Yeah, but you have to admit it gets old after a while when you keep getting "rock woo-woos" like btimsah, bradguth, and fluid6969 posting pictures of rocks and saying "it's a structure! NASA is hiding the truth!"
Rock/Structure Redux.
- Thread starter btimsah
- Start date
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
I was always ready to discuss the potential. You wanted to discuss pictures of rocks.btimsah said:
In passing, could we clarify what you mean by a rock. I sensed more than once a difference of usage twixt yourselves and the noble debunkers.
e.g. A mountain is not a rock, but it is made of rocks. So a photo of a mountain may loosely be described as a rock. Yes? No? Other?
Ophiolite said:
Rock, boulder, moutain, crater, depression, rise, hill, ejecta, regolith, other.
On sciforums.com all of those = rocks. It seems strange that when someone is so sure it's a A-ROCK, that later they claim they COULD HAVE MEANT a mountain. I've never heard anyone refer to a mountain as a lot of rocks. Let's go climb that big rock, you mean the mountain? NO THE ROCK. Because this is sciforums.
What I consider to be a rock, is a rock. Not a mountain. If you consider a mountain to be a rock then that would explain a lot.
btimsah said:
Tower Rock
Camel Rock
Rock Climbing
Chimney Rock
Define:Rock
THE Rock
Enchanted Rock
Damn-sure-not-gonna-put-it-in-your-pocket-rock
Sheesh... you gotta get out more, man. Go climb a.... rock.
Face it. You posted pictures of rocks.
You're not serious, right? The geologic process of the Moon is basic science, the stuff they teach in Middle School.
Go to your local library and get some books to read before you embarrass yourself futher, man.
In the meantime, check out this link:http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~mkargo/articles/moon.html It'll give you something to look up at your library.
Go to your local library and get some books to read before you embarrass yourself futher, man.
In the meantime, check out this link:http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~mkargo/articles/moon.html It'll give you something to look up at your library.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
Mechanism 1:Temperature contrast - expansion/contraction effect.btimsah said:
Maximum daytime temperature 105 deg C
Minimum nightime temperature -180 deg C
Temperature difference 285 deg C
Apply approximately 50,000,000,000 times and note the effect upon surface rocks.
Mechanism 2: Bolide impact.
You may have noticed a substantial number of craters on the moon.
(a)The impactors generate substantial volumes of ejecta some of which in raw or weathered form may themselves be unusual rocks.
(b) The impact of the ejecta will 'sculpt' the impacted material.
(c) If the impactor is a comet it will locally and temporarily deliver fluids that may be incorporated in the regolith and serve to enhance Mechanism 1. [This is wholly speculative and you would be quite sensible to ignore this one (c) completely.]
Mechanism 3: Micro-meteorite impact.
The lunar regolith has been created by four billion years of impacts by dust and grain sized particles. Enough said.
Mechanism 4: Astronauts
A little under a third of a ton of rocks were brought back from the moon, and they hit a bunch more with their hammers. {It's not a large effect, but if you keep that up for 4 billiion years it will be noticeable. That's why I urge you to join my "Protect the Lunar Landing Sites from Space Tourists" organisation today. )
And I haven't even mentioned the solar wind.
[Now I'll be bitchy, because I only had three hours sleep. The rocks did not, as you stated, "create some interesting shapes". They may "have interesting shapes", but they did not create them. And it is mechanisms, not mechinisms.
Wooly writing suggests wooly thinking. Try harder.
]
If you want to hijack your own thread Btimsah and convert it to rocks then go ahead, However I warn you now. If the skeptics become rude, obnoxious or taunt you, you brought it on yourself.
This will be the ONLY thread on rocks, I catch anymore and it will be a delete.
This will be the ONLY thread on rocks, I catch anymore and it will be a delete.
Ophiolite said:Mechanism 1:Temperature contrast - expansion/contraction effect.
Maximum daytime temperature 105 deg C
Minimum nightime temperature -180 deg C
Temperature difference 285 deg C
Apply approximately 50,000,000,000 times and note the effect upon surface rocks.
Mechanism 2: Bolide impact.
You may have noticed a substantial number of craters on the moon.
(a)The impactors generate substantial volumes of ejecta some of which in raw or weathered form may themselves be unusual rocks.
(b) The impact of the ejecta will 'sculpt' the impacted material.
(c) If the impactor is a comet it will locally and temporarily deliver fluids that may be incorporated in the regolith and serve to enhance Mechanism 1. [This is wholly speculative and you would be quite sensible to ignore this one (c) completely.]
Mechanism 3: Micro-meteorite impact.
The lunar regolith has been created by four billion years of impacts by dust and grain sized particles. Enough said.
Mechanism 4: Astronauts
A little under a third of a ton of rocks were brought back from the moon, and they hit a bunch more with their hammers. {It's not a large effect, but if you keep that up for 4 billiion years it will be noticeable. That's why I urge you to join my "Protect the Lunar Landing Sites from Space Tourists" organisation today. )
And I haven't even mentioned the solar wind.
[Now I'll be bitchy, because I only had three hours sleep. The rocks did not, as you stated, "create some interesting shapes". They may "have interesting shapes", but they did not create them. And it is mechanisms, not mechinisms.
Wooly writing suggests wooly thinking. Try harder.
You should not start a sentence with an AND.
Hmm.. I was not suggesting that ONLY WIND and WATER can create rocks. lol
I know there are numerous ways rocks can be created, but the question becomes which process created which rocks in which photo.
I mean, but this has allready been done with on here and as I stated before this is my last thread in the STRYDERUINED area.
SkinWalker said:
No, the geological process of the Moon is not middle school stuff. Or, it was not at the school I went too. Secondly, the embarrassment should be the fact that you could not respond to my question as to how you know the traffic to this site would RISE, once I'm gone. You just made that up. That's embarassing.
As for my comment about wind and water forming some of those rocks, I don't think you understood me so I'll just move on. Not like I can post images of rocks....
He didn't say you posted any images of rocks "genius," he said this will be the only thread on rocks.
One thing's for sure. You're a liar. You made 12 posts after you supposedly left the sub-forum.btimsah said:
btimsah said:
Well, you've already established that your education is deficit. Perhaps they no longer teach kids with the same voracity that they did when I was in Middle School, because we certainly discussed the geology of the Moon.
btimsah said:
No, the embarrassment is still yours. I said probably, not would.
me said:
btimsah said:
You can post all the images of rocks you want. In this thread.
btimsah said:
Don't try to fix it now... it was very obvious what you were implying:
btimsah said:
btimsah said:
And yet you said "I'm gone," and still continue to post in the very sub-forum you claim to have left.