0
$\begingroup$

PearsonArtPhoto why did you delete my question? I got my math from an article SCIENCE 01/06/2014 08:38 Moon Dust Mystery Solved With Help Of Apollo Mission Data Megan Gannon Space.com they said it was 0.04 inches every 1000 yrs I was just looking for a good answer. so I see that when faced with a serious ? people resort to name calling and block people. the dust kicked up by the rover making rooster tails seams to land normal and not fly away like a projectile like Hobbes said in his article on here. when there are conflicting answers it makes me wonder that's all. read the answers given by those to the ? " why didn't the Apollo 11 lander blow the dust away?" on this site. they give conflicting answers. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/06/moon-dust-mystery-apollo-mission-data_n_4548157.html

$\endgroup$

migrated from space.stackexchange.com Dec 1 '17 at 12:15

This question came from our site for spacecraft operators, scientists, engineers, and enthusiasts.

7
$\begingroup$

From Who are the site moderators, and what is their role here? in our Help Center:

Moderators are human exception handlers, there to deal with those exceptional conditions that could otherwise disrupt the community.

While our site has not altogether banned questions framed as skeptical of the moon landing, we have decided as a community to take a strong stance against users entrenched in denialism. Obviously, determining when this is the case and how to take action is subjective, but that is the type of decision that moderators are there to make.

I agree with PearsonArtPhoto that the tone you took and the framing of the question was disruptive to the community and deletion was the best path. If you would like to participate in this community, I would highly suggest taking some time to cool off and review our Help Center. Definitely read some of our other questions and answers.

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

Looking at your question, let's break it down:

Title: if the moon is 4.3 billion yrs old and dust accumulates at a rate of 0.04" per 1000yrs

Poor capitalization, and it's not really a question. You could just put some of the basics in the title, like "Why isn't there 14,000 feet of dust on the Moon?"

Now for the main body of your question.

their should be 14,333 FEET of dust.

This seems to be a continuation assuming one read the title. Still, it doesn't really make sense as it stands.

where did it go?

This is a valid question actually, barely.

and the other answers given for the dust not blowing around on here are unintelligent and are far fetched.

This is just plain insulting, and doesn't really contribute anything towards the question at all. If there was a specific answer or two you had a disagreement to, it could be interesting.

red flags on every one of them.

Similar to previous.

now give me a real answer not a N'ever. A. Straight. Answer answer.

Basically this screams that you aren't going to accept any answer we might give you.

Lastly, you included a source in this question that could give some kind of additional information.

Now, if your question had been better formatted, we might be able to accept it. Something like this might work:

Title: Why isn't there 14,000 feet of dust on the moon?

According to https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/06/moon-dust-mystery-apollo-mission-data_n_4548157.html , dust accumulates at a rate of 0.04" per 1000yrs. By my math, over the 4.65 billion years of the Moon's lifetime, there should be 14,000 feet of dust. The Apollo astronauts did not see that much dust. Where did that dust go to?

Note the differences. Proper capitalization goes a long ways. Being open to information, stating one's sources, and removing general insults goes a long ways.

If you want to ask a question, and can be open minded, state your sources, and be clear, we are more than willing to entertain any such questions. A few instances of similar questions you might look at are:

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .