Moon Negotiations - Moonlight is God?

Moonlight is the light that comes to Earth from the Moon. This light does not originate from the Moon, but actually originates from sunlight. The Moon does not, however, reflect sunlight like a mirror, but it reflects light from those portions of its surface which the Sun's light strikes.

Good post

Moonlight is the light that comes to Earth from the Moon. This light does not originate from the Moon, but actually originates from sunlight. The Moon does not, however, reflect sunlight like a mirror, but it reflects light from those portions of its surface which the Sun's light strikes.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claims?

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claims?

I can think of some evidence. Interested?

Hit me!

Quote from: Tewk on August 11, 2010, 12:35:32 PM

Moonlight is the light that comes to Earth from the Moon. This light does not originate from the Moon, but actually originates from sunlight. The Moon does not, however, reflect sunlight like a mirror, but it reflects light from those portions of its surface which the Sun's light strikes.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claims?

Please reference: http://www.extremescience.com/zoom/index.php/space/35-space-science/77-about-the-moon, Further evidence can be found at nasa.gov and the National Air and Space Museum. There are numerous articles, many peer-reviewed in top-shelf journal, too. Google is your friend.

Yet NASA is my enemy. You should know that by now!!

Yet NASA is my enemy. You should know that by now!!

I really don't care if NASA is your enemy, as I ignore all ad hominem fallacies. You should know that by now!! Deal with the evidence, not the person presenting it.

When you present me with some evidence I will gladly deal with it. Posting a web link to the NASA website is not the provision of evidence!

When you present me with some evidence I will gladly deal with it. Posting a web link to the NASA website is not the provision of evidence!

Yes, it is. And the Extreme Science link isn't a link to NASA by the way. You need only Google for the evidence. We don't hide it or pretend that it's
"secret" or like pongo said "not ready for publication". It's all there. That you won't look is a reflection, pun intended, on your character. In any decent telescope you can see the riles and shadows of the Moon. You can easily see with your own eyes how the shadows always point away from the Sun, just as RET predicts. You can discover the Truth for yourself, but you seem to wallow in the mire of 'dream states' and wild imaginings instead.

What sort of response am I supposed to give when you refuse to be even remotely specific with regard to evidence? I am not about to post a manifesto which deals with all amassable facts about the Moon - if you wish me to give you a response, you will have to be specific with regard to which aspect of Lunar theory you wish me to cover.

Just wondering, if the moon was a mirror, wouldnt the emittet light be uniform and of the same color and intensity as that of the sun?

What sort of response am I supposed to give when you refuse to be even remotely specific with regard to evidence? I am not about to post a manifesto which deals with all amassable facts about the Moon - if you wish me to give you a response, you will have to be specific with regard to which aspect of Lunar theory you wish me to cover.

The Extreme Science link is very specific. I haven't asked you for your evidence, have I? You asked us for ours and we gave it to you. Now you try to dodge a third time. Alight though, I play:

1) Provide evidence that the Moon shines by light produced within its surface and not first created by the Sun.
2) Provide evidence that the phases of the Moon are not caused as the Extreme Science link describes.
3) Provide evidence that the shadows on the Moon are not evidence that the Moon shines by the Sun's light.
4) Provide evidence that the riles on the Moon are not evidence that the Moon does not shine by its own light.

Once you answer those, I'll have many more challenges for you.

@James: You're one big ignorant tool, aren't yeah?

Quote from: Tewk on August 11, 2010, 12:35:32 PM

Moonlight is the light that comes to Earth from the Moon. This light does not originate from the Moon, but actually originates from sunlight. The Moon does not, however, reflect sunlight like a mirror, but it reflects light from those portions of its surface which the Sun's light strikes.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claims?

Here is a simple device that demonstrates the RE concepts of day, night, seasons, solstices, equinoxes, lunar phases and lunar eclipses.  Perhaps you could provide an equally simple and elegant device or model that demonstrates the equivalent FE phenomena.

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

No. Please pay attention.

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on August 11, 2010, 07:48:00 PM

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

No. Please pay attention.

Please look at the picture!

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

*sigh*  Asked and answered in another thread.  Yes, for the sake of illustration, the RE sun can be considered a spotlight.  However, that doesn't mean that the RE is indeed a spotlight.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 11, 2010, 07:50:49 PM

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on August 11, 2010, 07:48:00 PM

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

No. Please pay attention.

Please look at the picture!

Okay, now what? The model uses a spotlight and therefore the Sun is a spotlight. Is that your argument? You do understand how daft that argument is, right?

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on August 11, 2010, 07:51:20 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on August 11, 2010, 07:50:49 PM

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on August 11, 2010, 07:48:00 PM

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

No. Please pay attention.

Please look at the picture!

Okay, now what? The model uses a spotlight and therefore the Sun is a spotlight. Is that your argument? You do understand how daft that argument is, right?

I'm just wondering why such a simple and elegant model of RET still has to rely on a FET component!

Quote from: ClockTower on August 11, 2010, 07:56:54 PM

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on August 11, 2010, 07:51:20 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on August 11, 2010, 07:50:49 PM

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on August 11, 2010, 07:48:00 PM

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

No. Please pay attention.

Please look at the picture!

Okay, now what? The model uses a spotlight and therefore the Sun is a spotlight. Is that your argument? You do understand how daft that argument is, right?

I'm just wondering why such a simple and elegant model of RET still has to rely on a FET component!

What component from FET does it "have to rely on"? You're welcome to more accurately represent the Sun as a large fusion reactor in your version of the RET model, but I suspect this model does just fine in explaining the RET concepts to open-minded children. Now why it fails to get the point across to you, I'll reserve comment.

Quote from: ClockTower on August 11, 2010, 07:56:54 PM

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on August 11, 2010, 07:51:20 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on August 11, 2010, 07:50:49 PM

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on August 11, 2010, 07:48:00 PM

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

No. Please pay attention.

Please look at the picture!

Okay, now what? The model uses a spotlight and therefore the Sun is a spotlight. Is that your argument? You do understand how daft that argument is, right?

I'm just wondering why such a simple and elegant model of RET still has to rely on a FET component!

Since the RE receives less than 1% of the sun's light output, a spotlight is an acceptable substitute for illustrative purposes.  However, as I've said before, that does not mean that the real RE sun is a spotlight.

What sort of response am I supposed to give when you refuse to be even remotely specific with regard to evidence? I am not about to post a manifesto which deals with all amassable facts about the Moon - if you wish me to give you a response, you will have to be specific with regard to which aspect of Lunar theory you wish me to cover.

James denying evidence with a conspiracy theory is a prime example of why you are a prime example of what I have been talking about on the previous page. Here you make assertions of the moon being a "mirror" without evidence or even realizing how mirrors actually work. Next you deny evidence and then revert to circular argunments as a means to justify your denial of evidence. And saying the moon is a mirror is thus also asserting magical object as if you were casting magic missle in a D&D game. And may I ask what evidence do you have to show the evidence provided you is magically false? Did you bother to visit the links that show you how to track the moons orbit according to a spherical Earth to which would be impossible on a circular flat Earth? Of course not, and quitely expected.

ITT: Ichi deliberately misunderstands a concept to avoid answering a question.

Hit me!

Ofcourse the phases of the moon and the shadows on the surface that we discussed earlier are a stong evidence, but let me give you a new one now.

As you probably know, one can take a spectrum of some light source. This spectrum is quite unique for source as it provides unique information about its temperature and chemical composition. It turns out that the light that corresponds to the 'light' side of the moon is identical to sunlight. I would consider that a strong evidence too...

The albedo of the moons reflection is about 7 to 10% of the suns light. Regolith which is the dust that covers the surface of the moon, and this dust has the same reflectivity albedo that is consistent with said figures of 7 to 10 %.. The moons shadows are also consitent with this reflective quality.. In fact mythbusters have a very good video on this subject. No the moon is not a mirror, and yes it's reflective, however it is diffuse in nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albedo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regolith

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

Did you never get past kindergarten?

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on August 11, 2010, 07:48:00 PM

So the sun is a spotlight in RET as well 

Did you never get past kindergarten?

LULZ  

Quote from: James on August 11, 2010, 03:44:23 PM

Hit me!

Ofcourse the phases of the moon and the shadows on the surface that we discussed earlier are a stong evidence, but let me give you a new one now.

As you probably know, one can take a spectrum of some light source. This spectrum is quite unique for source as it provides unique information about its temperature and chemical composition. It turns out that the light that corresponds to the 'light' side of the moon is identical to sunlight. I would consider that a strong evidence too...

As a matter of fact, this has been submitted to direct experiment by zetetic scientists, and it has been demonstrated conclusively (besides being common knowledge anyway) that the Moon's light is not attended by even the slightest heat. Whither has the Sun's heat gone, if, as you claim, it is reflected onto the Moon? For as you rightly assert, the Sun's light ought to be traceable by virtue of its temperature characteristics!

Quote from: Hortensius on August 11, 2010, 10:24:51 PM

Quote from: James on August 11, 2010, 03:44:23 PM

Hit me!

Ofcourse the phases of the moon and the shadows on the surface that we discussed earlier are a stong evidence, but let me give you a new one now.

As you probably know, one can take a spectrum of some light source. This spectrum is quite unique for source as it provides unique information about its temperature and chemical composition. It turns out that the light that corresponds to the 'light' side of the moon is identical to sunlight. I would consider that a strong evidence too...

As a matter of fact, this has been submitted to direct experiment by zetetic scientists, and it has been demonstrated conclusively (besides being common knowledge anyway) that the Moon's light is not attended by even the slightest heat. Whither has the Sun's heat gone, if, as you claim, it is reflected onto the Moon? For as you rightly assert, the Sun's light ought to be traceable by virtue of its temperature characteristics!

Please provide the scientific documentation that Moon's light contains no heat. Indeed please provide evidence that any photon doesn't provide some form of heat.

Of course, we expect you to dodge this challenge like you've done so often before.