Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition

I will be on a show soon talking about the dangers of the moon. What are the top 10 topics you'd like to hear about?

As a refresher, this is the previous discussion about dinosaurs:
At time marker, at around 30-35min
https://idobi.com/podcast/017-alien-abductee-josh-harvey-john-davis-flat-earth-dino-hoax/

I will be on a show soon talking about the dangers of the moon. What are the top 10 topics you'd like to hear about?

As a refresher, this is the previous discussion about dinosaurs:
At time marker, at around 30-35min
https://idobi.com/podcast/017-alien-abductee-josh-harvey-john-davis-flat-earth-dino-hoax/

Attraction by moonlight of angry dangerous faeries.

Contact lycanthropism.

Being black under moonlight in America.

Moonwave ebola.

Madness rays.

Lack of availability of moon milk.

How will I see at night?

You have been disqualified for posting only 7 topics.

Many viruses though do show strength during the full moon. I will cross reference against ebola - thank you.

Madness will be covered in detail.

I won't cover it, but yes those with darker skin pigments are less affected by luna's dangerous rays.

I will be on a show soon talking about the dangers of the moon. What are the top 10 topics you'd like to hear about?

As a refresher, this is the previous discussion about dinosaurs:
At time marker, at around 30-35min
https://idobi.com/podcast/017-alien-abductee-josh-harvey-john-davis-flat-earth-dino-hoax/

 

I doubt many will bother with your podcast,, but really?  Paleontologists are in to the conspiracy too?

If i was to ogranise a Diner de cons,, (dinner for schmucks , bad remake of the french original), i would mose definately invite one of your likes to ensure an entertaining evening.

Oh, I'm sure you are in a better position to judge who 'bothers with my podcast', than myself.

The only conspiracy paleontologists are in on, is a conspiracy of idiotocracy and ignorance; the only religion is one of science. You couldn't make up shoddier science if you tried.

So tell me, why did this little critter evolve?


Or this one:

That would kill himself whenever he ate.

Or how about this gem of a dragon:

It really gives new revelations about how flight works, and also about mythology. Good job paleontology!

Another fellow that can't even eat his own food without killing him self:


And this one, can't support the blood to his brain without having impossible pressure in his circulatory system!

Even when they give them pea sized brains, the math just doesn't work out.

Oh, I'm sure you are in a better position to judge who 'bothers with my podcast', than myself.

The only conspiracy paleontologists are in on, is a conspiracy of idiotocracy and ignorance; the only religion is one of science. You couldn't make up shoddier science if you tried.

Mentionning science here and there does not make it more scientific.
The only fact mentionned countless times on these forums is that science refutes every single arguments you or any other fe present.
Dont you detect a trend here?

Did anyone claim that mentioning science makes it more scientific, or is that just your round earth privilege rearing its ugly head?

I'm more than happy to change my mind on my views. Show me how I'm wrong. Yes, I detect a trend. People tend to believe what they already believe; likewise they tend to disagree with us. Do you have a point in your ramblings?

Or perhaps some evidence?

I hope you will be discussing the proper measures to take to protect ourselves from moonlight.

So tell me, why did this little critter evolve?

Funny thing is you would ask why and not how.

Quote from: John Davis on May 25, 2018, 03:08:09 PM

So tell me, why did this little critter evolve?

Funny thing is you would ask why and not how.

This is a good point. They are intertwined. How something happens, if we believe in evolution, is also why it happens. In this scope.

I hope you will be discussing the proper measures to take to protect ourselves from moonlight.

Yes. The only reason I'm doing this discussion is to spread knowledge for the public - we need to know how to protect ourselves from the dangers of the moon.

Quote from: Xphilll on May 25, 2018, 03:16:53 PM

Quote from: John Davis on May 25, 2018, 03:08:09 PM

So tell me, why did this little critter evolve?

Funny thing is you would ask why and not how.

This is a good point. They are intertwined. How something happens, if we believe in evolution, is also why it happens. In this scope.

Humm nhaaaa thats not at all how evolution works or at least based on the knowledge we have about it now.
Trial and error through random genetic mutations over vast periods of time is how it works in a nutshell. Why implies an intention.
I dont know where you got the images of those creatures but its almost certain they are imagined by artists that were asked to depict animals based on some bone fragments or fossil records. Some of those creatures may very well have been errors and went extinct sooner than others.

Yes. The only reason I'm doing this discussion is to spread knowledge for the public - we need to know how to protect ourselves from the dangers of the moon.

Given you current delusional beliefs on at least two subject matters, you may want to think again before spreading more "knowledge".
I honestly never heard about the dangers associated with moonlight but if the "knowledge" is emanating from a strong fe advocate, which again, have totally failed to present a single working piece of evidence to back up there ridiculous claims, there a good chance you will not be taken seriously.

Quote from: John Davis on May 25, 2018, 03:23:56 PM

Quote from: Xphilll on May 25, 2018, 03:16:53 PM

Quote from: John Davis on May 25, 2018, 03:08:09 PM

So tell me, why did this little critter evolve?

Funny thing is you would ask why and not how.

This is a good point. They are intertwined. How something happens, if we believe in evolution, is also why it happens. In this scope.

Humm nhaaaa thats not at all how evolution works or at least based on the knowledge we have about it now.
Trial and error through random genetic mutations over vast periods of time is how it works in a nutshell. Why implies an intention.

Why does not imply intention; as you said, why it happens is because it is more suitable to life. How it happens is a different conversation.

I dont know where you got the images of those creatures but its almost certain they are imagined by artists that were asked to depict animals based on some bone fragments or fossil records. Some of those creatures may very well have been errors and went extinct sooner than others.

Yes, paleontology is imagined by artists.

Quote

Yes. The only reason I'm doing this discussion is to spread knowledge for the public - we need to know how to protect ourselves from the dangers of the moon.

Given you current delusional beliefs on at least two subject matters, you may want to think again before spreading more "knowledge".
I honestly never heard about the dangers associated with moonlight but if the "knowledge" is emanating from a strong fe advocate, which again, have totally failed to present a single working piece of evidence to back up there ridiculous claims, there a good chance you will not be taken seriously.

Ok, let's talk about knowledge. How would you define "knowledge", so we can discuss it?

The act of gaining information over time?

Pretty much the opposite of here.

The act of gaining information over time?

Pretty much the opposite of here.

Oh wow, thanks again sokarul for failing to produce a coherent thought. The opposite of "here" is "gaining information over time"? As always on point. Don't you have some moonshramp to complain about?

To your point, its is the act of contextualizing that information gained over time;  collecting it alone leads us to silly ideas like spontaneous generation. Newts anyone? Maybe an apple?

Quote from: sokarul on May 25, 2018, 05:37:22 PM

The act of gaining information over time?

Pretty much the opposite of here.

Oh wow, thanks again sokarul for failing to produce a coherent thought. The opposite of "here" is "gaining information over time"? As always on point. Don't you have some moonshramp to complain about?

Here information is list over time.

But no I’m not into moonshrimp these days. I’m into the flags of New Zealand and Australia these days. Did you know they both have the Southern Cross on them? Who do you suppose is right?

Who do you suppose is right?

Nobody. Why do you ask?

Strange. I could have sworn the Southern cross existed. I mean it’s on their flags. Guess I will be in the back as you accept a Nobel Prize.

The moon is dangerous. No wonder my parents say that I should stay inside during night.

The moon is dangerous. No wonder my parents say that I should stay inside during night.

Exactly. Listen to your parents.

Experience has a weird way of teaching you that an old saying might have more truth to it than science would dictate.

So knowledge means nothing now? Why did you want the definition?

So knowledge means nothing now? Why did you want the definition?

If you have never heard about the dangers associated with the moon, its clear you have never read anything about the moon. Don't you wonder why its called lunacy?

When did I claim knowledge means nothing? You are fair to push back on this though, I must admit my answer was a bit short and rude and for that I apologize.

I wanted the definition so we could talk about it. You gave one I feel was mostly aimed at insulting the work we do here at the Society;

To the point though, information gained over time would include many things most would not count as knowledge, for example, a book of randomly typed characters. Since it includes the opposite of knowledge (supposedly disorder?), it cannot be the definition of knowledge itself - or at least a pretty useless one.

Quote from: sokarul on May 25, 2018, 07:00:30 PM

So knowledge means nothing now? Why did you want the definition?

If you have never heard about the dangers associated with the moon, its clear you have never read anything about the moon. Don't you wonder why its called lunacy?

Science is always looking into it. Not looking good.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lunacy-and-the-full-moon/

When did I claim knowledge means nothing? You are fair to push back on this though, I must admit my answer was a bit short and rude and for that I apologize.

I wanted the definition so we could talk about it. You gave one I feel was mostly aimed at insulting the work we do here at the Society;

You asked about the definition of knowledge and then enter an old wives' tale as evidence. The same type of tale that brought spontaneous generation.

Quote from: John Davis on May 28, 2018, 10:46:25 AM

Quote from: sokarul on May 25, 2018, 07:00:30 PM

So knowledge means nothing now? Why did you want the definition?

If you have never heard about the dangers associated with the moon, its clear you have never read anything about the moon. Don't you wonder why its called lunacy?

Science is always looking into it. Not looking good.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lunacy-and-the-full-moon/

Sokarul, your article just tried to tell me that gravity doesn't affect water that is enclosed.

Aside from talking almost solely about how the gravitational effects of the moon aren't the cause of madness, of course an obvious strawman (the light is the cause) - It also tried to make a point out of mosquitos not causing madness, in spite of you know... malaria.

On the other hand, for the moon's madness, it said 45% of educated collage students believe in the moons dangerous effects. It also said that experts in the field of medicine are even more likely to believe. 

The medical opinion is in Sokarul. I don't know why you are fighting it.

The article quotes those at the front lines, working in psychiatry, use the knowledge of the moon to help heal people.

The idea that "no evidence exists for it" is a patent false hood - They've provided a wealth of evidence for us.

Quote from: sokarul on May 28, 2018, 11:34:20 AM

Quote from: John Davis on May 28, 2018, 10:46:25 AM

Quote from: sokarul on May 25, 2018, 07:00:30 PM

So knowledge means nothing now? Why did you want the definition?

If you have never heard about the dangers associated with the moon, its clear you have never read anything about the moon. Don't you wonder why its called lunacy?

Science is always looking into it. Not looking good.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lunacy-and-the-full-moon/

Sokarul, your article just tried to tell me that gravity doesn't affect water that is enclosed.

Ok, terrific

Aside from talking almost solely about how the gravitational effects of the moon aren't the cause of madness, of course an obvious strawman (the light is the cause) - It also tried to make a point out of mosquitos not causing madness, in spite of you know... malaria.

What does malaria have to do with anything? Did you even comprehend what it was saying?

On the other hand, for the moon's madness, it said 45% of educated collage students believe in the moons dangerous effects. It also said that experts in the field of medicine are even more likely to believe. 

And?

The medical opinion is in Sokarul. I don't know why you are fighting it.

You still have no evidence just opinions.

The article quotes those at the front lines, working in psychiatry, use the knowledge of the moon to help heal people.

The idea that "no evidence exists for it" is a patent false hood - They've provided a wealth of evidence for us.

Wait, where is it?

Quote from: John Davis on May 28, 2018, 12:22:37 PM

Quote from: sokarul on May 28, 2018, 11:34:20 AM

Quote from: John Davis on May 28, 2018, 10:46:25 AM

Quote from: sokarul on May 25, 2018, 07:00:30 PM

So knowledge means nothing now? Why did you want the definition?

If you have never heard about the dangers associated with the moon, its clear you have never read anything about the moon. Don't you wonder why its called lunacy?

Science is always looking into it. Not looking good.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lunacy-and-the-full-moon/

Sokarul, your article just tried to tell me that gravity doesn't affect water that is enclosed.

Ok, terrific

So you agree?

Quote

Aside from talking almost solely about how the gravitational effects of the moon aren't the cause of madness, of course an obvious strawman (the light is the cause) - It also tried to make a point out of mosquitos not causing madness, in spite of you know... malaria.

What does malaria have to do with anything? Did you even comprehend what it was saying?

Quote

On the other hand, for the moon's madness, it said 45% of educated collage students believe in the moons dangerous effects. It also said that experts in the field of medicine are even more likely to believe. 

And?

And I'd rather in this case trust experts in the field than a fool that says gravity doesn't affect water in an enclosed body.

Quote

The medical opinion is in Sokarul. I don't know why you are fighting it.

You still have no evidence just opinions.

Yeah, I'm sure the majority of trained medical professionals have no basis for their beliefs. I'll remember that next time I get a shot. Are you anti-vax too?

Quote

The article quotes those at the front lines, working in psychiatry, use the knowledge of the moon to help heal people.

The idea that "no evidence exists for it" is a patent false hood - They've provided a wealth of evidence for us.

Wait, where is it?

On the other hand, for the moon's madness, it said 45% of educated collage students believe in the moons dangerous effects. It also said that experts in the field of medicine are even more likely to believe. 

1. Appeal to majority (logical fallacy).
2. Appeal to authority (logical fallacy).