Compare drug prices and get free rx coupons at eDrugSearch.com

Photos

WP_20161114_018

This was the moon on November 14th. the closest that the moon has been to earth in 68 years. the last time it appeared this close and bright was in 1948, the year ISRAEL became a NATION. I personally find this fact holds great significance.  GOD,  I believe is giving the world notice, I pray it will take the notice to heart.

Email me when people comment –

Comments

  • I believe so also, Brother Charlie. For at least 3/4 of this 2nd Covenant (the tome between Crucifiction and His 2nd Return {Come quickly, Lord Jesus!}), in the sky 2 visible objects existed to 99% of the people, the Sun and the Moon. The Moon was the only objuect we could actually look at. It, I believe, has been seen as God's eye in the sky. I find it very significant that it doesn't rotate; the same features always face earth, while 1/2 of it never is visible. I find this significant. After all the countless meteor impacts that are supposed to make up it's craters, none were strong enough to give it a spin. Why not? What goes on on the Dark Side of the Moon, that famous Rock album by Pink Floyd. I believe the album to be prophetic. I think somehow the moon, whether it's just an omen, a sign, or much more (another large impact could crack it, give it a spin, and have it's orbit change and have it crash down on Earth, wreaking enormous damage. (OK, all you budding Astronomists out there, is this possible?). I haven't done research on if any of this is Scriptural, I suspect it's not, just the thoughts of an old man on these things, but I do agree with you, Charlie. The super large moon caused by several forces IS significant, and we'd better start taking a good look to it to figure out what The Lord is trying to tell us here about our future.

  • Great image Charlie, I covered some of this in my discussion in the 'End Times Prophesy' group last week [http://www.christianslikeme.net/group/end-times-bible-prophecy/foru...].  What are significant, according to the Bible, is 'Blood-moons', these are basically total or partial eclipses of the Moon when the Moon seems to turn rust-red or blood red.  The effect is caused by the light that illuminates the Moon passing through the Earth's atmosphere, which is filled with both droplets of water and dust.  From the research that I have done (see my post at the above link) the Blood moons do have a significance in changing world order.  However I am not sure one could assign the same to the 'super-moon'.

    There have been countless theories about the Moon and its many craters, from the ancient atomic war hypothesis through to the mundane.  For the truth we need to take a closer look at the Moon itself.  In the centre of many of the craters we can find little mountains, this is the strongest clue we have to the origin of the craters.

    The image on the left is of the large impact crater Tycho, one of the best known craters, the one that looks like it has several rubble fields stretching our from it, in the northern hemisphere it is in the lower left quadrant.  We can clearly see in this image one of the 'Central Peaks' we find in many of the craters.  From this evidence we can derive several possibilities.  At the time of most impacts the Moon was either molten or semi-molten.  We must think back to our childhood and throwing pebbles into a pond, when the pebble enters the water it pushes the water aside, making a sort of crater, then the water rushes back to the centre forming a vertical droplet, our mountain (right).  So we know from this that at the time of impact the Moon must have been essentially molten, possibly with a thin crust.

    There are also other craters that more resemble the surfacing of gas during the contraction of a molten body, these are very round and have no central peak, just as happens when boiling viscus liquid.  All of this suggests strongly that the Moon was molten and also suggests a rapid cooling and solidification.  The puzzle is always why there seems to be less craterisation on the back side.  The Moon does in fact rotate, but its rotation matches that of the Earth exactly, we do see a little more than 50% of the Moon as it's orbit is elliptical and so displays a little of each side of the terminator at the opposite points of its orbit. 

    The most likely explanation for the existence of the Moon, is obviously God's creation, but God did not just click His divine fingers to bring the Earth, Moon and the universe into existence just as they are today, the physical evidence says otherwise.  If we think that God produced false evidence, such as the evidence of molten rock on the Moon, by inference, we call God a liar.  I believe in the literal reading of Genesis 1, which does in no way contradict the book of nature, the evidence that we see, in point of fact the physical evidence actually supports what Genesis, and many other passages of Scripture, tells us.  God Himself wrote the laws of physics, so why would He not use them to create the universe? 

    My opinion of the cratered Moon's face is this; both the Earth and Moon were manufactured at the same time and as the two bodies started to coalesce there was a great deal of extraneous material flying around and the action between the Earth's and the Moon's gravity caused a natural war between the two.  Material was attracted to either one, the Earth being larger it took longer to cool and had the proto-atmospher, erosion destroyed Earth's scars, whereas the Moon, without atmosphere is as pristine as the days it was made.  All praise to our God.

  • Dr. Blake; off subject a bit, but why doesn't the Moon have it's own rotation, separate from Earth, so we see the dark side? I have heard a lot of conspiracy thought regarding this, and have always wondered this myself. Why does it's rotation match Earths so precisely?

  • The simple answer is that both the Earth and the Moon formed out of the same cluster of matter, at the same and under the exact same conditions, we would therefore expect that there must be many similarities.  The matter from which the Earth and the Moon formed was already in orbit around the Sun and already rotating when they started to form.  Generally it would take an asteroid of some 20% of the mass of a planet or moon to change its orbit or rotation, so to change the rotation or orbit it would take an asteroid somewhere in the region of the size of the Moon, and that goes for the Moon, to change that it would take an object around 20% of the Moon's mass, the speed does not matter.

  • I’ afraid that there is absolutely no evidence for a hollow Moon Charlie, this seems to be a thing of Science Fiction.  Every one of the surveys of the Moon, the orbiter surveys and the soundings carried out during the landings has shown that the Moon has a thin crust, a very deep mantle and a small dense, possibly Iron, core.  It is true that the Moon’s density is substantially less than the Earth, probably because of the small core, and maybe a foamy rock mantle (rather like pumice).  This evidence is from seismic experiments.  If the Moon were hollow, its reduced mass would not exert the gravitational pull on Earth’s fluids that it does.

    I am not an expert on the human mind but logically I can see no reason why the full Moon has any more effect on the human mind than the new Moon, after all the only difference is the source of the light.  I remember someone saying that a mosquito landing on your head has more effect than the Moon’s exerts.  It can of course have no effect on fully contained liquids such as the water in the human body.

    As to mining the Moon, I believe that this would have little effect, unless a high percentage of the Moon were to be removed.  We need to remember that density of the Moon.  The Moon’s density is 3.346 g/cm3, other than Io, the second most dense moon in the Solar System. The density of Earth is 5.52 g/cm3, the densest planet also.  This is because moons are usually formed from the less dense materials left over from planet formation.  If we reduce that density substantially, I think the Moon would move closer to the Earth and therefore compensate and maintain the balance.  However, under the circumstances; having to remove materials back to Earth by shuttles would restrict the volume of material removed, and only the most rare and valuable elements.

    Hope this answers your question Charlie, if not get back to me.

This reply was deleted.

You need to be a member of Join the #1 Christian Social Network - ChristiansLikeMe.net to add comments!

Join Join the #1 Christian Social Network - ChristiansLikeMe.net