c511f0f1 No.3768240
Thank you. This is a nice thread, and I think I have some new ideas hand drawn backround art.
4a9eedae No.3768270
>>3768196tms? That's not
you, is it?
af953c7e No.3768301
>>3768240glad these can inspire you, it's not like i have places to post them and have people actually look at it, ironically it's here, on /furi/. i feel like doin this
ba95d61e No.3769562
>>3769553Old old news. But anyway, at least it didn't land upside down like that Japanese lander did.
It's obvious why it tipped over. It has only six legs. It needs at least 18 legs.
5f6f95b2 No.3769567
>>3769554During the early expansion of the universe planets formed from irradiated dust clouds. In a weightless environment, gravity will pull even the smallest particles that come close to each other together.
Mass attracts mass. So the earth started off as space dust swirling around until the core formed over billions of years but it happens with lots of celestial bodies that at the same time the larger core is forming a smaller one will be near by and they often exchange particles at their periphery while they formed. Even today, swirling spirals is the most common formation of celestial groupings.
It's less that the moon was made from the earth as much as they formed at the same time using the same source materials. Like twins. Most celestial bodies have moons of some form. It's very common.
The random chaos after the big bang was a mess.
Saturn has 146 moons. They just aren't as hefty as our girl.
ba95d61e No.3769570
>>3769567> irradiated dust clouds. That seems important to you? So what, those poor irradiated clouds suffered from higher cancer rates?
> In a weightless environment, gravity will pull even the smallest particles that come close to each other together. Pure ignorance! At first, gravity had almost no effect. The static electrical charge was far more prominent, to begin with. Just as static charge makes dust bunnies form and grow under your bed, static charge made dust begin to clump together in space. Only after that did gravity begin to dominate.
> It's less that the moon was made from the earth as much as they formed at the same time using the same source materials.Your ignorance truly knows no limits. The predominant theory holds that early on, there was no moon but a planetoid the size of Mars smashed into the earth. Material thrown into orbit eventually formed the moon. Most of that material IS from the early earth.
d305f2d8 No.3769574
>>3768531That's a grandma I would let get old and rot without visit and joy of seeing her "annoying" grandchildren.
df64cd08 No.3769608
>>3769570and before the static there were photons pushing things around but no one gives a fuck about the minusha of particle physics at the beginning of the universe you pedantic turdmuffin!
He asked if the moon was part of the earth. Answer the question he asked or shut the fuck up. It's arrogant, know-it-all, pricks like you who give science a bad name.
0f38626c No.3771507
>>3769608>Answer the question he askedFirst he's gotta prove how good he can read wikipedia.
c8716a14 No.3771511
>>3771507> read wikipedia.[Trying to win an argument by turning to Wikipedia]
Nope. All of us who've been on the internet for a while know Wikipedia is unreliable and only useful as a beginning point to do actual research from trustworthy sources.
You should lurk more, you foolish nuteen.
