Just like the methods used by early humans, whereas living in
protective caves is perhaps the only direct habitat usage of our moon,
with air-locked tunnels created by a fleet of mostly robotic TBMs
making the innards of our moon into cozy and relatively failsafe
habitats.

Something terminated most surface life as we know it, perhaps
initiated as of 11,713 years ago when according to multiple ice-core
samples from various independent research groups having told our
geologists of when the last ice-age abruptly ended.
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wil...ees/methuselah
“At 4,841 years old, this ancient bristlecone pine is the oldest
known non-clonal organism on Earth.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_trees
“The record-holders for individual, non-clonal trees may be the Great
Basin bristlecone pine trees from California and Nevada, in the United
States. Through tree-ring cross-referencing, they have been shown to
be more than 5,000 years old.”

‘A colony of Huon pine trees covering 1 hectare (2.5 acres) on Mount
Read, Tasmania is estimated to be around 10,000 years old, as
determined by DNA samples taken from pollen collected from the
sediment of a nearby lake. Individual trees in this group date to no
more than 4,000 years old, as determined by tree ring samples.”

Of course underground and cave dwelling life was way better protected,
and much of its existence having been preserved, and thereby
identified as having been existing for much older 11,713 years. In
other words, to a great extent surface life was wiped clean, as though
a very bad thing had taken place, and relatively soon thereafter the
surviving humans as having been protected by their caves started
taking notice of our moon, and perhaps for the first time had to deal
with seasons.

I’m thinking that Earth without any significant axial tilt and with
somewhat less ocean tidal considerations becomes an icier planet, and
otherwise without a moon is when nighttime becomes extremely dark and
nasty to anything that didn’t already evolve with exceptional night
vision and/or having its very own bioluminescent capability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_vision
“Humans have poor night vision compared to many animals, in part
because the human eye lacks a tapetum lucidum.”

“Many animals have better night vision than humans do, the result of
one or more differences in the morphology and anatomy of their eyes.
These include having a larger eyeball, a larger lens, a larger optical
aperture (the pupils may expand to the physical limit of the eyelids),
more rods than cones (or rods exclusively) in the retina, and a
tapetum lucidum.”

Early humans had relatively small eyes, as well as no indications of
any bioluminescent capability, and apparently were badly nearsighted
as well as intellectually dumbfounded about practically everything.
In other words, our physiology of that 10,000 BC era has us dependent
on most everything going smoothly and friendly, because our
intellectual capabilities were not hardly worth squat until something
kicked our genetic evolution butts into high gear, at a thousandfold
the rate of all other species on Earth, and yet our physiology
remained as extremely limited and relatively frail compared to the
vast majority of other life which was way better suited to surviving
without the use of protective caves.

Those early humans had to have had a great many fears and
uncertainties over just about everything. Therefore most of anything
outside of their protective caves had to have been truly remarkable as
well as spectacular and otherwise mostly scary as hell, and most
certainly worth noting as exaggerated in their cave wall paintings.

Apparently, for all of its spooky grandeur and spectacular vibrant
nature, their moon of that cave dwelling and still very ice-age era as
of prior to 10,000 BC, simply didn’t muster up to anything worth their
time.


On May 23, 7:17*am, Brad Guth wrote:
In case some of you didn't realize it, "Terraforming the moon
underground" means digging into it, and TBM means tunnel boring
machine.

On Apr 11, 9:17*am, Brad Guth wrote:







Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains and
pretending as always being faith-based and/or politically correct,
because it's their mostly public-funded and/or faith-based job to
topic/author stalk and to otherwise FUD everything to death. *Hitler
had the exact same “Paperclip” team of rusemasters and FUD-masters, as
professional clowns working and/or manipulating the locals into a
mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many bought
into instead of taking any logical stance against their totally
bat**** crazy peers.

Of course this mainstream status-quo policy of obfuscation and denial
is what brought us a mutually perpetrated cold-war era and the
negative Karma likes of 911 (make that positive Karma if you are an
oligarch of our military industrial complex), each of which wasted
decades and costing us trillions of our hard earned dollars, as well
as having systematically squandered all sorts of talent, expertise and
resources that we'll never get back, and which force other nations to
follow suit.

Venus is pretty much as hot and nasty as we’ve all been indoctrinated
about. *However, this not necessarily the case of each and every
location, such as mountainous and polar area can be considerably
cooler though still extremely hot by human standards that we’re
accustomed to. *With applied physics and reasonable technology, the
surface of Venus can be dealt with, at least robotically, and
otherwise via composite rigid airships it can be further exploited
while easily protecting the airship crew. *Of course you have to think
both really big and perhaps even small in order to fully appreciate
the potential of what exploiting such a nearby planet has to offer,
because it’s the in-between that’s not easily accomplished if you can
only think of terrestrial methods that get to deal with on Earth.

Our physically dark and naked moon is just another metallicity
treasure trove of valuable resources (including much clean energy),
just sitting out there and causing us mostly grief and otherwise
contributing very little terrestrial benefit, unless added IR, X-rays
and gamma plus loads of tidal surging and increased seismic trauma is
desirable.

On Feb 18, 6:56*am, Brad Guth wrote:

It's probably close to averaging a cozy 0 F (255 K) at no greater than
10 meters deep, and it shouldn't have any problems reaching 70 F (day
or night) at 100 km deep or possibly as shallow as 10 km (depending on
the core energy). *The R-factor of lunar regolith (lose basalt rock
and loads of crystal dry dust that’s at minimum 10 meters deep) is
none too shabby, and otherwise the geothermal conductance and/or heat
transfer coefficient (aka geothermal gradient) of its paramagnetic
basalt crust of 3.5 g/cm3 density shouldn't be significantly any
different than here on Earth, except that our terrestrial basalt isn't
nearly as paramagnetic or much less offering carbonado, and the core
heat of Earth being 7000+ K as opposed to only 1000 K of our moon.
Supposedly there is only a wee little bit of lunar granite to deal
with, but the samples thus far are inconsistent in their composition.

A new interpretation is that all-inclusively the geothermal outflux of
Earth (including geothermal vents and volcanic contributions) is
getting rid of roughly 128 mw/m2, whereas our moon is supposedly only
getting rid of as little as 16 mw/m2 (an 8th as much).

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient
*“Geothermal gradient is the rate of increasing temperature with
respect to increasing depth in the Earth's interior.”

The "Igneous Petrology" of our moon and Venus should each be unique
and considerably different than Earth.

“The composition of igneous rocks and minerals can be determined via a
variety of methods of varying ease, cost, and complexity. The simplest
method is observation of hand samples with the naked eye and/or with a
hand lens. This can be used to gauge the general mineralogical
composition of the rock, which gives an insight into the composition.”

Unfortunately, the rocks returned from our moon were entirely similar
to those of terrestrial rocks. *Of course there’s all sorts of actual
paramagnetic basalt moon rock to be found on Earth, because there
should be at least a thousand teratonnes of it, whereas naturally most
of which ended up in oceans and otherwise as having meteor and obvious
melt indications that are entirely quite different than local volcanic
spewed basalts.

“A more precise but still relatively inexpensive way to identify
minerals (and thereby the bulk chemical composition of the rock) with
a petrographic microscope. These microscopes have polarizing plates,
filters, and a conoscopic lens that allow the user to measure a large
number of crystallographic properties.”

Contributor “Wretch Fossil” actually has a very good “petrographic
microscope” and multiple resources plus talent of interpreting such to
go along with it. *Sadly this technology and its expertise of
interpreting is being ignored by those of authority that do not want
outsiders having a public say about anything. *So, once again, it
really doesn’t matter whatever level of modern applied technology and
expertise we have to offer, because it’s only going to be topic/author
stalked and systematically trashed by those of Usenet/newsgroup
authority that have multiple mainstream issues at risk.

TBMs cutting their tunnels into the interior of our moon should prove
both interesting and rewarding in terms of extracting rare and
valuable elements, not to mention creating the very cozy and safe
habitat potential that’s opened up for multiple uses. *Unfortunately
this method can not be applied on such a geodynamically active planet
like Venus that has such a thin crust and way more primordial core
energy outflux of perhaps 20.5 w/m2 as contributing way more
geothermal energy than any other planet or moon has to offer, although
older and cooler planets or any number of their moons (except for Io
that’s averaging 2 w/m2) should be somewhat similar to terraforming
the cozy interior of our moon.
*http://www.mps.mpg.de/solar-system-s...etary_interior...

*http://commercialspace.pbworks.com/f/Public+ILN.pdf

*The likely two thirds (6.6e17~6.6e18 tonnes) worth of lose surface
basalt rock and dust including whatever 4+ billion years worth of
accumulated deposits, as remaining crystal dry on the naked surface of
our physically dark moon (not including the other good third portion
as having been dislodged and deposited on Earth) is a direct result of
the thousands of significant impacts, and especially as a result of
whatever created its South polar crater of 2500 km diameter, that
which all by itself should have contributed a minimum of 3e17 m3 or
possibly a maximum contribution of 1e18 m3 if including the planet
sized impactor contributions. *Given the limited surface area of the
moon as being 3.8e13 m2 doesn’t exactly allow all that much surface
area for accommodating such volume of lose crater made fallout, and
perhaps due to much of its own basalt metallicity making its density
worth on average 3.5 tonnes/m3 unless offset by loads of accumulated
carbon buckyballs. *In that kind of hard vacuum, there really
shouldn’t be all that much porosity to any of its solidified basalt or
carbonado.

Liquefied basalt as returning fallout from such truly horrific impacts
that should have extensively solidified and possibly fused upon
contact with the relatively cool basalt surface, as such should have
been quite obvious and highly distinctive if such exposed lunar
bedrock samples had been return to Earth. *Sadly, no such samples or
even unique meteorites ever materialized from our NASA/Apollo era,
that found our naked moon as instead so unusually reflective and UV, X-
ray and gamma inert as well as hardly the least bit dusty, and what
little crystal dry dust there was seemed to offer terrific surface
tension and clumping for their footing and traction like no place
else.

Even taking the utmost conservative swag-estimate of 3.8e16 m3 worth
of lose rock, debris and accumulated dust, is still suggesting an
average surface depth of one km, which of course our Apollo era found
no such indications, as though that moon is relatively new to us. *Of
course, if that moon had created our Arctic ocean basin as of 11,712
years ago, would actually explain quite a bit.

How’s that for a worthy topic of terraforming the innards of our naked
moon that’s practically dust free and mostly solid as any rock
according to our Apollo wizards?