The Anti-Moon...

a circle with infinite radius/diameter will appear to be a straight line.

a circle with infinite radius/diameter will appear to be a straight line.

And so?

a circle with infinite radius/diameter will appear to be a straight line.

In that case, it would not be a circle at all, but a straight line. What's your point exactly?

So the size of the antimoon increases and it gets closer to earth, making it appear as a straight line over the moon.

It would block out a nice portion of the night sky then. Good try.

It only blocks cold light from the moon, duh.

So what is cold light?

Remember it is in between the earth and the moon. I reckon it would have to be pretty close.

You guys are confusing an eclipse (what the anti-moon causes) and mere phases of the moon. The moon is not a sphere but a shell. As this shell rotates, you see the various phases.

Which brings us back, where is the anti-moon? Seems easy enough to notice an absence of stars in an otherwise star-filled night so why haven't astronomers noticed this yet?

You guys are confusing an eclipse (what the anti-moon causes) and mere phases of the moon. The moon is not a sphere but a shell. As this shell rotates, you see the various phases.

Which might make sense if the features on the moon moved and weren't constant as phases shifted and we observed the shape a shell would create as it rotated.

Troll harder.

You guys are confusing an eclipse (what the anti-moon causes) and mere phases of the moon. The moon is not a sphere but a shell. As this shell rotates, you see the various phases.

then why does one see different features, mountains, valleys, craters, move into the shadow(of earth). if moon was rotating this would not be so. also conflicts with FE's faq

Quote from: Dino on January 06, 2010, 03:40:28 PM

You guys are confusing an eclipse (what the anti-moon causes) and mere phases of the moon. The moon is not a sphere but a shell. As this shell rotates, you see the various phases.

Which might make sense if the features on the moon moved and weren't constant as phases shifted and we observed the shape a shell would create as it rotated.

Troll harder.

The "features" on the moon aren't on the moon. The moon projects light which travels through an outer translucent non-rotating shell which has various "features". We do observe the shape of a shell as it rotates.

Quote from: Dino on January 06, 2010, 03:40:28 PM

You guys are confusing an eclipse (what the anti-moon causes) and mere phases of the moon. The moon is not a sphere but a shell. As this shell rotates, you see the various phases.

also conflicts with FE's faq

So does reality, but that doesn't seem to matter to them.

Quote from: LiceFarm on January 06, 2010, 03:59:31 PM

Quote from: Dino on January 06, 2010, 03:55:04 PM

The "features" on the moon aren't on the moon. The moon projects light which travels through an outer translucent non-rotating shell which has various "features". We do observe the shape of a shell as it rotates.

Quote from: Its a Sphere on January 06, 2010, 03:46:20 PM

Troll harder.

why then is this line of ,what us REers call shadow, sometimes round, sometimes straight, sometimes in between?

The moon is a rotating shell emitting light. It is almost, but not quite, hemispherical in shape. The light emits outward only, not inside the shell. In one phase we see an entire hemisphere, as it rotates more we see only half of the hemisphere, as it has rotated almost 180 degreee, we see a crescent.  

As a point, why does a half moon have a straight line running through the middle, while a crescent moon is curved. That is a big flaw with the anti moon, as well as being able to see the rest of the moon if you look closely.

Nobody was ever claiming that the Antimoon caused the Moon's monthly cycles. You'd have to be a lunatic to claim that. If you read back, we have only ever suggested it causes eclipses, which are a different phenomenon entirely.

So why haven't astronomers spotted the lack of stars in a disc/spherical shape?

So why haven't astronomers spotted the lack of stars in a disc/spherical shape?

and why have they not seen stars through this "translucent non-rotating shell"?

Quote from: ugaboga313 on January 06, 2010, 04:28:09 PM

So why haven't astronomers spotted the lack of stars in a disc/spherical shape?

and why have they not seen stars through this "translucent non-rotating shell"?

Because the relatively brighter moon makes it hard for them to show up.

Quote from: knutin on January 06, 2010, 04:35:05 PM

Quote from: ugaboga313 on January 06, 2010, 04:28:09 PM

So why haven't astronomers spotted the lack of stars in a disc/spherical shape?

and why have they not seen stars through this "translucent non-rotating shell"?

Because the relatively brighter moon makes it hard for them to show up.

have you not seen stars through your telescope beside the moon?

Is there a frequently unanswered questions post yet?

Is there a frequently unanswered questions post yet?

Haha. Good idea!

Quote from: Hazbollah on January 06, 2010, 11:29:41 AM

As a point, why does a half moon have a straight line running through the middle, while a crescent moon is curved. That is a big flaw with the anti moon, as well as being able to see the rest of the moon if you look closely.

Nobody was ever claiming that the Antimoon caused the Moon's monthly cycles. You'd have to be a lunatic to claim that. If you read back, we have only ever suggested it causes eclipses, which are a different phenomenon entirely.

So what cause's the moon's monthly cycles in FE?

FE'ers can, through someone else's theory, argue how the earth can accelerate forever without ever reaching the speed of light and throw formula's at you. Let's face it, a very small percentage of people can explain the theory of relativity and probably fewer can understand it.

But to throw two softball questions at FE'ers
1 How come the anti-moon does not block out the light of other stars, thus proving it's existence
2 How come stars cannot be seen through the non rotating translucent disk in front of the rotating moon shell
   note: There are filters one can purchase for telescopes to see objects quite clearly close to moon

and Dino because you seem to like quotes

You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe. [Dr. Arroway in Carl Sagan's Contact (New York: Pocket Books, 1985]

So what cause's the moon's monthly cycles in FE?

There are different theories, but we believe it may be caused by the migration of the bio-luminescent organisms which live on the moon. I don't believe they have been given a name yet, so I've taken to calling them Lunites.

Quote from: onetwothreefour on January 06, 2010, 05:58:27 PM

So what cause's the moon's monthly cycles in FE?

There are different theories, but we believe it may be cause by the migration of the bio-luminescent organisms which live on the moon. I don't believe they have been given a name yet, so I've taken to calling them Lunites.

That might be the most sane answer I've read in this forum.Thank-you Lord

FE'ers can, through someone else's theory, argue how the earth can accelerate forever without ever reaching the speed of light and throw formula's at you. Let's face it, a very small percentage of people can explain the theory of relativity and probably fewer can understand it.

But to throw two softball questions at FE'ers
1 How come the anti-moon does not block out the light of other stars, thus proving it's existence
2 How come stars cannot be seen through the non rotating translucent disk in front of the rotating moon shell
   note: There are filters one can purchase for telescopes to see objects quite clearly close to moon

and Dino because you seem to like quotes

You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe. [Dr. Arroway in Carl Sagan's Contact (New York: Pocket Books, 1985]

The antimoon only significantly dims the cold light given off by the moon.

Quote from: knutin on January 06, 2010, 04:35:05 PM

Quote from: ugaboga313 on January 06, 2010, 04:28:09 PM

So why haven't astronomers spotted the lack of stars in a disc/spherical shape?

and why have they not seen stars through this "translucent non-rotating shell"?

Because the relatively brighter moon makes it hard for them to show up.

And when the moon isn't "shining relatively" brighter?  You know, when the shell has rotated and is facing away.

Quote from: onetwothreefour on January 06, 2010, 05:58:27 PM

So what cause's the moon's monthly cycles in FE?

There are different theories, but we believe it may be caused by the migration of the bio-luminescent organisms which live on the moon. I don't believe they have been given a name yet, so I've taken to calling them Lunites.

And what is this belief based on? (not the one where you don't believe that they have been given a name yet)

Lord Wilmore is absolutely right. The best guess at the moment is that prehistoric, possibly microbial life inhabited the terrestrial areas which harboured the Sun and the Moon. When the photoelectric effect turned them into massice discs and sent them hovering into the sky, they took their microbes with them. The microbes evolved two types of bioluminescence, both probably defense mechanisms against predation. The Solar microbes emitted hot light, which is today exploited by plants, but which also has cancerous effects and can temporarily blind predators, and the Lunites emitted cold light, which is more injurious to modern plants and animals, and can cause more permenant blindness and other ill effects. The Antimoon either lacks microbial life entirely, or its inhabitants never developed bioluminescence.