Information icon.svg

Campaigning for the RationalMedia Foundation 2021 board of trustees election is underway!


From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This page is automatically archived by Archiver


Could someone halp me with teh science :-) -αmεσ (soldier) 11:00, 16 December 2007 (EST)

Erk. For the moment, I'll just throw in the "Origin of the Moon" article that eventually got annihilated again by Andy: Here (the YEC position paragraph was added by someone else, but the rest was my full rewrite - I can also post the rewritten version somewhere here if there is demand)
If time allows, I'll poke the Origin/Giant Impact section in a few, using the material from the rewrite (the current article is basically the exact same FUD Andy fabricated before I rewrote). --Sid 11:40, 16 December 2007 (EST)
I seem to have messed up the formatting with my addition re the size of the disc, and I don't know how to fix it. Help! I also see that the same absurdity was adressed farther down on the page, but would humbly suggest that my approach is more obvious and more scientific. PoorEd 15:55, 30 January 2008 (EST)
In your section you could also mention that the moon doesn't even appear to be the same size all the time (I'd do it but I don't want to anger the formatting gods) since it is not always the same distance from the earth. It's distance from the earth varies by around 40,000 km (around 25,000 mi for those of you who hate the metric system). Also, when viewed from the surface of the earth (as I'm sure Jesus intended) the moon appears to be larger when near the horizon due to refraction (a decent explanation of this effect here). --BillOhannitygodvelocity. 16:27, 30 January 2008 (EST)
Good points, further undermining the absurdity of the too much against the odds to be anything but God's Big Hint To Us About Something Or Other. BTW, the moon only looks bigger when it's near the horizon because of the reference points we can see such as trees or building. PoorEd 14:57, 5 February 2008 (EST)

Should this be moved to Conservapedia space? weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 07:25, 26 October 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I think so. ħumanUser talk:Human 14:49, 26 October 2008 (EDT)

The splitting of the Moon[edit]

Christians don't have monopoly on religion-fuelled idiocy...--ZooGuard (talk) 17:16, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

A Ridiculous Liberal Myth[edit]

It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)

Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.

Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!

Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down..

(Share and enjoy. - Frankie (talk) 01:14, 30 January 2012 (UTC) )

Love your work buddy. Keep it up. DamoHi 01:24, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
"O, swear not by the moon, the fickle moon, the inconstant moon, that monthly changes in her circle orb, Lest that thy love prove likewise variable."
Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare. DamoHi 06:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Ah, but isn't Shakespeare also a fake? Peter Monomorium antarcticum 01:28, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Round the Moon - A Sequel to From the Earth to the Moon--DamoHi 06:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC) Jules Verne 1865. DamoHi 06:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and don't forget about HG Wells' The First Men in the Moon. Just finished reading it actually. Sam Tally-ho! 06:26, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
And what about the Ancient World - this and this 'and a good few others besides.'
May these gods look kindly upon you. Anna Livia (talk) 21:46, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
The Earth is stabilised by the moon; the Lunar Society of Birmingham; lunatics and other uses.
And how come there weren't any NIMBYs at the time at this unwarranted night time intrusion/your sweet little granny didn't tell you about the good old days when there was no moon.
Where did "they" get all the material to make the moon, which is not always in the night sky (see the recent solar eclipse)? (And why should "they" care about you shooting beer cans in your back garden?)
And, the final proof that this idea is wronger than wrong - #Joseph Kennedy was never president#. Anna Livia (talk) 15:05, 1 September 2017 (UTC)



Dear Eugene; On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. (You can indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line.) Thank you.. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 04:59, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Who's Eugene? Christopher (talk) 08:52, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Eugene Oregon has gotten noticed by our friends at FSTDT. Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 20:31, 29 August 2017 (UTC)


If this does not exist it should do.

There should be discussion of why the moon is not a balloon, and why the reverse side of the moon is less interesting than the one we see. (talk) 10:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Vanishing moon[edit]

Will mention this so the relevant moonrakers can be tracked. Anna Livia (talk) 15:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Indicators of exploitation of the moon coming to actuality[edit]

  • You get spam purporting to come from (current tech geeks and 'blue sky thinkers') inviting you to invest in 'their project.'
  • Start-up companies that are more puff than properly-thought-out-and-invested, being given sky-high valuations (and then losing a lot of people a lot of money).
  • Governments attempting to get in on the act/find means of taxing the activity introducing legislation that does not suit the practicalities.
  • 'Save the pristine wilderness of the Moon' groups appearing.
  • Assorted bits of spin-off technology (some of it by chance - William Perkin investigating quinine synthesis and discovering a mauve dye, WD40 etc).

What else? Anna Livia (talk) 10:51, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Life on the Moon[edit]

Could [1] be included somewhere? Anna Livia (talk) 17:13, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Lunacy about the Moon in more spiritual and conspiracy flavors[edit]

Weird ideas about the Moon are prominent in esoteric and spiritual conspiracist teachings. David Icke teaches that the Moon is artificial and an old alien space ship. Below are a few other ideas that stand out as noticeably different.

Back in the first half of the 20th century, the cultish and innovative spiritual teacher George Gurdjieff taught that humanity was "food for the Moon", and that the Moon was like a huge electromagnet sucking the life of everything on Earth, tied to an elaborate cosmology. (Source, the book In Search of the Miraculous by P.D. Ouspensky.) Other occultists (e.g. The Zelator by David Ovason) talked about the Moon sometimes being a symbol for a mysterious eight sphere which is not literally a sphere, home to lower astral entities that feed on humanity. Gurdjieff also added a vague idea about a second tiny Moon which is difficult to see in his book, Beelzebub's Tales to His Grandson.

Also, see Draft:Francis E. Dec for a mention of the paranoid schizophrenic idea that the Moon houses our real moon-brains in the brain-bank cities on the far side of the Moon that we never see, while people on this planet are remote-controlled Frankenstein slaves.

There's no doubt more, but that's all I have handy. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 22:03, 12 May 2021 (UTC)


Will mention this Anna Livia (talk) 22:51, 14 July 2021 (UTC)