[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Louis Frank's 'Small Comets'
Hi Wal and All,
Wal wrote:
"Methinks there are good explanations for why there is no water on moon.
The
boiling pt of water in a vacuum is extremely low,
Well, I am somewhat confused because, while there may not be liquid
water on
the moon there is ice. And I'm not sure what the relevance of the
boiling
point of water in a vacuum is, but if it is relevant and is extremely
low, why
is there ice on the moon?
Best regards,
Julia
wal wrote:
> Listees,
> Methinks there are good explanations for why there is no water on moon. The
> boiling pt of water in a vacuum is extremely low, and given the moon's slow
> orbit, there is ample time for it to vaporize and be lost.
> A better question is, why isn't there more water on Mars?
> Conditions are better for it to accumulate there (has atmosphere and lower
> surface temps).
>
> Wal
>
> >>"They calculated that about 20 comets enter the atmosphere each minute.
> >>At that rate, the steady stream of comets would have added about one inch
> >>of water to the Earth's oceans every 20,000 years -- enough to fill the
> >>oceans over billions of years. "
>
> >If this is true for Earth, why does our moon not have an abundance of
> >water? Just curious.
>
> That is a good question. The opponents to the 'small comet' theory
> have already pointed this out, that the Moon is a very dry place, and
> would be expected to be much wetter if the comets are in the quantities
> that Louis Frank is claiming. Frank's typical response to all of the
> evidence against his theory (of which is quite considerable now and
> growing), is "that can't be right".
>
> Ron Baalke
References: