the moons size coincidence?

Wonderfully said!


A relativley new 'member'

--

Leo's up - somewhere,
Jeffrey


Beneath South Carolina skies and clouds and clouds and clouds
-------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------- ----------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Bill Kelly" wrote in message
...

"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message
oups.com...

garry parker wrote:
Do any moons of the other planets have the right size to produce a
similair
effect from that planets perspective?

I dont think that has been worked out yet but it would be odd if they
don't. It's relatively simple maths to do. From the distance of Jupiter
the moon wouldn't need to be very large. And it has so many to choose
from.

Then there are all the other coincidentae. Just what would happen if
the moon had a magnetic core?
Does the fact that it doesn't spin have anything to do with that?
How far from the sun would it reposition itself if it had a magnetic
field?
How would that affect earth?

Then there is the fact it is cold by night 2 weeks a month. Does it
have ice?
Would a diurnal rotation warm it enough to melt it?
If it could spin would it be able to support an atmosphere?
Would that affect its magnetism?

Where would the earth be without it? How does the age of the universe
and the time involved in the moon and earth finding each other affect
the time that all the other chances would need to come together to
produce such a vibrant ball of life?

Is evolution possible under such circumstances.

OOPS troll...

.. sorry.
I know that it is best to stay on the "topic" of this newsgroup, but this
topic lends itself to the spiritual aspects thereof. A comment or so, here
or there, is acceptable, don't you think? I remember when there were a
good number of regular posters here, who said mostly nothing but
silliness, and although they are probably not greatly missed, I think it's
ok to laugh about glowing toilet seats now and then. It has been said that
the greater the intelligence, the the greater the need to be totally non-
serious at times. Yours,
Bill Kelly.
Yours,
Bill Kelly.

Jeffrey Hopkins wrote:

Wonderfully said!

What exactly did he say?

I wasn't accusing anyone of trolling but just pointing out that the
thread was a potential drifter. Anyone interested in my interests can
get more with a Google search

A relativley new 'member'

Genuine ex-virgin I fear. Hence the lack of top postage. Or is that not
a breach of nettiquette on here?

I know an awful lot about the moon and I haven't mentioned the half of
it. I haven't come here to post flame bait though and these days I tend
to ignore trolls. I merely wanted to set someone -who was already on
the right track, well on their way.

This is what I have accomplished, I feel. The subject of astronomy is
peppered with prattfalls for people who can be quite abusive if you are
not a fellow believer in the scientific religion. It would be a shame
to be lead astray by pointless whimsey.

I appreciated very much your input. I knew there wasn't any kind of
insinuation about someone being a true troll. You were just being polite.
And yes my bottom posting is condsidered the best way to reply on some of
the newsgroups I have been to. There are even some pages written on the
bottom vs. top posting debate. I don't really consider that it matters a
great deal. But sometimes some may read only the reply at the top,
especially on long threads, and not truly understand what is being said, and
give a badly informed reply. In that case I suppose it is better to bottom
post. I have watched and infrequently posted here, off and on over the past
couple of years. I am more of a would be amateur at astromomy, mostly due to
very washed out skies, and somewhat due to lack of funds, but I prefer
looking in on this newsgroup to the other astronomy groups. This one has
less garbage, more politeness, and is kinder to newbies. I'm afraid that may
say something about the American vs British or Euopean mentalities. I have a
friend who also says that the posters who respond to his groups from Europe
seem to be friendlier, and have a better sense of humor. There is so much
cynicism, and a generally defensive posture here these days, as I suspect
there is also in very many other parts of the world. Anyway, God bless, and
thanks for the input on the creation aspect of this subject. Yours,
Bill kelly.
"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jeffrey Hopkins wrote:

Wonderfully said!

What exactly did he say?

I wasn't accusing anyone of trolling but just pointing out that the
thread was a potential drifter. Anyone interested in my interests can
get more with a Google search

A relativley new 'member'

Genuine ex-virgin I fear. Hence the lack of top postage. Or is that not
a breach of nettiquette on here?

I know an awful lot about the moon and I haven't mentioned the half of
it. I haven't come here to post flame bait though and these days I tend
to ignore trolls. I merely wanted to set someone -who was already on
the right track, well on their way.

This is what I have accomplished, I feel. The subject of astronomy is
peppered with prattfalls for people who can be quite abusive if you are
not a fellow believer in the scientific religion. It would be a shame
to be lead astray by pointless whimsey.