moon. Instead of on the surface in the shadows of craters like it actually. Not to mention the fact that rocks that they brought back are 'dry' in comparison to rocks on the wet earth. So no your wild guess is refuted by the actual evidence.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Ok, u're incredibly retarded about the conversation itself & u expect me to converse with u on something more complex such as space exploration? I find u useless & it's quite telling by now why u'd question my intellect -- because it's ur own that u're insecure about (that would be the science of psychology).
I never said ice was ON the moon. That was from ur head. Who the fcuk wouldn't know water wouldn't survive the intense heat of the sun with practically no atmosphere? No shit sherlock.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
No, nor did I say you said that. What you did say was they should have found it when they visited the moon. No I says because where they went there wasnt any ice to be found.
Then why would you assert they should have found water? then assert that they spent their time masturbating.
jtyranus 2 years ago
So now u're agreeing to what I was saying about there being NO need for a WHOA moment on water ANYWHERE near the moon.
Especially since they already confirmed there is and was (a lot) of water on Mars with even more potential for (past) civilization. Does that mean that God is real and that God(s) were aliens. ???
It's like getting excited over marshmallows when Rice Krispies Treats are far more interesting. So who CARES!
Vaccinate yourself from gullible stupidity.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Yes and no. It was fairly likely that there was water ice, the whoa comes from the fact that it makes a whole metric butt load easier to colonize the moon. among other things.
No on the god thing. The arguments was a very specific subset of creationists.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Yes, those subset of creationists which to me isn't the fact they believe what they do but that they think they know it all, just like some evolutionists, apparently.
We don't know much it seems. Okay then, thanks for the chat. Get your vaccine asap. :)
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
The problem with your comparison to mars. Only recently, like the past five years, did they find solid evidence to confirm there was water on mars. Up to that point it only looked like there was once water on mars, due to the canyons and such. We had to send probes and rovers there just to find a little bit of water.
jtyranus 2 years ago
They sent probes to Mars? Nooo. Stop! I bet it took them more than once to land them fancy machines on Mars. I never knew this. You're right, this poses a serious conflict to what I said. How did I not know this! My intellect and ignorance is astounding.
But I already put my closure in the other part of this convo. So messy.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
If you knew this then why are you comparing mars to the moon?
You say we should have known by now since we can see ice caps, which isnt water ice, on mars. But it took years of sending probes to mars.
No, the fact that they sent probes to mars isnt a conflict to what you said. the fact they sent them there to find evidence of water is. the fact that it took over thirty years is.
jtyranus 2 years ago
You have zero comprehension of what I'm saying. I explained it. Distance, size, relativity, infrared technology that has nothing to do with how lit an area is? Any of that ring a bell?
If not, just explain to me something else I already know. Like, is there life on Jupiter? OR MAYBE ON ONE OF IT'S MOONS! Could it be..
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
no none of that is ringing a bell.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Too bad this wasn't in text format, otherwise you'd be able to look. How inquisitive of you. :)
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
No. I mean your statements dont make any sense.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Sure they do.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
oh, I am glad you finally get it. This was starting to get frustrating.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Tell me how infrared technology is supposed to detect water ice on the moon? it cant see through the surface of the moon.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Oy. Look it up. Heat sensory goes a long way.
Here's one better to why I built up on the idea that water was central INSIDE the moon.
Picture it, Earth (wtf ever time) when science claimed the earth was hit by a meteor causing its tilt:
Water gets knocked outside the earth's atmosphere, travels/orbits away from earth with rock. The water would linger there like this:
watch?v=yV3fa9qoSek
Having its own gravity, rock covers it, turning it to ice. Can't evaporate anywhere without atmosphere.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
I dont think the earths tilt is claimed to be caused by a meteor impact. Its tilt is however constrained by the presence of the moon.
Water gets knocked outside its atmosphere. hmm. well that would mean the water was vaporized in such a large impact. once in space the vapor would dissipate in the vacuum.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Well, it is the claim last i heard, and another theory as to why the dinosaurs became extinct. Pretty common knowledge.
The water can be knocked outside of earth as vapor, yes, but knocked out with chunks of rock would keep the water pulled toward the rock pieces, eventually combining together.
Look at the video again, the chemical reaction inside the bubble would somewhat represent the constant vaporization and recombining of the fragments, seeming to cause most of its craters, not comets.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
No. I think you are getting it confused with uranus. Its tilt is the result of a large impact.
No. As any chunks launched into space would not have enough gravity to hold the gaseous vapors. The moon is larger than these chunks would have been and it cant hold any vapors or gasses.
The reactions were confined within the water, and you said the surface rocks and such came later.
Im sure your hypothesis will make sense in no time, and by that I mean at no time will it make sense.
jtyranus 2 years ago
I'm not surprised you don't understand. I will look at wiki to read about how little they know about the interior of the moon. Ummm, thanks. :/
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
I understand what you are saying. But it doesnt reflect what would really happen in such a large impact. A large impact like that would vaporize both water and rock of a large area. Then it would throw huge chunks of rock. These would make it into space. the vapor would disperse out into the vacuum and the rocks would not surround it these escaping gasses.
jtyranus 2 years ago
The vapor would not be stuck in earth's gravity with enough force.
Stick to one spot. For every comment I give I get three back from you. See last comment I posted, I explained it.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
See it would be like the gasses streaming off a comet. once the water is in vaporized form it will expand out into space. The only reason a comets tail goes in one direction is due to the solar wind. It would be interesting if it could happen the way you suggest.
jtyranus 2 years ago
No, it would NOT be like gas streaming off a comment. Earth is in question here, not comets, and if knocked off the planet would eventually get stuck between Earth and the sun's gravity. Again, not complicated. Space is a lot less complex than in situations taking place within the confines of our atmosphere. There are less rules.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Actually yes it is complicated as there are many, many more factors than simply being stuck between the earth and suns gravity.
There are numerous other factors out in space that you dont apply on the surface of the earth. Like vacuum, solar winds, and so on.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Yes it would be like a gas streaming of a comet because it would be in space.
jtyranus 2 years ago
interesting video thanks for the link. does not really support your assertion though.
I would evaporate. liquids in lower pressures evaporate at much lower temperatures. So in a vacuum it would evaporate. Not that the water would make it intact into orbit. a collision that size would just vaporize the water.
jtyranus 2 years ago
water boil vacuum. watch?v=9q5gEZGoBnk
jtyranus 2 years ago
The water didn't go anywhere, it collected inside the vacuum, outside the cup. That's not how things work in space, dear.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Ok. Now stay with me on this one. Since the water went to the inside of the cup that means when the water vapor went in space it all went towards the cup that contains the universe.
Sorry for being snarky, but the water collected inside of it because of was confined in a container in space it would not.
jtyranus 2 years ago
No. On one of the Apollo missions they did take a drill. What is the relevance of that?
jtyranus 2 years ago
Yeah, they should've used the drill, but like i said IF YOU'RE PAYING ATTENTION, they should have been able to detect it from a distance much sooner than October, 2009 if they could spot ice caps on something as far as Mars. Seriously.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
And Its statements like these that make it so tempting to insult you. No they would be able to detect it from a distance. The ice was at the bottom of a crater at the pole. Thus they had to crash a probe so the other could take pictures of the resulting plume to scan it for the chemical signature of water. Which is different from spotting 'ice' caps on mars since in comparison they huge. and made of carbon dixoide.
jtyranus 2 years ago
oopsie. supposed to be "wouldn't be able to detect it from a distance"
jtyranus 2 years ago
You're not insulting me, you're insulting yourself by your needless defense on something that really has little to do with you or I as individuals. This makes you more dumb than you're inability to grasp the subject at hand, or at least what I'm saying about it.
You can see ice on Mars which is much further away even in its closest position to Earth, but they can't x-ray the moon to spot a little water??? Wtf?
Size is relative with such varying distances and technology.
Point: Worthless news.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
You can see carbon dioxide, aka dry ice on mars, through a telescope because by comparison the ice cap is frakking huge. Fairly easy in comparison to trying to find water ice at the bottom of the crater at the poles and in the shadows on the moon.
jtyranus 2 years ago
So they'll confirm there is probably large chunks of ice under the surface of the moon in lit areas. I'd bet on that.
It's hard for them to see lots of things. Science isn't as smart as it makes itself out to be. They don't seem to get anything done, politically, scientifically, etc.
I like how we claim to have figured things out like electricity and such when that was apparently figured out a loooong time ago. Whole other subject but yeah. Have a good night.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Probably not. since the ice from the craters are from comet impacts. The interior of the moon is largely without voids, that is it is full of rock and not pockets of ice.
jtyranus 2 years ago
How did you (or anyone) conclude it was from comet impacts and not somehow related to the water of earth itself? How do they know that much about the interior of the moon. A rough measurement of its density (not mass btw ;) by gravity divided by something else? Seems to be a series of guesses and theories more than facts.
None of it matters so much though. Remember that science is an institution just like religion, only science is more relevant now. All the more reason to question it.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Because it is stuck in the bottom of impact craters.
They know a little about the interior of the moon because of seismic sensors left on the moon by the Apollo program. Then there is the chemical analysis of the rocks brought back from the moon. there was no water on the moon.
And if the interior was ice, it would have a different mass.
jtyranus 2 years ago
I think you mean "density" more specifically than mass. But if you mean "gravitational mass" (you have to be specific, science's definition of mass is more complex) then that would explain why walking on the moon or jumping is so much like as if walking on the bottom of water.
They don't know how much water is in the moon (yet) if they only just found some. Just 'cause they found it under the surface of a crater, doesn't mean it was just in that spot.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
gravitational mass. The density doesnt matter, because whether it is more dense and occupies the space of a pea or is less dense it still has the same amount of mass.
jtyranus 2 years ago
no they have a pretty good idea based on physics and evidence.
Just check out the wiki article "internal structure of the moon"
It explains a little on how they know a little about the interior of the moon.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Hmmm, that's not my understanding of it. Seems very simple to me that the water would change form, but wouldn't go anywhere. Even within Earth's atmosphere, the water evaporates but stays within the atmosphere. It's called rain. Look it up. lol
Seriously, tho. Evaporation esp with rock sediment around it would only keep it there in space, whether it's vapor, liquid, or ice.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
no. the water would change form and it would go somewhere.
And you dont see the difference between the earth and the vacuum of space? here on earth it is kept by the gravity and is not in a vacuum. In space it is in a vacuum and is not being held to the surface by gravity.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Go look at the video again. A vacuum (pressure) is not the same as zero gravity, and btw, DENSITY has all to do with gravitation pull, I double checked. How you do not know this or can even imagine this I do not know:
Water in Zero Gravity:
watch?v=T4JrhW2aO6I
Not that complicated, esp with large enough chunks of rock keeping the water/vapor local like how EVERY planet was formed by separate rocks combining. Thank you.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
no. it is mass. when you are going to make calculations about gravitation you take into account its mass. basic newtonian physics. * F is the magnitude of the gravitational force between the two point masses, * G is the gravitational constant, * m1 is the mass of the first point mass, * m2 is the mass of the second point mass, * r is the distance between the two point masses.-wikipedia on calculating gravitation between two objects
jtyranus 2 years ago
It is mass AND density. You just gave the formula for mass between two objects, which would explain why a moon made of at least half of ice water couldn't retain vapor but it can retain water. People are mostly water and we can walk on the moon. Don't know where you think you've disproved my "misconception".
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
No. Gravity is determined by the mass. Only thing that changes with the density is how much mass is within a certain volume. an equal amount of mass more dens will still have the same gravity.
of course they didnt float away. the difference between them and a mass of water blasted from the surface of the earth is that it would be vapor.
jtyranus 2 years ago
You say that like I cant tell the difference between a vacuum and a microgravity environment. What I am telling is that your hypothesis brakes down when the water vapor, it will be vapor with such an energetic impact, in space will dissipate in the vacuum. So despite that interesting property displayed in that video it just would not work that way in your proposed 'theory'.
jtyranus 2 years ago
the rock chunks would not have enough gravity to keep it local. the moon doesnt have enough gravity to keep water or water vapor local so why would these smaller chunks be able to do that.
The planets were formed by rocks coming together. But the water came from comets and meteorites from the outer solar system during the late bombardment.
And the reason you get several comments for your one is that it take alot to correct your misconceptions.
jtyranus 2 years ago
You're not correcting my 'misconceptions' but rather throwing questions at me that I already answered. You just can't comprehend them. You're the type of person that think louder or more means right. Not so.
The moon as it is now was not always in the orbit that it is in, again I explained that a tug-of-war between the earth and sun's gravity would help keep it in place. Unlike your explanation of a comet that leaves behind water, there aren't surrounding gravities in effect.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Good point about the moon not retaining vapors but just a few moments (mostly) behind the earth would have it freeze instantly if it is anything like the temp of the moon without light. In actuality, the moon could've been bigger but most of the water, escaped, perhaps leaving a layer of ice here and there trapped.
Also it is said the Earth was further from the sun, so it'd actually be cooler then.
The formation of most of the foundation of the moon could've happened in a very short time.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
No questions. You say the water would be a blob in space. I tell you that is incorrect for several reasons. The impact to put a mass that large into space would just vaporize the water. Once in space the vapor would expand and dissipate.
Surrounding gravities dont figure into it. vapor in space will expand and dissipate. A comets tail forms from the thermal energy causing the comets ice to sublimate into gasses(water vapor) then it expands into the vacuum of space.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Not if it has a chance to freeze over and over again, and very quickly might I add. We're talking about water being knocked away from a planet with considerable about of gravitation, not some comet emission in the middle of nowhere.
The water, as it vaporizes into the vacuum of space, would still be in earths orbit and have many chances to freeze while non-water sediments combined them.
You only explained why there is no water ON THE SURFACE of the moon, and I agree.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
Unfortunately it wouldnt matter if was the dark side or the light side of the earth it would still have a lot of energy in the water vapor and would escape into space. Due to it being a gas in a vacuum.
The only reason I mention the comet emission is that once the gas is in space its lost. So once your super heated cloud of water vapor was in space it would be gone too.
jtyranus 2 years ago
That would only put a whole in your "fantasy" because if comets with hydrogen or any element of water was the reason there is water on earth, and earth had no atmosphere, then that water would escape or be vaporized as well. Try again.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
And if I remember correctly you stated that an impact like the dinosaurs caused this supposed water deposit. An impact of that size would not be able to place anything outside the roche limit.
In all honesty your little fantasy is full of holes.
jtyranus 2 years ago
I didn't state that. That is just another theory scientists came up with, not my fantasy.
Every theory has a whole which is why they're all theories. Part of why none of this matters.
Don't forget your flu shot. Very important.
GhostWhisperBlues 2 years ago
its ice, not liquid water. Ice is still water though. Water in its solid state
KittyRokher 2 years ago
Ice is frozen water...so...you refute yourself then agree with the refutation...
I suppose that makes you correct...but still.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
The reason they crashed the probe where they did is because it was a crater deep into the surface of the moon and was at the southern pole so it was always in shadow. No sunlight means no sublimation of the ice.
jtyranus 2 years ago
the moon.... jesus h christ in a chicken basket... the moon, over
Octamed 2 years ago
I'd love to see some aliens before I die.
GwydionMapDon 2 years ago
What religious people would say is that God put water on the moon to help us travel in space.
Mglosk 2 years ago
Comment removed
Mglosk 2 years ago
I know what the considered religious response will be.
"LA LA LA LA CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA LA"
MarcusCardiff 2 years ago
Man, you missed the point. You gotta have faith, and god works in mysterious ways. Yeap :) just kidding.. and by the way, I put small g on the word because I think that that I should be grammatically correct.
freesapiens 2 years ago
@freesapiens
haha i like that, the lower g for that reason :)
spiritconsumer 2 years ago
Frank.... READ THE FREAKIN' DESCRIPTION BOX! Or, you could just listen to the video. I CLEARLY say that I KNOW there are other layers to this issue, but I wasn't mentioning them "FOR A REASON!"
THIS video addresses the CREATIONISTS who think that Earth is the ONLY place with water. I didn't say anything about what I knew or what science has already found.
Please try to keep up.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Dude
You know there is no proof in what you say. And there is no connection to the video. But everyone must be heard even the low single celled ameba christian freaks who can't think past a 3 year olds mentality.
oblufire 2 years ago
Q: Why would god put water on the moon.
A: To get his crazy followers to be interested in outer space. So that they may one day preform Space Crusades. Forcing the Ewoks, Wookiees, and Vulkans to accept the owrd of god, OR DIE!
dragonddff 2 years ago
I'm pretty sure the printing press was invented to make books more available and cheaper. However, the inventor CHOSE to make the bible as his first mass produced book. Give me a week and I'll ask my teacher to be sure, but as a professor at UCF who does my history class in high school, I usually take his word for it.
terenhas 2 years ago
Well of course he chose to print the bible. That is what would make the most business sense at the time.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Water is a common substance and I am not suprised whatsoever that water is on the moon, and on Mars, and all sorts of other places. Just not a big deal. Oh, anyone who actually thought earth was somehow exclusive to ANYTHING is a fracking smacktard and should be sent to the moon.
Moonbogg 2 years ago
I don't see why creationists believe that water is exclusive to Earth. Think of what water is made up of, Hydrogen and Oxygen, which are the first and third most abundant elements in the universe respectively.
I'm sure they also conviniently forgot that comets are made of ice, and last I checked, comets don't originate from Earth.
TheOmniNerd 2 years ago
Jesus dropped that water off on his way to heaven.
FantasticBabblings 2 years ago
Where does it say that life is not somewhere else.
About the moon... Europa, etc... water does not equal life, life requires water like pool requires a pooltable.
Finding a pooltable does not mean there is pool being played on it.
simonthesinner 2 years ago
First of all, the Bible does NOT say that the Earth, is the only place with water. But anyways lets say that it did, Is it not YOUR scientists that say that the moon came from earth? therefore the earth would be the only place with water, but since i know its not since i believe even mars has water, whatever. All i know is that God is real, or i can assure you that i would not be typing right now. Only i know what ive been through. God Bless.
Rockstar3004 2 years ago
Actually I think the current theory accepted is that the moon from a planet impacting earth and then coalescing into the moon. Most of that water is likely not from that. Most likely from comet impacts and meteor impacts.
Also I think this argument is directed at creationists who use an argument that the water from the rest of the solar system was used to flood the earth.
jtyranus 2 years ago
They are pretty positive that the moon formed from a massive impact of something into the earth, but the earth was a molten metal and rock slag heap, there was absolutely no water on earth at that point in time, so you're correct, none of that water is from earth.
terenhas 2 years ago
Well it seems like you almost started to attempt an argument there, but then lost your train of thought and went to the 'Existence by Experience' argument, which doesn't work for anyone, it's absolutely useless to let that slip out, it just makes you look even sillier =\
terenhas 2 years ago
im not attempting to argue crap, hahaha there is no argument that can possibly affect me or anyone i have spoken to, God is real i mean what more do you want? this is all i have to say....''God IS Real'' i dont need doctrine or crap i already know.
Rockstar3004 2 years ago
What more? Evidence would be nice.
jtyranus 2 years ago
If it told you every reason i know God is real first of all you would not believe me, and second of all it would take me hours to type, why even bother. take it or leave it, believe in God with the measure of Faith you have, or do not believe. all i know is that i used to be an unbeliever but look at me now, hahhaha i cant argue it would be too funny or frustrating for me, i dont know, God Bless.
Rockstar3004 2 years ago
Well start off with the good reasons. How about the top three?
jtyranus 2 years ago
The pope's cousin, Count Popula, a magical monster with pencils for arms
Count Popula is real i mean what more do you want?
This is all I have to say... "Count Popula IS Real"
jtyranus 2 years ago
Sir, i told you that you were not going to believe me if i told you the reasons i believe in God, but OK ill tell you even though i have a pretty good idea of what you will say cause all of you are blinded terribly, ill tell you 3, number one, i have seen Gods signs wonders and miracles before my eyes at church and in houses all over Miami, i have seen water turn into wine, i have seen Gold dust appear inside of closed glass bottles, i have seen bones created before my eyes...next comment
Rockstar3004 2 years ago
I have seen believers in count Popula make an elephant disappear.
watch?v=Vk48Dry8KzY
jtyranus 2 years ago
BULL....SHIT
court adjourned
terenhas 2 years ago
i myself was healed of flat feet and arthritis, i have felt God so much so that i have been dropped to the floor because my physical body has not been able to contain it, i have seen cancer healed, i have seen deaf people hear, and blind people begin to see, i have seen asthma healed, and i have seen mental handicap people restored, and much more, in Jesus name with prayer.
Rockstar3004 2 years ago
Ah yes. Psychosomatic. If you believe hard enough the pain doesnt bother you so much.
Cancer cured? were they also taking some of that fancy medical care? Like to find out that it was actually cancer and if so treated with chemo or radiation?
jtyranus 2 years ago
jtyranus, you see why i can't tell people like you real stuff that happens in life? you are an unbeliever, the people that were diagnosed with cancer brought real medical papers, and another thing, i was healed of arthritis and flat feet, and i didnt believe i was gonna get healed cause i never saw God heal before that, someone prayed for me and it happened and i could not deny it because it happened inside of my body and i saw and felt it happen.
Rockstar3004 2 years ago
Ok. Im assuming that if they brought medical papers they also got that fancy chemo therapy or other cancer treatment.
You just said you started believing in god strongly after a depression induced hallucination. That strong belief in god is where the psychosomatic part comes in. And I am sure if you had arthritis and were examined again you likely still have it.
jtyranus 2 years ago
no there was no chemo therapy involved, see i go to a church called King Jesus Ministry, it is the biggest hispanic church in the nation, 200 new members or more join every month, they have professional doctors there that check the people after healings to confirm that no one is lying, if someone has asthma, and my pastor prays for them, he makes them run around the church various times to confirm the people are healed. ive seen women walk in church in wheel chairs and leave carrying it.
Rockstar3004 2 years ago
Im sure it is similar to this. Except this one has a guy doing backflips.
watch?v=bgW5gTp4bnM&feature=related
jtyranus 2 years ago
You think people aren't willing to lie FOR the ridiculous crap they believe in? You need a bbbiiiggg fucking reality check buddy.
terenhas 2 years ago
ok Reason 2, i have studied. i have studied various religions since i myself come from a family composed of atheists, Afro cubans, and unpracticing catholics, i used to be a mix of everything, i have found and listened to many scientific theories, i have looked at archeological finds, i have read history books, and especially the Bible, and have found that there is more than Faith evidence when it comes to God, but natural evidence, we can see his fingerprints in our bodies and nature.
Rockstar3004 2 years ago
All the evidence points to naturalistic causes aided by Count Popula.
Reason 3: Good for you overcoming such pain. Still not a very good reason though.
jtyranus 2 years ago
Again, bull shit, get me a legitimate and big name human anatomist to tell me that instead of evolution. I rarely say it, but, jesus christ you're dumb!
terenhas 2 years ago
Reason 3, i have a testimony, i used to go through depression, suicidal thoughts. addictions, Hate of society because i was bullied for 9 years, i went through rejection as well, and one day i was contemplating the thought of running away or commiting suicide, and i heard a voice inside of my being, asking me ''How much do you cost?'' That day i was dropped to the ground with laughter, i went to church for the first time in year