If people understood science, they'd relax about this.

Here, it is reported that satellites around the moon (ironically, the moon is actually a large satellite) have detected small pockets of water all over the surface of the moon, though they are few and far between. "The moon remains drier than any desert on earth" the article proclaims.

If people knew why there was water on Earth, they wouldn't be so amazed about water being on the moon. Water on Earth (where it wasn't formed via bizarre lightning strikes hitting methane gas pockets and causing explosions the byproduct of which was water) mostly came to this planet via meteorites that contained huge volumes of water in the form of ice in their mass. The meteorites burned up in the atmosphere, leaving behind water vapor, or crashed into the surface of Earth, where the ice melted. And that is how we have all this water. It is possible, if Jupiter hadn't solidified and sucked up most of the debris between Mars and Uranus, that Earth would be completely covered in water. But we got to 70%, astronomical events occurred, and the meteorites stopped crashing here. Mostly.

The same is true for the Moon. Any causual observer looking at the moon can see the millions of pockmarks where meteorites have struck the surface. Most of those meteorites contained water. In the low atmosphere of the Moon, it makes sense that the water would sublimate and leave the Moon's surface. But the idea that frozen fragments of the meteorites remain is not a revelation, it is just an extension of what we already know to be true about our home planet.

I am just glad it was India that spent millions on the satellite that proved this, and not NASA. However, since I cannot write about space without criticizing my old pals at NASA, I must admit: India successfully put a satellite into Moon orbit for $80 million, but it took $600 million for NASA to build a toilet.


_