On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 7:17:45 AM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
"Brad Guth" wrote in message
...
On Monday, September 23, 2013 10:53:05 AM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
"Brad Guth" wrote in message
...
On Monday, September 23, 2013 8:18:31 AM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:
Even though the Earth/Planet X impact theory hasn't changed, the time of
the
event has slipped by a 100 Million years, a mere blink of the eye in the
Solar System's elapsed-time table ...
http://news.yahoo.com/moon-100-milli...121148745.html
The likely planets, planetoids and asteroids of the Sirius star system are
only at most 256 million years old, and at least some of that stuff having
survived Sirius(b) when it converted from an enormous red giant and became
a
white dwarf as of roughly 64 million years ago.
Can gold deposits be carbon dated, or even lead dated?
How about the age dating of carbonado, or even paramagnetic basalt?
*** What does any of your insanity laced ranting and raving have to do
with
the Moon ???
Notice to Moron GuthBall:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius
It's a fun read, but I doubt it'll do anything for your creeping insanity.
Our moon wasn't likely made of Earth, as we've been purely indoctrinated to
believe, but then you'll believe anything your ZNR buddies have to say.
The size of item which created its 2500 km crater was perhaps one of 6371 km
radius, that was a glancing blow also responsible for creating our Arctic
ocean basin. Its paramagnetic basalt and carbonado crust is nothing like
Earth has to offer.
*** Look, moron ... at least they ran computer aided tests on the oblique
impact of planet X and the subesquent formation of the Moon and its
gradually increasing orbital distance ... so it makes a lot more sense than
your pulled-out-of-your-ass tlithobreaking theory (whatever that means) and
your incessant rants about the imminent encounter with Sirius and how the
moon came from ... you have not documentation on any of your brainfatrz, nor
any supportive data ... just like the Liberal you are ... trust me, even
though I am a Community Organizer, I cam make it all better ... just trust
me. Right.
Until definitive proof is offered to the contrary, Mr. Hartmann's theory
stands the test of logic and repeatability by simulations.
They are so deathly afraid to run any alternative simulations, that they keep running out of Depends. Even the very best impactor simulations of extremely large and massive items is woefully deficient and thus untrustworthy.
Your Operation Paperclip buddies still can not explain what created that 2500 km diameter crater nor whatever happened to its impactor, much less telling us how and when our planet got its Arctic ocean basin and seasonal tilt.. As discovered and interpreted thus far, there has been none of those extremely survival intelligent and artistically talented humans as of prior to 10,000 BC as having depicted their version of their natural environment with any moon, even though their having accomplished far better resolution paintings or depictions of smaller items of much less survival importance.
Your public funded computer simulations are just that, and there's nothing the least bit objective about any of it. So, considering alternatives seems only logical, especially since the Apollo era (extensively run by those of Operation Paperclip) accomplished nothing of any objective proof that can be independently verified.
A lithobraking encounter via a glancing blow would have created our Arctic ocean basin, the antipode of Antarctica and having tilted our icy planet if it were impacted by a 7.5e22 kg icy planetoid. As to exactly when this took place is what needs to be further researched and estimated as based upon the best available evidence instead of simply based entirely upon computer simulations that can be made and/or modified in order to suit whatever end results are being paid for.
Are you going to suggest that early humans (like those of your kind) were all badly nearsighted, and didn't even know the difference between day or night, summer or winter?