Warp wrote:
>   It looks like a spoof site to me.

Clearly Poe's law holds for more than just fundamentalism.

I thought it was a great site because it's so *obviously* whacked yet uses 
all the same techniques as the other conspiracy theories use.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

"somebody" <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> Bah! Of course moon exists, and of course it's made of green cheese. The
> real riddle is, does it rotate around its own axis?

Depends on whether it actually rotates around the earth ;)

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> > http://www.revisionism.nl/Moon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm
> >
> > The moon does not really exist. It's all a conspiracy.
> >
>
> Are people really this stupid/insane? Seriously, how can they believe
> the crap they spew?

A good question, which this site - as I guess - is all about. I can't take such
guys seriously, but at least in *this* case the crap makes perfect sense as
soon as you don't: A nice brainfuck he's pulling off there.

A meta-hoax, if you like.

Post a reply to this message

"scott" <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> I think you're right, even the conspiracy believers wouldn't write something
> like this:
>
> http://www.revisionism.nl/Moon/Feedback5.htm

I like the "statistical experiment", too (including the statement of
qualification).

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:
> "somebody" <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
>> Bah! Of course moon exists, and of course it's made of green cheese. The
>> real riddle is, does it rotate around its own axis?
> 
> Depends on whether it actually rotates around the earth ;)

It actually doesn't. It rotates around the sun.  If you actually do the 
math, you find that the attraction of the sun on the moon when it's on the 
sunwards side of the earth is stronger than the attraction of the earth on 
the moon.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 07:51:49 -0500, Mike Raiford wrote:

>  I'd say
> it's lunacy

Caused by a full moon, no doubt.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> clipka wrote:
> > "somebody" <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> >> Bah! Of course moon exists, and of course it's made of green cheese. The
> >> real riddle is, does it rotate around its own axis?
> > 
> > Depends on whether it actually rotates around the earth ;)

> It actually doesn't. It rotates around the sun.  If you actually do the 
> math, you find that the attraction of the sun on the moon when it's on the 
> sunwards side of the earth is stronger than the attraction of the earth on 
> the moon.

  It is possible for a body to rotate around more than one other body at
the same time.

  Of course with the Earth-Moon system it gets a bit blurry because the
two bodies basically rotate around each other, rather than the Moon purely
rotating around the Earth. The deviation the Moon causes on the Earth is
rather significant (I think it's something like 5000 km).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> > Depends on whether it actually rotates around the earth ;)
>
> It actually doesn't. It rotates around the sun.  If you actually do the
> math, you find that the attraction of the sun on the moon when it's on the
> sunwards side of the earth is stronger than the attraction of the earth on
> the moon.

Oh come on, do you really believe that sun-worshipper propaganda crap? They've
been trying to hype the sun as the king of the sky ever since they put it up
there, when we all know it's no bigger than the moon. Get real man! The moon
was built first (which is why it's not burning any more these days), and
there's really no reason to give the sun any attention. It's just a poor copy
by the Japanese (which still brag with it on their national flag), envious of
the Arabs' achievement at building the moon.

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> >  I'd say
> > it's lunacy
>
> Caused by a full moon, no doubt.

Ha, gotcha! So you do admit that the moon is hollow - or how could it possibly
be "full" otherwise? :P

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
news:web.4a6e2cc8e4cb2a56842b7b550@news.povray.org...
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> > > Depends on whether it actually rotates around the earth ;)

> > It actually doesn't. It rotates around the sun.  If you actually do the
> > math, you find that the attraction of the sun on the moon when it's on
the
> > sunwards side of the earth is stronger than the attraction of the earth
on
> > the moon.

> Oh come on, do you really believe that sun-worshipper propaganda crap?
They've
> been trying to hype the sun as the king of the sky ever since they put it
up
> there, when we all know it's no bigger than the moon. Get real man! The
moon
> was built first (which is why it's not burning any more these days), and
> there's really no reason to give the sun any attention.

Plus the sun only comes out during daytime. The moon, by contrast, is much
more useful as it brightens up the night.

Post a reply to this message