Why don't we remove the moon from Earth's orbit???

On Sep 23, 8:12 am, Knecht wrote:
On Sep 20, 8:07 pm, Victor Smootbank wrote:

C'mon, the moon is an ugly piece of rock and dirt blocking our
view into deep space.

I think we'll need a petition to move the moon from our orbit,
because the moon is a giant piece of garbage.

When the moon is gone, astronomy will be far more fun!!!

What do you think???

According to a credible physicist with a published book on basic
physics, the interaction between the Moon and the Earth plays an
important role in generating the Earth's magnetic field (dynamo
mechanism). The Earth's magnetic field is crucial to us because it
deflects a large portion of dangerous cosmic radiation (high E
protons, alpha particles and nuclei) from hitting the Earth directly.
Some radiation is good because it drives evolution, but too much and
we get trashed.

We are currently losing our once upon a time robust magnetosphere at
roughly -.05%/year, which could have a little something to do with our
moon moving away from us at 38 mm/year. However, more than likely the
moon has been extracting magnetosphere energy as long as it's having
been parked so nearby, especially since the law of magnetic force
isn't getting this sufficiently attenuated at merely -38 mm/year, and
especially since our physically dark and nasty moon has a somewhat
wussy core of salt like low density that's apparently not magnetic.

However, the moon's somewhat salty surface is loaded down with iron
and other worthy elements that could be sufficiently magnetic. Too
bad for Earth and moon science that we still do not have any viable
platform of instruments as efficiently being kept within the moon's
L1. The moon's L1 must be another one of those deep, dark and scary
places for even robotics to be.
- Brad Guth -

On Sep 20, 5:07 pm, Victor Smootbank wrote:
C'mon, themoonis an ugly piece of rock and dirt blocking our
view into deep space.

I think we'll need a petition to move themoonfrom our orbit,
because the moon is a giant piece of garbage.

When the moon is gone, astronomy will be far more fun!!!

What do you think???

By rights and because it clearly belongs to all of humanity, as having
been the most likely cause of having created our seasonal tilt upon
its somewhat recent lithobraking arrival, as in fact we should manage
to relocate our moon, for the very salvation of our badly failing
environment before it's too late. Entirely banishing our moon is
however not such a good idea, even if we'd accomplished such a
daunting task, whereas going that far would open up a whole list of
potential negatives by way of our playing God, because the mostly
fluid environment of this planet needs a little more than a solar
tidal force by which to best manage our 98.5% fluid environment, that
is unless you wouldn't mind another full blown ice age.

Unlike most folks of denial in usenet naysay land, I happen to agree
with Mook's SBLs, and for equal if not better reasons than just the
clean and safe transfer of solar pumped energy into our humanly
dumbfounded realm of our supposedly energy starved environment.

However, of one rather nifty and clean energy resource alternative
that's unusually massive and nearby and still in the ongoing process
of doing our global warming environment more harm than good has to do
with our moon, whereas we could technically moderate that bad moon
stuff by way of our eventually relocating that physically dark and
somewhat salty big old thing out to an active halo orbit within
Earth's L1, and the next or rather ongoing requirement is for us to
fully utilize the LSE-CM/ISS and of its tether dipole element that can
technically reach as close as you'd like to Earth (just short of a few
fail-safe km worth of coming into direct contact).

Willie Moo / William Mook:
A detailed analysis of the power flows in Earth's biosphere came up
with the following;

50,000 TW - direct solar
320 TW - hydrological cycle (including winds)
40 TW - photosynthesis (all life)
10 TW - human industry (2005)

Once again, your CIA WorldFactBook "detailed analysis" is simply being
way too conservative, and your human energy consumption (if all
inclusive) is off by at least 50% (I'd go as far as humans being
worthy of 20 TW).

On behalf of the raw 'energy in' simply has to equal 'energy out', or
else Earth explodes. Your CIA WorldFactBook doesn't even take the
horrific influx or clean through and through energy worth of solar and
moon gravity issues into account. Doesn't the complex Earth/moon/sun
tidal force of such interactive gravity account for anything within
that good old mainstream conditional physics book of Mook?

You good folks do realize that the all-inclusive volumetric worth of
Earth (including its extremely wet and sooty atmosphere) is 98.5%
fluid to those multibody forces of gravity, don't you.
- Brad Guth -