Full lunar eclipse to bring super blood Moon
One of our planet’s most stunning sights is coming to the skies – a super blood Moon. In the year’s only full lunar eclipse, Earth will come between the Sun and the Moon.
It will be visible with the naked eye before dawn on Monday in most of Europe. The Americas will get a great view on Sunday evening.
Falling fully into Earth’s shadow, the Moon will slowly darken before turning dusky red. The Moon will appear larger than usual because it will be at its closest point to Earth of its orbit, giving it the name super Moon.
It will also be called a super flower blood Moon. In the Northern Hemisphere, a full moon in May is often called a flower Moon because it coincides with the Spring flowers.
The only sunlight reaching the Moon during the full eclipse will be passing through the Earth’s atmosphere.
This light will be blood red, from all Earth’s sunrises and sunsets reflected on to the Moon’s surface, explains Dr Gregory Brown, astronomer at the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, London.
“You’ll actually be seeing every sunrise and every sunset occurring around the Earth at once. All of that light will be projected on to the Moon,” he told BBC News.
On Monday, western parts of Europe will get a good but short view as the Moon will set during the eclipse. Look low on the horizon between 0230 and 0430 BST and you’ll see the moon falling into shadow before glowing red. It should be visible in Africa too.
In the UK watching from a high vantage point like a hill or tall building will be essential because of the Moon’s very low position in the sky.
The UK will get a better view of the earlier part of the eclipse, Dr Brown explains. As Earth’s shadow starts to cover the Moon, it slowly takes a bite out of it. The Moon will be fully eclipsed and red at 0429 BST. It will then set, though the eclipse will continue until 0750 BST.
The Americas will be treated to the full spectacle, lasting 84 minutes. If you’re in western US and Canada, the time to watch the horizon is Sunday evening as the Moon rises.
You can see it with the naked eye, while looking through binoculars or a small telescope will enhance the red colour.
Of course, the very best vantage point for witnessing this eclipse is a place very few people have been lucky enough to visit – the Moon itself.
“If you were an astronaut standing on the Moon, looking back towards Earth, you’d see a red ring running around the outside of our planet,” Dr Brown explains.
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Mark Tapley
| #
More from the fake war in Ukraine:
https://i.imgur.com/sbDLvM2.png
https://i.imgur.com/ZFEO4fK.png
https://ukraine.timesofnews.com/breaking-news/israeli-tv-channel-runs-live-footage-from-ukraine-showing-crash-landed-tie-fighter-from-star-wars.html
Reply
Lloyd
| #
And the Moon is involved how???
Reply
Howdy
| #
“The total lunar eclipse will occur on Sunday, May 15th into Monday, May 16th, 2022 – depending on your location”
In Scorpio. Scorpio is ruled by Pluto, the planet of transformation.
https://www.jessicaadams.com/2022/05/13/blog/the-scorpio-lunar-eclipse-2022/
“In the year’s only full lunar eclipse,”
Other people don’t agree. There is another on November 7th and 8th, location dependent.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
The moon appears red because it is radiating the energy it has absorbed from the sun in the red/infrared spectrum not because it is reflecting light from the Earth’s atmosphere.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers and Herb,
I must question what Herb wrote because I do not want readers to be misinformed. If all the red solar radiation that is scattered by the earth’s cloudless atmospheric gas molecules at high altitudes is absorbed by the moon’s surface, there is no red radiation from the moon’s surface to be see here on the earth..
Have a good day, Jerry
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Jerry,
Since oxygen and nitrogen (the gases in the upper atmosphere) do not reflect, absorb, or emit visible or infrared light how exactly are they scattering this light? The surface of the moon in sunlight is 224F while in shade is -230F. Where does this energy go when there is an eclipse and the temperature drops?
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers and Herb,
After I had submitted my comments I had a queasy feeling that I could be wrong. For I asked myself, why are not all total lunar eclipses blood red.
Then, when I came back I see my biggest mistake was that I had only read Herb’s comment and had not studied the BBC figure. Which shows that no solar radiation is incident upon the moon’s surface.
I read that I see direct sunlight before I should at ‘sunrise’ and after I should after I should at sunset. And I read that this is because the atmosphere at these time most strongly refract the solar radiation because of the atmosphere’s vertical density gradient caused by the influence of gravity upon the atmospheric molecules.
Now as I actually read the article I read; “The Americas will be treated to the full spectacle, lasting 84 minutes. If you’re in western US and Canada, the time to watch the horizon is Sunday evening as the Moon rises.” Hence, I see a possible answer to the question: why are not all total lunar eclipses “blood moons”?
I must admit that because I have seen at least on blood moon total eclipse, I doubt if I would have made the effort to observe this one. But I will this one because I now have many questions because of what Herb wrote. So, Herb, thank you very much and I will report what I was able to see in the morning and what I may have learned by observing.
Have a good evening, Jerry
Reply
nafaho
| #
I make 85 dollars each hour for working an online job at home. dso I never thought I can do it but my best friend makes 10000 bucks every month working this job and she recommended me to learn more about it.
The potential with this is endless…>>>>>>https://t.ly/eGAt
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hello Herb:
Those ass tronouts must have got awful hot on the moon in the day time (ap. 200 deg.) and cold at night (-200 deg.). No problem, now their on there way to Mars (Devon Island). Even got a helicopter to fly in the 100 times less atmosphere than Earth.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/pZOEuvHvC8rZ/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/ML1I0cx7Xi7W/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/NXaj3Crq1Ce0/
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Mark,
On the moon there is no atmosphere or transfer of heat by convection, only radiation. During the day you need only wear a reflective suit to avoid the 200 degree heat or stand in the shade and at night the problem is with losing the heat your body produces, not freezing. The suits must not only provide air but also temperature control, just like deep diving suits.
Herb
Reply
nafaho
| #
Everybody can earn $500 Daily… Yes! you can earn more than you think by working online from home. I have been doing this job for like a ADt few weeks and my last week payment was exactly 2537 dollars 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐛𝐳.𝐜𝐨𝐦
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hello Herb:
Thanks for the explanation about the radiant heat effects in no atmosphere. The paper thin suits would have provided no oxygen nor temp. control. Here is an excellent video you may not have seen, with lots of official NASA footage and interviews with ass tronauts. Note at the end, Buzz Aldrin’s answer to the 8 year old girls question, “when are we going back the the moon.”
https://www.bitchute.com/video/0oANUdFS0LxK/
Another good one with the ass tronauts “photographing Earth” in the window.
Reply
Her Rose
| #
Hi Mark,
I only watched part of the video before seeing it was nonsense. The van Allen belts are made of charged particles and because they have electric charges and little velocity (unlike gamma or neutron radiation) they an be stopped by a thin layer of metal.
The lunar lander looked flimsy because it was. It was designed for conditions on the moon and needed to be as light as possible, which means the panels and screens were paper thin with little structural strength needed.
The wire to the astronaut is because he is holding a microphone so the astronauts can be heard.
Space suits are not just thin layers of material but have reinforcing structures in them to preserve their shapes at different pressures. The need for this was discovered when an astronaut went out on a space walk and his suit expanded almost preventing from getting back inside.
As I’ve said before Mark you look for evidence to support your beliefs (more appropriately you disbeliefs) and accept it without question or thought because it conforms to your already made up mindset.
Herb
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hello Herb:
No reasonable person can lookout the so called lunar lander and believe this piece of crap went 138,000 miles, landed on the moon then redocked at 3,000 mph with the capsule. They don’t even have a space station in orbit or else they wouldn’t need all the NASA official fake videos. Herb, just like the flimsy airliners going through steel and concrete structures, you believe whatever the official story is. I am surprised you harbor any doubt about the “safe and effective” vaccine: This must be like those planes that penetrated the towers, huh Herb:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/xTc1NfVcE1ZF/
Now more on the fake space station; and you think they went to the moon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot54-wbVqb4
And here’s that “lunar lander.” Just take a look at this cobbled together crap. This is a testimony to how stupid they think the public is:
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hi Herb:
You referred to the van Allen belt. That is a NASA engineer talking about how they have to solve the radiation problem. They are claiming as you heard that they no longer have the technology after 50 years to return to the moon as one of their ass tronouts stated at the beginning. The entire video is full of discrepancies like this. At the end, Aldrin admits they never went..
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Mark,
They are not talking about the van Allen belts which are charged particle held in an area by the radiated electric fields of the Earth. What they are worried about is the large amount of radiation ejected by the sun that would cause problems with long exposures outside the Earth’s magnetic fields (trip to Mars). That radiation includes X-rays, gamma rays, and other high energy radiation that is difficult to shield against. Since solar flares are unpredictable and can be very large (extending further than the orbit of the Earth) if one were to occur the consequences could be devastating to both human life and equipment (EMF).
Buzz Aldrins first reply to the girl on why we had not returned to the moon was, that was his question. He then goes on to claim they never went to the moon because aliens on the far side warned us not to go. You consider this as authoritative information? You continually contradict yourself in order to argue for your beliefs using any source. You say no astronauts went into space or to the moon and cite as evidence a man whose credentials are that he has been in space and gone to the moon. You deny the existence of ISS and yet with a little effort you could find out when and where it would be visible in your area. You deny that planes could fly into skyscrapers even though there are tens of thousands of eye witnesses to it and videos (all fake because it is not what you believe and the the entire world is trying to trick you). You deny that it could be done even though it happened before when a much smaller and slower plane (B-25) did it years before to a much more substantial skyscraper (Empire State building).
You deny there are nuclear bombs which means you must also deny nuclear power and even radioactive elements exist.
Your problem is that you only want to believe what you want to believe and deny or ignore anything casting doubts on those beliefs. You selectively embrace anything and everything that supports your belief no matter how bad the evidence. You are an anti-scientist that is not interested in finding the truth but maintaining the existing orthodoxy.
Herb
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hello Herb:
Now you are even making things up to prop up the Apollo money laundering fraud. Aldrin said nothing about aliens in his answer to the question “why has no one been to the moon in such a long time ” was I quote “because we didn’t go there and thats the way it happened. And if it didn’t happen, it’s nice to know why it didn’t happen.” Here Aldrin goes out on a limb as far as he can, knowing its not just him at stake but other fake ass tronouts and their families. How ridiculous can you get Herb, Aldrin never mentioned aliens.
If the sun’s radiation is a serious problem now it would have been a problem for the comparatively antiquated equipment in 1969. How do you explain the exact same scenery (front screen projection) on different missions to different locations? And what about those “moon rocks” proven to be fake? I never said that they could not put satellites in orbit. I think the problem is coming back into the atmosphere from orbit. If NASA had ass tronouts in a real space station they would not have to put out crappy CGI videos and women with their hair sprayed up like morons.
I am not contradicting myself anywhere, nor am I resorting to aliens on the dark side of the moon. Herb you should know that so called “eye witness accounts” are some of the most unreliable evidence there ever was. Kind of like all of those people dying of the fake virus. The WW2 B25 bomber that hit the Empire State building was a much heavier made aircraft than the flimsy composite planes today. And all it did was break some windows and cripple into the street. Like the 747 I posted that fell apart from just spinning around on the runway. These airliners are made for cruising at high altitude. Even birds will knock a hole in the nose cone. The wings are so flimsy that the only thing that can be mounted on the ends are a plastic light as. The notion that one of these flimsy craft cut through solid structural steel and concrete buildings (and even protrude from the other side of the building) is totally asinine. It wasn’t even good CGI. Then there is the fact that spilled kerosine from the fuel tanks would basically just go poof. A very inefficient low temperature fire. It requires ap. 7000 deg. of concentrated heat to melt structural steel. Then there is the situation where the hundreds of thousands of tons of concrete was pulverized (all the cement dust) that could only be done with precisely set thermite. And of course the buildings did not fall over but collapsed at near free fall speed directly into their own foot prints. This can only occur in standard demolition when the foundation and lower structure is blown out first.
Reply
erb Rose
| #
HI mark,
You continue to cherry pick evidence to support your beliefs. In the video Buzz answers the girls question with, That is not a questioner an 8 year old girl but one I ask. Implying that the wonders why we hadn’t gone back to the moon. He later says that the reason never landed on the moons because alien race had a colony on the dark side and threatened us if we landed. Since you believe the man had been liar most of his life, saying he had been in space and on the moon, why do you contend that when he is old and sick he then tells the truth? It’s because it is what you want to hear.
The B-25 was a much flimsier plane, incapable of carrying the load or survive the speed of a modern jet. The plane did not fall to the ground (only fuel and nobody on the ground died) but stuck in the building with one of its engines going through the other side. If your going to cite evidence at least get the facts right. (oh that’s right, if the facts don’t fit your scenario they were faked.)
You keep referring to melting the steel but all you need is enough heat to destroy its strength, not melt it and a fire burning rich (black smoke) has enough heat to do that.
As far as the controlled demolition when charges are set to blow out support columns, the bottom collapse and the rest of the building settles collapsing on its foundation. This is not what the faked videos showed. The collapse started at the upper stories where the plane hit (faked and a coincidence) then the upper stories settled down crushing the lower stories.
You don’t use thermite to destroy concrete. That is another of your imaginary facts. Thermite issued to melt metal. Concrete is made from cement. Cement is made by heating limestone and driving the water out. All you need to do to destroy concrete is to heat it enough to drive out water and weaken it. In Philadelphia they had a tire fire (not thermite) under an I-95 bridge that resulted in the bridge needing be rebuilt because the concrete had lost its strength.
Your evidence does not support your conclusions and the only reason you cite them is to try to give credence to your preconceived beliefs. It’s like Jerry using irrelevant quotes from his experts to give an illusion of support to what he’s saying.
Herb
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hi Herb:
The question is posed by the 8 year old girl and Buzz Aldrin Answers her exactly as I quoted. I have watched his and Armstrongs interviews by Bart Sibrel in which Armstrong almost admits it was faked. I also have watched his cryptic speech where he implies the same. I have watched the three ass tronaut actors interviewed in which they were obviously uncomfortable about the process. None of them reported seeing stars (I wonder why) and none of them reported seeing any aliens. There is no reason for aldrin to make the recorded statement other than to try to get out the truth. Remember Gus Grissom (who hung the lemon) and his two crew members were eliminated as was another one who had called to be interviewed.
I believe the Empire State Building is still intact. It did not collapse in its own footprint with all the cement pulverized and all the steel cut to precise lengths that were immediately hauled with no forensic inspection. Note also that there was no office furniture, water coolers, computers or other typical items. Thats because the towers built by the Rockefeller’s were intended to be destroyed all along. Thats why Netanyahu’s friend, Zionist Silverstein bought the building for a pittance and collected double indemnity. Thats why ten million dollars of short sales were placed on the bond company and airlines (very unusual) 3 days prior and why even though the SEC should have made those who made the transactions public did not. That is why the day before the 911 event Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld reported a missing amount in the defense budget of over a trillion dollars! That is why if you check the Social Security Death register for that day in N.Y you get a typical figure because there was hardly anyone in the buildings. The Israeli “art students” did throw out 14 mechanical dummy for the MSM to film.
Concrete can be pulverized with a siege hammer or jack hammer if you have long enough, or high explosive charges will do it a lot better. In the videos you can even see the squibs detonating the charges floor by floor. All the heavy glass was blown out at the bottom from the foundation charges and in the bottom of the rubble far away fro the fake fires was buried still hot metal from the thermite. They, did plant an aircraft engine next to a nearby building to simulate the non existent airliners but they put the wrong model.
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hello Herb again:
And I forgot to mention.What about building 7 that did not have a fake plane hit it. I guess it was that great big fire in the secretaries waste basket, huh Herb. Thats why Silverstein called for the building to be “pulled.” Those waste basket fires can be awfully hot you know. However the MSM was right on it. Even called the collapse 15 minutes ahead of time. Funny thing too is that building, just like the others fell straight down at almost free all speed, in its own foot print. Now what happened to these three buildings as reported by the MSM and only believed by morons and the totally gullible has never before in the history of construction happened anywhere in the world. However standard demolition is used to drop massive structures like this on a routine basis. Thats the fact of the matter.
Reply
Seriously
| #
👍Herb. Many humans are not capable of moving beyond their original controllers, in his case, religion. Confirmation bias is a medium that has been used, always, to facilitate control. It keeps the social strata together and keeps the violence to a minimum, unless it is deemed usefful otherwise, in which case it is used to foment violence. Shared belief, regardless of ‘truth’ is the control mechanism, in any field you can name, including science. I look forward to your posts because you have clearly understood that an open mind is the only access to logic/truth & potentialunderstanding. This guy feels like a bot – why spend time on here at all if you really think the earth is flat, the bible is the actual word of god, achievements in science are only the work of the zionist cabal? That a logical mind is an abomination against a 2000 year old book? I see you pointing him out for what he is and I 👏…I just wish he’d find a new site to haunt.
Reply
Whokoo
| #
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers,
In case you didn’t know, WhoKoo’s speciality is humor! Yes, I thought I might see a video of the Blood Moon.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers,
In case you didn’t know, WhoKoo’s speciality is humor! Yes, I thought I might see a video of the Blood Moon.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Howdy
| #
“Shared belief, regardless of ‘truth’ is the control mechanism, in any field you can name,”
So if two or more people believe something, they are under control of an external mechanism? That makes no sense. In fact, no disrespect to you Seriously, or Herb, but being in agreement with Herb, you are claiming Herb and yourself are under this control because you are in agreement, aren’t you?
Reply
Seriously
| #
I wasn’t planning on it ‘ making sense’ to you or Mark…you are both clearly beyond the pull of logic and firmly locked in your beliefs. Feeble arguments don’t save you here.. I have no illusions that any information that does not fit into your narrative can ever succeed its bounds…hmmmm, anti-black hole? 🤣 I’m only grateful I don’t dwell within its limits…a worse fate I cannot imagine. I see bigger pictures than you are capable of, as clearly evidenced in your response. And Mark; no one on this site is ‘ sucking up the msm narrative’ – that’s why we’re here. WHY are you is the question…
Reply
Howdy
| #
I see, you weren’t able to come up with a satisfactory explanation so you cast aspersions. Allways the way of the desperate with no answers
.
Odd that you mentioned Mark when replying to a question I specifically asked you about something you decided to include me in without provocation, that had no relation to Mark. Perhaps you’re obsessed, or your judgement is clouded by negative bias.
“I see bigger pictures than you are capable of”
Big ego too I see. If you knew anything at all seriously, you would know Mark and I don’t agree on that much.
You have shown in your comment that you are completely lacking in objectivity I’m afraid. You made a fool of yourself.
Reply
Seriously
| #
I had not planned on ‘making sense’ to you or Mark.
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hello Seriously:
Who has the open mind? Someone like you and Herb that suck up every bit of MSM garbage like the transparently fake Apollo program or composite and aluminum planes cutting like butter through engineered structural buildings. Or some one who uses a little common sense when evaluating what is thrown out by the controlled media. Of course we have also been over the issue of those 66 million year old dinosaurs too. What I don’t understand is how is it that you and Herb believe in asinine nonsense that even a child can see through but don’t trust our wonderful governments on the issue of the “safe and effective vaccines.”
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers,
I came here to report that I have nothing to report about Blood Moons because it was cloudy and I saw nothing. But I do urge you to pay attention what Seriously has written and to ignore what Mark and Howdy generally write.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Howdy
| #
Readers can see right through your illogical rantings jerry. It isn’t enough to generate interest in your comments, no matter who you try to blame.
Reply