Bassel Darwish - Moon (Original Mix) [Natural Rhythm]

there is a very interesting, suppressed piece of work on the, "moon", called moon-gate, (http://www.markfoster.net/struc/moongate.pdf) of which here is an interesting chapter, on their being an atmosphere on the moon

INCREDIBLE FINDINGS
CONCERNING THE LUNAR
ATMOSPHERE
There were many indications during the Apollo missions
that the Moon has a Earth-like atmosphere. Television
commentators and reporters seemed to ignore these
indications and went along with the accepted belief that the
Moon is airless. Evidence confuting the vacuum theory will
be presented and conventional beliefs given in the previous
chapter will be examined in light of the evidence.
Dust cannot exist in a vacuum; however, the reader
probably remembers watching the astronauts walk through it
on the Moon's surface. Just before astronaut Neil Armstrong
stepped onto the Moon for the first time, he described the
surface as fine grained, almost like a powder.1
Once on the
surface, Armstrong confirmed his initial observation by
stating that it was fine and powdery. He described how he
could pick it up loosely with his toe, and how it adhered in
fine layers to the soles and sides of his boots like powdered
charcoal. He mentioned that he only went in a fraction of an
inch; that he could see his footprints in the fine, sandy particles.2
Orthodox scientists accept that this dust exists, but
they continue to deny that the Moon has any substantial
atmosphere. There has to be an atmosphere because dust
cannot exist in a vacuum. The density of the atmosphere
remains to be determined.
89
90 MOONGATE
Apollo 11 landed in the Sea of Tranquillity which is a
lowland on the Moon. If an atmosphere existed, its density
would be greater in the lowlands than anywhere else. Since
Apollo 12 also landed in the low-lying Ocean of Storms,
additional atmospheric indications would be expected during
this mission. Indeed, soon after the landing, Conrad stated
that he thought they were in a lot dustier place than Neil
Armstrong was.3
Apollo 17 also encountered dusty
conditions. The reader may recall Apollo 17 pictures of the
Rover with the "rooster plume" of dust coming off the back
wheels. The dust not only stretched behind the Rover, but it
curved around and rained down on the astronauts.
A picture of the deployed Solar Wind Composition
Experiment on the Apollo 11 mission is shown in Photo 5.
This was a very thin strip of aluminium foil, four feet long
and one foot wide, which was to hang straight down from a
support rod. It was designed to stop the solar wind particles
which would be analysed back on Earth. The same
experiment was performed on the Apollo 12 mission. The
following Apollo 12 incident involving the experiment was
summarised from an account given by Lewis.4
Earlier in the
day, before their second EVA, astronaut Bean noticed
something through the LM window which baffled him. The
solar wind trap had been hanging straight down when the
astronauts entered the LM after their first EVA. Bean
reported to Capcom (Capsule Communicator) that the sheet
looked like a sail in the wind around the pole, with a bulge in
the front and bent back on both sides. Capcom replied that he
suspected they had a real solar wind. Bean replied to Capcom
that Capcom must be kidding. In turn, Capcom offered an
alternative explanation: The front was thermally expanding
more than the back; the
Incredible Findings Concerning the Lunar Atmosphere 91
back was radiating and the front was hot due to a thermal
difference across it. Capcom stated that he was receiving a lot
of approval from others in Mission Control on the idea. Bean
then insisted that it still looked like it was wrapped around
the pole as if a wind were blowing on it.
After the astronauts left the LM for their second EVA,
Capcom told Bean to ask Conrad to take a picture of the solar
wind composition sheet as it was wrapped around the pole.
Another amazing thing then happened as Conrad prepared to
take the picture. The foil no longer appeared to be wrapped
around the pole.5 Conrad informed Bean that it must have
been an optical illusion from inside the Lunar Module. Bean
then reported this observation to Houston.
An analysis of the incident is now in order. The solar wind
was expected to be substantial and measurable on the Moon's
surface if an atmosphere did not exist. This vacuum condition
is why scientists designed the experiment in the first place.
The primary constituent particles of the solar wind are
supposed to be hydrogen and helium travelling with velocities
up to 1000 kilometres per second. However, the solar wind is
so minuscule that its density only fluctuates between 1 and 30
hydrogen atoms per cubic centimetre during quiet Sun
activity. The assumption of a solar wind density of 4 atoms
per cubic centimetre yields an impact pressure of 10-8 dynes
per square centimetre. If 10 times the pressure is assumed for
an active Sun, the pressure turns out to be .000000000000034
pounds per square inch. This pressure could not even be
measured without specially designed sensitive instruments.
The normal atmospheric pressure on Earth at sea level is 14.7
pounds per square inch. A barely noticeable 1-mile per hour
breeze on
92 MOONGATE
Earth exerts a pressure of .000018 pounds per square inch
and will barely move a window shade. However, this is
53,000,000,000 (53 billion) times as strong as the solar wind!
Clearly the solar wind was not responsible for causing the
composition sheet to bend back against the pole. After
Capcom suggested the real solar wind idea, Bean came back
with a statement alluding to the joke which he thought
Capcom was making. Bean evidently knew that the solar
wind was not responsible. Capcom evidently knew it also,
but may have been trying to patch the leak. Capcom then
countered with an explanation which fell apart when the solar
wind sheet mysteriously straightened out.
Capcom suggested that the front of the sheet was expanding
more than the back. This, of course, happens to
objects in the Sun, but other evidence destroyed this
explanation. First of all, the sheet had been set up in the Sun
for many hours without any noticeable effects on it. The
astronauts were out working with the instrument and would
have noticed the warped sheet on their first EVA. Since the
Sun would heat up the sheet very rapidly if a vacuum existed,
the warping would occur almost immediately. Once it
became warped, it would stay that way until taken down. The
Sun would move very little across the Moon's sky in the time
of the trip. Therefore, the conditions creating the warped
sheet in the first place would remain nearly the same.
After Capcom made the thermal expansion suggestion, he
mentioned that he was getting approval of the idea from other
Mission Control people. Evidently they must have thought
that it would be an acceptable explanation for the public and
other scientists. Bean replied that it still looked like it was
wrapped around the
Incredible Finds Concerning the Lunar Atmosphere 93
pole with the wind blowing on it. The statement by Bean is
clear. He seemed convinced that what caused the sheet to
bend around the pole was a real atmospheric wind, not the
solar wind. His persistence in referring to the wind after the
solar wind idea had already been rejected by Capcom and
himself is a giveaway. Bean seemed to ignore the explanation
by Capcom and may have been fascinated by the atmospheric
evidence.
The final blow to the thermal expansion explanation
occurred when Conrad went to photograph the bent sheet. It
had mysteriously straightened out in a short time. As
explained previously, this would not happen under conditions
demanded by a vacuum. The reference to an optical illusion
was probably a means to end the conversation about
something which should never have been brought up in the
first place. Once the cat was out of the bag, Capcom and the
astronauts would have to patch up the security breach as best
they could. Bean was a trained astronaut and seemingly
would not have been duped by an optical illusion.
If the Moon's atmosphere could produce a noticeable
movement of the solar wind composition sheet, it has to be
fairly dense. During some of the Apollo missions, dust
kicked up by the astronauts had a tendency to drift. This is an
indication of a dense atmosphere. In addition, the American
flags billowed noticeably during some of the early Apollo
missions. The first Apollo missions had flags with horizontal
support rods along the tops to make them stand up. This still
allowed light winds to cause them to bow out or billow
occasionally.
The author acquired the movie showing the Apollo 14 flag
ceremony. Close analysis of this film shows that the flag
billowed and waved when the astronauts were not touching it
or even close to it. At the end of the flag
94 MOONGATE
ceremony, as one of the astronauts moved away from the
flag, it began to wave back and forth. In an apparent attempt
to mask any further display of an atmospheric wind, both
astronauts blocked the movie camera's view of the flag. The
astronaut nearest the flag began running toward and in front
of the camera while the other astronaut put his arm in front of
the lens. However, it was already too late to cover up the evidence.
The author challenges all sceptics to witness this film
for themselves and to explain the waving flag by any other
logical means than a dense lunar atmosphere. It is amazing
that this hard core evidence is available to the public. Even a
die-hard sceptic should be convinced after seeing this film
sequence. The Apollo 14 film was ordered in 1980 from
Movie Newsreels, a company located in Hollywood,
California.
On Apollo 16, there was an apparent attempt to reorient the
public's thinking about the waving flag evidence already
released. This time a heavily starched flag that would
maintain a distorted shape at all times was opened. A special
point was made on one telecast to stress that the flag was
processed in this way to give the appearance of a waving flag
in an airless world. The real purpose was undoubtedly to
make the flag less susceptible to breezes than previously
unstarched flags had been.
Photographic evidence of light diffusion is one of the best
proofs of a dense lunar atmosphere. An Apollo 14 picture of
the lunar surface, Lunar Module, and tire tracks from the
MET (Modularized Equipment Transporter) is shown in
Photo 6. It shows streamers of light across the entire lunar
surface and horizon. The diffusion of light from the Sun is so
great that most of the visible sky is illuminated. The reader
should recall that
Incredible Findings Concerning the Lunar Atmosphere 95
references were given in Chapter 6 explaining that in a
vacuum the Sun would be extremely bright, but the sky
around it would be completely black. Photo 7 is a picture of
Apollo 15 astronaut Scott standing on the slope of Hadley
Delta with the Apennine Mountains in the background. Photo
8 shows Apollo 16 astronaut Duke scooping samples on the
rim of a deep crater with the Rover in the background. The
visible sky in both of these photographs is very bright,
indicating the even diffusion of light through the lunar
atmosphere. Clearly, the photographic evidence does not
support the assertion of a lunar vacuum. It provides evidence
of a dense atmosphere.
Another photo revealing the NASA cover-up appeared on
the cover of the December 12, 1969 issue of Life magazine,
showing Apollo 12 astronaut Bean setting up instruments on
the Moon. He is surrounded by what appears to be a halo.6
This picture is shown in Photo 9. Since other photos of
astronauts on the Moon do not show a semblance of this halo
effect, there seems to be only one reasonable conclusion: In
NASA's attempts to suppress visual evidence of an
atmosphere, the sky was blackened or touched up in all but a
few of the photographs. The halo which appeared around
Bean was the result of a poor job of masking or obliterating
the sky around him. Since this lunar light effect was so
pronounced in this picture, it should have appeared in other
photos but it did not. Other writers speculated that it was the
astronaut's aura, or radio energy emissions which became
visible in the Moon's vacuum. This might have had some
merit if it consistently appeared, but cannot be taken
seriously in light of the other photos. Significantly, NASA
never bothered to give the public a reasonable explanation of
why it
96 MOONGATE
occurred; they simply attributed it to spurious reflections
from his suit. However, this does not make any sense because
the "spurious reflections" would still have be reflected off
something in the space surrounding him to account for the
phenomenon. In a vacuum, a camera only picks up light
photons which travel in straight lines from each point in the
picture; therefore, Bean should have been surrounded by a
jet-black sky in the space above the horizon. The amount of
reflected light surrounding him is so great that only a dense
atmosphere can account for it.
An excellent example of how the blue sky was filtered out
of Moon pictures is provided by the movie film of Apollo 14
astronaut Mitchell's descent down the Lunar Module ladder.
As he began his descent, the amount of light diffusion from
the sky was so intense that the entire sky was almost white
with shades of blue. In addition, it was difficult to see
specific details of Mitchell and the Lunar Module due to the
amount of light. Incredibly, as he made further progress down
the steps, the white and blue sky gradually turned to light
blue, then to a darker blue, and finally to extremely dark blue
or black by the time he reached the surface. By then, all
details in the film were clearly outlined with little, if any,
light diffusion evident. The next scene in the film was the
previously mentioned flag ceremony which had a very dark
sky. This film segment of Mitchell shows that either the
camera had a filtering capability or the film was altered after
it was returned to Earth. In any event, this incident provides
evidence of a dense, blue lunar atmosphere in support of
evidence already provided by the waving flag on the same
movie film. Significantly, it provides proof that the capability
existed to filter out the blue sky in Moon
Incredible Findings Concerning the Lunar Atmosphere 97
photographs and films. Photo 10 is a frame taken from the
movie sequence showing the blue sky. Mitchell is descending
the LM ladder.
Mists, clouds, and surface changes have allegedly been
seen at various times on the Moon. Many such observations
are referenced in an article by Paul M. Sears entitled "How
Dead Is the Moon?" which appeared in the February 1950
issue of Natural History. The following is a partial summary
of observations referenced in this article.7
Besides twilight
which demonstrate the lunar atmosphere, more spectacular
proof is provided by observations of bright moving specks
which might be luminous meteors in the lunar air. There are
monthly appearances of strange dark areas known as variable
spots which spread and grow as the Sun climbs, becoming
darker in relation to the rest of the surface. Some of these
spots fade again toward sunset, while others steadily darken
till night prevails. These spots may differ in size and shape
from month to month, and some spots even occasionally fail
to reappear. Sparse clouds seem to occasionally drift over the
surface and obscure surface detail. Some of these clouds are
outlined on one edge by their own shadow and there are
certain regions where clouds are seen more frequently than
others. For instance, six astronomers in the last century
claimed to have seen a mist which obscured details in the
floor of the crater, Plato.
The astronomers who made the above mentioned discoveries
were not taken seriously because the Moon's one-sixth
gravity was not supposed to have enabled these
phenomena to occur. In Strange World of the Moon, written
in 1960, V.A. Firsoff mentioned that experienced observers
have recorded changes in the intensity of dark and bright
markings during lunar
98 MOONGATE
eclipses and other times during the lunar day. He referred to
local fade-outs of visibility when the rest of the Moon is not
affected. Shades and patches which resemble mists and
clouds, as well as glows and lights, have all been observed to
appear and reappear in certain localities. Firsoff stated that all
of these phenomena cannot be solely attributed to lighting
effects or the position of the Moon with respect to the Earth.8
According to Firsoff, an area of brightness exists in the
lunar Alps where some of the peaks appear ill-defined on
occasion, even though the surrounding country is sharply
outlined. Furthermore, in the southeastern portion of Mare
Crisium, near Picard crater, some of the obscured regions
have persisted continually for years, completely covering
surface detail.9
Firsoff referred to sunlight seen near the terminator which
is redder than under a high lunar Sun. He mentioned that it is
difficult to explain this in any other way than scattering by
gas combined with tiny crystals. Other colors of green,
brown, blue, and violet have been seen in the maria and
inside craters. The periodic change in intensity, position, and
extent suggests that the color effects are caused by physical
or chemical changes which depend on the amount of solar
heat. Firsoff even considered that biological activity might
account for the observations.10 The above considerations add
credence to the NASA-supplied evidence of a substantial
atmosphere.
The occultation of stars by the Moon is additional
evidence for the existence of an atmosphere. Charles Fort
wrote a book entitled New Lands in 1923 in which he
discussed the numerous observations of Moon-occulted
stars.11 Apparently, the seeming motion of stars occulted by
the Moon was such a commonly observed
Incredible Findings Concerning the Lunar Atmosphere 99
phenomenon at the time that Fort was certain that the Moon
had an atmosphere. Unfortunately, the data regarding
occupation which has been collected is made somewhat
indeterminate by the irregular shape of the Moon's outline. In
addition, the data is so variable that estimates of the density
of the Moon's atmosphere cannot be relied upon. The
occultation measurements only establish that there is an
atmosphere, not its density.
Eclipse halos have some of the same problems that Moonocculted
stars do. An eclipse photo which appeared on the
cover of the April 1979 issue of Life magazine may
demonstrate this halo effect. However, critics might argue
that the halo is made up entirely of the Sun's corona, not the
Moon's atmosphere. In any event, disregarding the solar
flares, the halo's thickness indicates that it becomes almost
imperceptible at an altitude of 150 miles above the surface.
At this height, the density of the Moon's atmosphere would
be negligible. It would be so thin that the Sun's light would
not interact with the rarefied air molecules to any extent.
Conclusions regarding the Moon's atmosphere have always
failed to take into account the extent of dust particles and
water vapor suspended in it. These particles may be the
greatest factor governing the diffusion of light through an
atmosphere. Firsoff mentioned that the lunar atmosphere
would probably scatter light like a pure gas, unlike the Earth's
atmosphere which contains a high percentage of dust, ice
crystals, and water droplets. He stated that even at the altitude
of Pic du Midi Observatory (9,351 feet), the Earth's
atmosphere will scatter longer wavelength light a lot more
than the Ray-leigh gas scattering formula predicts because of
the large particles in it.12
100 MOONGATE
The Moon's atmosphere is not likely to experience high
winds and other weather conditions to the extent that is
common on Earth because of the long days and nights, and
the absence of large bodies of water on the surface.
Therefore, the atmosphere is probably much cleaner than the
Earth's and light diffusion and scattering effects would be
minimal. In addition, sunrise and sunset colour effects would
not be as great and the atmospheric halo would be less
apparent at the time of a solar eclipse. Occultation of stars
would not be as pronounced as expected and the
interpretation of the findings would be that the Moon has an
extremely thin atmosphere. The atmospheric density could
still be as great or greater than Earth's without being as
visible.
It is logical to assume that the Earth and Moon, and hence
their atmospheres, were created in the same way. An
atmosphere is probably produced by the discharge of solid
and gaseous material from the upper crust. Bodies like the
Earth and Moon will possess atmospheres of the same depth
if their gravity's are the same, and sufficient to hold an
atmosphere. If one of them has a lower gravity, its
atmosphere will be deeper because the gases are compressed
to a lesser extent than the atmosphere of the one with the
stronger gravity. The depth of an atmosphere is inversely
proportional to the magnitude of the gravitational field. This
follows from the gas law involving pressure and volume
which states that the volume of a confined gas is inversely
proportional to the pressure applied to it. In other words, if
the pressure is doubled, the volume becomes half as great.
If the Moon has as much atmosphere in relation to its
surface area as the Earth, is there any direct evidence that
indicates it? According to Paul M. Sears in the previously
cited article, lunar astronomers in the 1930's
Incredible Findings Concerning the Lunar Atmosphere 101
began to speculate on the fate of meteors they knew must be
striking the Moon. Calculations were made which showed
that meteorites weighing ten pounds or more, impacting on
the dark portion of the Moon (assumed to be airless), should
disintegrate in a flash brilliant enough to be seen with the
naked eye. Over 100 such flashes should occur each year. As
a matter of fact, only two or three such flashes had been
reported in all history. This meant that they were being
consumed in an atmosphere before striking the surface. The
Moon seemed to be better protected from meteorites than the
Earth!
To explain this paradox, astronomers reasoned that
although the density of the Moon's atmosphere at its surface
is only 1/10,000 of the Earth's, its density above 55 miles is
greater than the Earth's at the same elevation. This was
attributed to the Moon's low one-sixth gravity which was
unable to concentrate its atmosphere near the surface.
However, if the Moon's atmospheric density were only
1/10,000 of the Earth's at the surface, and its gravity were
only one-sixth of Earth's surface gravity, the mass or quantity
of atmosphere over a unit area would only be 6/10,000 of that
protecting the Earth. Since the quantity of air is the most
important factor which protects the surface from meteorites,
the paradox was not resolved by their explanation. There
simply wasn't sufficient air in the lunar atmosphere to
account for the burn-up of meteors if one-sixth gravity was
assumed.
According to the Sears' article, it was apparent that the
brightest meteors, those that would be reported as fireballs if
they occurred on Earth, should be faintly visible through
telescopes. Therefore, in 1941, one of the most experienced
students of the Moon, Walter
102 MOONGATE
Haas, began an extended search for lunar meteors. After 170
hours of searching the dark portion of the Moon with
telescopes, Haas and his associates had detected 12 bright
moving specks which began and ended at points on the
Moon. During the same observations, four or five Earth
meteors crossed the field of view. One or two of the lunar
flashes may have been faint Earthbound meteors, but the
laws of probability indicated that the rest occurred on the
Moon.
The reason meteors seemed to be stopped more effectively
in passing through the Moon's atmosphere than the Earth's
will now be given. Measurements made during the Apollo
missions indicated that a bulge exists on the far side of the
Moon. This implies that the density and depth of the
atmosphere on the near side are much greater than the
average density and depth. It is significant that the near side
is primarily comprised of the so-called maria. They were
originally given this name because they have all the
appearances of dried-up or drained-off oceans and seas. The
far side was determined to be mostly mountainous, giving the
Moon extremes of elevation greater than Earth's. This same
condition would occur on Earth if the oceans and seas lost
their water. If the average lunar atmospheric thickness is
about the same as Earth's, the conclusion is that the
atmospheric density on the near side of the Moon is greater
than any place on Earth!
The startling implication of a dense atmosphere is that
spacesuits and life-support systems might not be needed in
most areas on the Moon if the atmospheric gases are the same
as Earth's. This suggests that the Apollo astronauts may have
been wearing extremely light backpacks since oxygen
requirements could have been supplied by the Moon's
atmosphere. It follows
Incredible Findings Concerning the Lunar Atmosphere 103
that the suits were probably only used during filming to
propagate the cover-up. After completing the filming
sequences, the astronauts could discard the suits and
backpacks and go about their Moon exploration or other
activities completely unencumbered. However, in other areas
the gear may have been required, just as on the highest Earth
mountains. If the Earth lost its oceans, many mountainous
regions and high plateaus would no longer have sufficient
atmosphere to sustain life. The atmosphere would seek the
lowest level and fill up the ocean beds which reach depths of
many miles. Since the Earth's oceans cover the majority of its
surface, millions of square miles would probably become
uninhabitable.
It is conceivable that life and vegetation could exist in
certain regions despite the long lunar days and nights.
Sheltered canyons and valleys at the right elevations and
latitudes would not experience the extremes of temperature
found in the uninhabitable areas. The extremely long days
and nights occurring in the Earth's polar regions might
produce very similar conditions to certain lunar regions, and
significantly, life forms have adapted well to these extreme
conditions on Earth.
The previous references to drifting clouds and mists
suggest surface water. Observations indicate that cloud
formations are more extensive in mountainous regions and
inside craters where the moisture is trapped between natural
barriers. Drifting clouds require winds to move them. In a
vacuum, the discharged gases would diffuse out rapidly and
would not drift.
Another indication of a dense lunar atmosphere was
provided when Apollo spacecraft and lunar probes orbited the
planet at an average distance of 70 miles above the surface.
No specific reasons were given by NASA
104 MOONGATE
for choosing this height. In fact, if the Moon had no atmosphere,
the best altitude for the Lunar Orbiter satellites
would have been much lower. The Lunar Orbiters were sent
to the Moon to take pictures; therefore, lower altitudes would
have produced more refined maps of the surface. Even the
Apollo Command Module orbited at this altitude. An
atmosphere forces the minimum permissible orbit to an
altitude where frictional air resistance does not slow down a
vehicle or satellite substantially. The effects of an atmosphere
on a low altitude spacecraft would be a quick decay in the
orbit, causing the spacecraft to slow down, burn up, and
crash. This is why Earth spacecraft, such as Skylab and other
satellites, stayed more than 100 miles above the Earth. It
seems that the orbital altitude chosen by NASA was probably
due to the Moon's atmosphere since it prevented them from
safely orbiting at any lower altitude for any significant length
of time. This implies that the density of the Moon's
atmosphere may be similar to Earth's.
One of the significant discoveries of the lunar program was
that the Moon has a very feeble magnetic field. The existence
of a lunar magnetic field did not clash with orthodox beliefs
about the origin of a planet's magnetism because a small iron
core could always be used to explain it and the size of the
core could be adjusted to fit the extent of the magnetism
found.
The most probable cause of a planet's magnetic field seems
to be the rotation of charges which are present in its
atmosphere and on its surface. These charges rotate with the
planet; therefore, the intensity of the magnetic field generated
would be directly proportional to the planet's rotational
velocity. Since the Moon's rotational
Incredible Findings Concerning the Lunar Atmosphere 105
velocity is less than one percent of Earth's, it also follows that
the Moon's field is less than one percent of Earth's. The
Lunar Analysis Planning Team came to the consensus that
natural remanent magnetism found in Moon rocks suggested
that the Moon had a magnetic field strength at one time equal
to several percent of Earth's.13 They were still uncertain as to
how it was generated.
A rotating planet can be compared to an electrical solenoid,
which is a coil of wire, as shown in Figure 3. When a current
is sent through the coil, a magnetic force is generated at right
angles to the direction of the wire. Planets carry charges with
them in their atmosphere and surface and this generates
electrical currents in the direction of rotation, or east-west.
The magnetic field is generated at right angles to this or in
the north-south direction. Even though the charges are not
necessarily moving east-west relative to the surface which is
travelling with them, the magnetic field is still created because
the planet itself is rotating. Other factors such as surface
material, surface anomalies, caverns, winds, and so on would
affect the direction and magnitude of local magnetic fields.
The explanation just presented explains many known facts
regarding geomagnetism. For example, sunspots affect
geomagnetism by altering the number of electrical charges in
the atmosphere and surface. In addition, geomagnetism
follows a 24-hour cycle due to the variable number of
charged particles reaching Earth from the Sun. Evidence will
be presented in the next chapter that the Moon has no iron
core. Without an iron core, orthodox physicists would have
difficulties in explaining lunar magnetism. However, the new
approach is logical as, standardz, hahahahahaha, :) #edio