It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How can the moon do that?

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whiskey Jack

Originally posted by Purgatory
Humans "think" they know all of the answers to everything, when in reality, their comprehension of all things greater than us is just a guess.


Ok, sure, but keep in mind that these "guesses" you so blithely discard are ones that have, on our limited scale borne out many times for many different people, so they're pretty decent guesses based on the evidence we have.

To digress a bit from the moon part of this discussion, let me tell you the story of a friend, her car, and her refutation of "guesses." History has shown us, time and time again, that when one solid object attempts to pass through the physical space occupied by another physical object it does not do so without passing along its kinetic energy. Sometimes this destroys one or both of the intersecting objects, but most of the time it simply damages one or the other, and arrests (or deflects) the trajectory of both objects. Simple enough, right?
Well, not for my friend. She's a dear, sweet person, but I will never, ever, get in a car with her. She is firmly convinced (because "it feels like it should be true") that if she only believes hard enough she can cause her car to pass through the space occupied by something else --a tree, a sign, another car, a house-- without interacting with that object. In spite of, to use the most conservative estimates, 6000 years evidence to the contrary, she believes that she can succeed at making one solid object pass through the physical space occupied by another physical object.
Now, it might be that she's right. There may be a way to do this, and it may be something that we'll discover in the next 30 years, but I don't want to be there when she makes the experiment while driving.

Similarly, it is certainly possible that the moon is a spaceship, that George Lucas channeled ancestral DNA memory when designing the Death Star so that it looks like Spaceship Iaeptus™, that we're all government-employed debunkers designed to keep the masses in happy tranquility, or that the Crab Nebula really would taste good if only you could find enough marinara sauce and a pot of boiling water a few million lightyears in diameter....but it's probably not.


my statement wasn't meant to discredit all science, but it's proving a point that many people feel that whatever science might decide (based on what we can only comprehend here, by earthly standards and ways of thinking) is written in concrete. it's not.
We don't know enough about the moon (yet) to really understand how it got there, and how it works (we can only assume it). This goes for many of those "big questions" out there. If I'm wrong, give me scientific proof of how the universe began, and what happens to our spirit/soul after we die. There is none.

Perhaps our understanding of gravity does not apply on a planet 30 light years from here where things could work differently. Perhaps there are elements on other planets far away that allow the existence of things, and theories beyond our comprehension. We don't know. That's my point here.
The scientific skeptics shouldn't be so quick to laugh at the other possibilities that are out there.




posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Purgatory
Perhaps our understanding of gravity does not apply on a planet 30 light years from here where things could work differently. Perhaps there are elements on other planets far away that allow the existence of things, and theories beyond our comprehension. We don't know. That's my point here.
The scientific skeptics shouldn't be so quick to laugh at the other possibilities that are out there.

Gravity is a universal force.
Just because we can't go there doesn't mean we don't know what happens there.

And yes, we do know.

You should read up on some astronomy/astrophysics my friend. Have you?



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Originally posted by backtoreality


And yes, we do know.


Correction there backtoreality, we THINK we know would be more accurate.


You should read up on some astronomy/astrophysics my friend. Have you?


Reading up on mainstream astronomy/astrophysics is like running on a treadmill. Lots of useless excercise and you don't go anywhere.

If you want to go anywhere worthwhile you have to get into a 'black' program where the real astronomy and astrophysics resides. All the public ever gets in glorified reruns of Star Trek if you know what I mean.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by backtoreality


And yes, we do know.


Correction there backtoreality, we THINK we know would be more accurate.

With that mentality, we don't really know anything about anything. We would only THINK we know.







Reading up on mainstream astronomy/astrophysics is like running on a treadmill. Lots of useless excercise and you don't go anywhere.

If you want to go anywhere worthwhile you have to get into a 'black' program where the real astronomy and astrophysics resides. All the public ever gets in glorified reruns of Star Trek if you know what I mean.

LOL.
'Black' program astrophysics?? I don't think so.
When the beginnings of the universe are studied, verified, billions of dollars of research are put into it on a global scale, with all results widely available to the public...what else could be more important than that?

That just sounds like an excuse to not keep current with the field--a kind of apathetic justification.


p.s. you really didn't answer that question.


[edit on 9-8-2006 by backtoreality]



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Originally posted by backtoreality



With that mentality, we don't really know anything about anything. We would only THINK we know.


I think you're getting the hang of it, backtoreality.



When the beginnings of the universe are studied, verified, billions of dollars of research are put into it on a global scale, with all results widely available to the public...what else could be more important than that?


The truth.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 04:16 PM
link   
If the reality of the universe is not exciting enough for you, then you have real problems my friend. You feel the need to create an alternate reality in your mind, to somehow make things more interesting? I have a sneaking suspicion that you haven't even given astrophysics a try.

I'm not calling you out, telling you to list the last 5 books you have read on the topic, but I am encouraging you to do the reading on your own. If you want a recomendation, U2U me--I will keep it confidential.

edited to remove a mild personal attack

U2U sent

[edit on 9-8-2006 by masqua]



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Originally posted by backtoreality




You are a lost cause.


Yeah, thats what my wife says.


If the reality of the universe is not exciting enough for you, then you have real problems my friend.


Its more exciting than you can imagine. For instance the reality is that the universe has no begining and no end; it just goes on forever. There was no "Big Bang". There are billions of planets out there just like earth.


You feel the need to create an alternate reality in your mind, to somehow make things more interesting?


My 'alternate' reality is the actual reality you will figure out someday. Maybe even in this lifetime (but probably not). People on Venus. People on Mars. People on Saturn. People just like us. An electromagnetic sphere for a sun, gravity waves that are instantaneous: Come on! Jump in! The waters fine.


I have a sneaking suspicion that you haven't even given astrophysics a try.


As a matter of fact I have. I have seen "Destination Moon" more than 25 times and I have seen "Rocket Ship X-M more than 50 times. I also have a copy of "Amazon Women On The Moon." In addition I have a First Edition of "The Conquest of Space" by Chesley Bonestell and Willey Ley. And finally, I have watched the Lazar Tape more than 100 times.


I'm not calling you out, telling you to list the last 5 books you have read on the topic.


Happy to oblige:

Behind The Flying Saucers Frank Scully
Flying Saucers Have Landed Desmond Leslie & George Adamski
Secret of the Flying Saucers
From Outer Space Howard Menger
Space, Gravity and the
Flying Saucer Leonard Cramp
Aboard a Flying Saucer Truman Bethurum

Did you read any of these books? What did you think?



but I am encouraging you to do the reading on your own.


Did the reading, been there-done that, got the t-shirt, got the coffee cup.

Now I have a question for you backtoreality: what color do you think the daytime sky is on the moon and why do you think that?



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Its more exciting than you can imagine. For instance the reality is that the universe has no begining and no end; it just goes on forever. There was no "Big Bang". There are billions of planets out there just like earth.

Proof?
None?
Exactly.




My 'alternate' reality is the actual reality you will figure out someday. Maybe even in this lifetime (but probably not). People on Venus. People on Mars. People on Saturn. People just like us. An electromagnetic sphere for a sun, gravity waves that are instantaneous: Come on! Jump in! The waters fine.

You sure that liquid is water?




I'm not calling you out, telling you to list the last 5 books you have read on the topic.


Happy to oblige:

Behind The Flying Saucers Frank Scully
Flying Saucers Have Landed Desmond Leslie & George Adamski
Secret of the Flying Saucers
From Outer Space Howard Menger
Space, Gravity and the
Flying Saucer Leonard Cramp
Aboard a Flying Saucer Truman Bethurum

Did you read any of these books? What did you think?

I think I'm done discussing this with you any further.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Originally posted by backtoreality


John Lear

Happy to oblige!

Behind The Flying Saucers Frank Scully
Flying Saucers Have Landed Desmond Leslie & George Adamski
Secret of the Flying Saucers
From Outer Space Howard Menger
Space, Gravity and the
Flying Saucer Leonard Cramp
Aboard a Flying Saucer Truman Bethurum

Did you read any of these books? What did you think?


I think I'm done discussing this with you any further.


Does that mean you didn't read the books? Or you didn't think?




posted on Aug, 10 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Does that mean you didn't read the books? Or you didn't think?


I haven't read any of those books, but I did read a few pages of the National Inquirer at the checkout stand.

They are different? How so?

Both offer zero conclusive evidence.


The books I was talking about can are testable, repeatable and conclusive.
That is the difference between reality and fantasy.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join