THE MOON: A Propaganda Hoax

[Piscean]

It really wouldn't suprise me if the moon wasn't real. Or atleast wasnt what we've been told it is. Every time I dug deep on any subject I found what was commonly taught to be lies and deception. People are told what to believe from the time theyre born and who can actually get to the moon to prove to themselves its what we are told it is?

[Anmon]

It doesn't matter what it is, its what we believe it is thats more important.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Piscean It really wouldn't suprise me if the moon wasn't real. Or atleast wasnt what we've been told it is. Every time I dug deep on any subject I found what was commonly taught to be lies and deception. People are told what to believe from the time theyre born and who can actually get to the moon to prove to themselves its what we are told it is?

Well that's just plain silly. I look up and see the moon, night after night after night, so I know that it exists and isn't going anywhere. And knowing what I know from my own eyes, everything I've read about the scientific nature of the moon makes perfect sense and is entirely plausible.

And since I know that I and the people I work with do our jobs sincerely and to the best of our abilities, I have no reason to believe that the people whose job it was to inform us about the moon also did their jobs sincerely and to the best of their abilities, and therefore there's no reason not to believe the recorded science simply because I didn't do it myself.

I've never hit a homerun in Dodger stadium before either, but I know for an absolute fact that it can be done.

.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Kite What a complete load of nonsense. This 'Mad Revolutionist' obviously has zero knowledge of astronomy.

I'm almost 100 percent sure that its a satire of some sort, or the dudes an idiot, either way. It's actually a clever way for a theist to dodge the "you don't have proof so hah" challenge, of course, it would fail if you gave the one doing the proving the necessary equipment, but a clever joke nonetheless.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Sonart . Well that's just plain silly. I look up and see the moon, night after night after night, so I know that it exists and isn't going anywhere. And knowing what I know from my own eyes, everything I've read about the scientific nature of the moon makes perfect sense and is entirely plausible. And since I know that I and the people I work with do our jobs sincerely and to the best of our abilities, I have no reason to believe that the people whose job it was to inform us about the moon also did their jobs sincerely and to the best of their abilities, and therefore there's no reason not to believe the recorded science simply because I didn't do it myself. I've never hit a homerun in Dodger stadium before either, but I know for an absolute fact that it can be done. .

You don' have any reason to not believe them, but a truly skeptical mind wouldn't believe them until you have every reason to believe them. And being close friends is no defense, I've boldfaced lied to my closest friends. You don't see the moon, you see a glowing disk that you've been told is a chunk of rock called the moon. you may have seen a homerun in dodger stadium, so its a little harder to be paranoid about that, but still.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary You don' have any reason to not believe them, but a truly skeptical mind wouldn't believe them until you have every reason to believe them. And being close friends is no defense, I've boldfaced lied to my closest friends.

Yeah, sure, if everything I know about the moon is based on information from one guy.

It's the same reason the 9/11 conspiracists are so fulla crap. (The CIA blew up the Twin Towers) You start with a theory based one observation, seems simple enough, but to be true, you have to extrapolate out a galactically complex plot involving thousands of willing evil minions in a dozen perfectly timed subplots, and not one of whom would ever say a word about it.

What we know of the moon is not simply some story related to us by the "official moon guy", it's the culmination of study by thousands of scientists and observers, not all of whom could have been charlatans and con artists, and any one of whom would have been thrilled to gain fame by proving the others wrong.

A mind can be skeptical, but within logical reason... beyond that, they're paranoid.

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary You don't see the moon, you see a glowing disk that you've been told is a chunk of rock called the moon.

I still see it, and I know what makes physical sense to me, so when I hear competing explanations of what I see, I go with what makes sense, and it's surely not the Mad Revisionist.

.

[Gods_Mercenary]

What makes sense changes daily.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary What makes sense changes daily.

Whatever you say, Mercenary...

[Jack]

It doesn't matter what it is, its what we believe it is thats more important.

Mind over matter or belief trumping reality? :)

The moon can also be inferred. Tides and the Earth's orbit around the Sun are both affected by something with sufficient gravitation pull on the planet to cause them. By looking at the effects we can infer the cause.

[Anmon]

Thats not the point I was making Isherwood, the greatest thing humanity has is not knowledge but imagination.

[Jack]

I consider them equally valuable. Knowledge without imagination or imagination without knowledge is limiting.

[Anmon]

But imagination come first, knowledge comes from experience.

[Darebirth]

Hasn’t the moon been mentioned in texts and literature throughout history?
There is no mention of the moon in the English language prior to the year 1066. This is a proven fact, so rarely spoken of in these controlled academic institutions. - Mad Revisionist

That's because so few books were around at the time. All of the books that were written at this time were written by monks who did not delve in sciences, such as astronomy.

[Darebirth]

There is only one logical arguement that the Mad Revisionist ever presented (at least that I've read) that properly lays out a conceivable argument against the moon. (Note: I'm paraphrasing.)

"Scientists say that the moon pulls on the earth's water, causing the tides. If the moon really had this effect on water, than why are there clouds in the Earth's sky. Wouldn't they be pulled right into space because they are lighter and closer to the moon that liquid water. How does this also comply with the fact that the moon has 1/6 of earth's gravity. If 1/6 of earth's gravity could control all the liquid water on earth, then Earth's gravity would be strong enough to pull the moon right into Earth."

When presented with this evidence, the moon's existance can only be plausible by saying that another force is the cause of the tides.

[SoylentGreen]

Darebirth When presented with this evidence, the moon's existance can only be plausible by saying that another force is the cause of the tides.

The sun also effects the tides.
Earths rotation is another thing that not only effects tides but also the tides effect earths rotation.

Tides affect the earth's rotation in two sharply contrasting ways. One way, caused by tidal friction, produces an extremely slow secular change in rotation. The other way, caused by the continual movements of the tides about the planet, produces very small but very rapid changes in rotation. These rapid changes occur at exactly the same periods as the tides themselves -- half-daily, daily, etc.

Tides and the Earth's Rotation

[Sonart]

.

Hasn’t the moon been mentioned in texts and literature throughout history? There is no mention of the moon in the English language prior to the year 1066. This is a proven fact, so rarely spoken of in these controlled academic institutions. - Mad Revisionist

What English language? Th Old English that existed prior to the Norman conquest... not surprisingly, in 1066 ...was a Germanic mix from the Saxons.

However, there are plenty of referenses long before then...

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

Although Genesis didn't actually call it the 'Moon'.

.

[Darebirth]

^ Yes, but anyone who beleives in the moon propoganda would probably call mistranslation on the bible. After all, the bible has been filtered through so many languages (Hebrew to Scandinavian to Greek to Latin to English) that it is a very difficult task to decipher what words the original authors actually intended to convey.