Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition

  • 101 Replies
  • 14928 Views
*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #60 on: June 01, 2018, 09:35:45 PM »

Here it is.
Quote
But there are at least three reasons why this explanation doesn’t “hold water,” pardon the pun. First, the gravitational effects of the moon are far too minuscule to generate any meaningful effects on brain activity, let alone behavior ... Second, the moon’s gravitational force affects only open bodies of water, such as oceans and lakes, but not contained sources of water, such as the human brain.
Ok, so first you meant to say moon's gravity. Originally you said they claim "gravity doesn't affect water." But now it's the moon's gravity.
Anyways the main part here is to look at the full quote.
Quote
But there are at least three reasons why this explanation doesn’t “hold water,” pardon the pun. First, the gravitational effects of the moon are far too minuscule to generate any meaningful effects on brain activity, let alone behavior. As the late astronomer George Abell of the University of California, Los Angeles, noted, a mosquito sitting on our arm exerts a more powerful gravitational pull on us than the moon does. Yet to the best of our knowledge, there have been no reports of a “mosquito lunacy effect.” Second, the moon’s gravitational force affects only open bodies of water, such as oceans and lakes, but not contained sources of water, such as the human brain. Third, the gravitational effect of the moon is just as potent during new moons—when the moon is invisible to us—as it is during full moons.
So you can see why they made the claim.
The claim is incorrect. I fail to see why you are presenting this as evidence against the dangerous nature of the moons light.
It is not incorrect for how it was used.
Quote

Quote
Quote
Do you feel that having a science degree means you wouldn't be an anti-vaxer? You are against the medical opinion on other topics, such as the dangers of the moon. Also, its clear that of those educated folks, 55% didn't believed in lunacy. Your degree then means little.
I'm not ignoring their medical opinion. It's their belief based on no evidence.
"A 2011 study published in the World Journal of Surgery found that more than 40% of medical staff believe that lunar phases can affect human behavior, even though most studies find no direct correlation between the full moon and hospital admission rates. "
And also no claims it's the light, but rather moon phase.
This is why you need to think more critically. This is also why I would not be an anti-vaxor.
Yeah I need to think more critically. Because, you know, hospital admission rates would be the best metric to use. Not.
So you are saying an accurate count of patients is not helpful? So if 30 full moon nights are slow at a hospital and one is busy then it was the moon? You really have no clue about how science works. Also the study you keep referencing doesn't actually make the claim it's the light itself, let alone polarized light.
Quote
Quote
Quote
I am at a loss to find any legitimate evidence against the moon's dangers from your silly article that says gravity doesn't affect enclosed water.
Back to the word "gravity". Why do you omit the part where they say "Moon's gravity"? Also it is well know the moon doesn't cause tides in a glass of water, if they were going for something like that.
Do you feel like the moon's gravity should act differently from every other known form of gravity? And you still aren't worried about the dangers of the moon?
The moon's gravity does not act differently, why do you ask?
Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #61 on: June 01, 2018, 10:00:45 PM »
Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
Rayleigh scattering polarises the the light from the sun and the moon:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Rayleigh sky model

The Rayleigh sky model describes the observed polarization pattern of the daytime sky. Within the atmosphere Rayleigh scattering of light from air molecules, water, dust, and aerosols causes the sky's light to have a defined polarization pattern. The same elastic scattering processes cause the sky to be blue. The polarization is characterized at each wavelength by its degree of polarization, and orientation (the e-vector angle, or scattering angle).

The polarization pattern of the sky is dependent on the celestial position of the sun. While all scattered light is polarized to some extent, light is highly polarized at a scattering angle of 90° from the light source. In most cases the light source is the sun, but the moon creates the same pattern as well. The degree of polarization first increases with increasing distance from the sun, and then decreases away from the sun. Thus, the maximum degree of polarization occurs in a circular band 90° from the sun. In this band, degrees of polarization near 80% are typically reached.
And moonlight is just reflected sunlight.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #62 on: June 02, 2018, 07:59:58 AM »

Here it is.
Quote
But there are at least three reasons why this explanation doesn’t “hold water,” pardon the pun. First, the gravitational effects of the moon are far too minuscule to generate any meaningful effects on brain activity, let alone behavior ... Second, the moon’s gravitational force affects only open bodies of water, such as oceans and lakes, but not contained sources of water, such as the human brain.
Ok, so first you meant to say moon's gravity. Originally you said they claim "gravity doesn't affect water." But now it's the moon's gravity.
Anyways the main part here is to look at the full quote.
Quote
But there are at least three reasons why this explanation doesn’t “hold water,” pardon the pun. First, the gravitational effects of the moon are far too minuscule to generate any meaningful effects on brain activity, let alone behavior. As the late astronomer George Abell of the University of California, Los Angeles, noted, a mosquito sitting on our arm exerts a more powerful gravitational pull on us than the moon does. Yet to the best of our knowledge, there have been no reports of a “mosquito lunacy effect.” Second, the moon’s gravitational force affects only open bodies of water, such as oceans and lakes, but not contained sources of water, such as the human brain. Third, the gravitational effect of the moon is just as potent during new moons—when the moon is invisible to us—as it is during full moons.
So you can see why they made the claim.
The claim is incorrect. I fail to see why you are presenting this as evidence against the dangerous nature of the moons light.
It is not incorrect for how it was used.
Quote

Quote
Quote
Do you feel that having a science degree means you wouldn't be an anti-vaxer? You are against the medical opinion on other topics, such as the dangers of the moon. Also, its clear that of those educated folks, 55% didn't believed in lunacy. Your degree then means little.
I'm not ignoring their medical opinion. It's their belief based on no evidence.
"A 2011 study published in the World Journal of Surgery found that more than 40% of medical staff believe that lunar phases can affect human behavior, even though most studies find no direct correlation between the full moon and hospital admission rates. "
And also no claims it's the light, but rather moon phase.
This is why you need to think more critically. This is also why I would not be an anti-vaxor.
Yeah I need to think more critically. Because, you know, hospital admission rates would be the best metric to use. Not.
So you are saying an accurate count of patients is not helpful? So if 30 full moon nights are slow at a hospital and one is busy then it was the moon? You really have no clue about how science works. Also the study you keep referencing doesn't actually make the claim it's the light itself, let alone polarized light.
Actually you don't. There are too many independent variables for admissions to be a useful metric. A painfully obvious example, less people may go to the hospital during the full moon due to increased visibility while driving.

An accurate count of patients would be more useful, which you didn't suggest originally, but it still falls pretty short - considering we are talking about a chronic disease with a long onset.

More useful would be information regarding rates of seizures, mania, etc in already afflicted patients which, as chance has it, supports notions regarding the dangers of the moon and are what lead to the belief maintaining throughout enlightenment.


Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
I am at a loss to find any legitimate evidence against the moon's dangers from your silly article that says gravity doesn't affect enclosed water.
Back to the word "gravity". Why do you omit the part where they say "Moon's gravity"? Also it is well know the moon doesn't cause tides in a glass of water, if they were going for something like that.
Do you feel like the moon's gravity should act differently from every other known form of gravity? And you still aren't worried about the dangers of the moon?
The moon's gravity does not act differently, why do you ask?
Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
I ask because you implied it does by wondering why I would talk about the moons gravity versus gravity. I do know that, but the particular way its oriented with the moon is unique.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2018, 08:02:01 AM by John Davis »

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #63 on: June 02, 2018, 08:02:40 AM »
Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
Rayleigh scattering polarises the the light from the sun and the moon:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Rayleigh sky model

The Rayleigh sky model describes the observed polarization pattern of the daytime sky. Within the atmosphere Rayleigh scattering of light from air molecules, water, dust, and aerosols causes the sky's light to have a defined polarization pattern. The same elastic scattering processes cause the sky to be blue. The polarization is characterized at each wavelength by its degree of polarization, and orientation (the e-vector angle, or scattering angle).

The polarization pattern of the sky is dependent on the celestial position of the sun. While all scattered light is polarized to some extent, light is highly polarized at a scattering angle of 90° from the light source. In most cases the light source is the sun, but the moon creates the same pattern as well. The degree of polarization first increases with increasing distance from the sun, and then decreases away from the sun. Thus, the maximum degree of polarization occurs in a circular band 90° from the sun. In this band, degrees of polarization near 80% are typically reached.
And moonlight is just reflected sunlight.
The moon, as you likely have heard, is self luminous. Yes, not all polarized light is dangerous, just those let off by the lunar organisms.

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #64 on: June 02, 2018, 08:30:21 AM »
Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
Rayleigh scattering polarises the the light from the sun and the moon:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Rayleigh sky model

The Rayleigh sky model describes the observed polarization pattern of the daytime sky. Within the atmosphere Rayleigh scattering of light from air molecules, water, dust, and aerosols causes the sky's light to have a defined polarization pattern. The same elastic scattering processes cause the sky to be blue. The polarization is characterized at each wavelength by its degree of polarization, and orientation (the e-vector angle, or scattering angle).

The polarization pattern of the sky is dependent on the celestial position of the sun. While all scattered light is polarized to some extent, light is highly polarized at a scattering angle of 90° from the light source. In most cases the light source is the sun, but the moon creates the same pattern as well. The degree of polarization first increases with increasing distance from the sun, and then decreases away from the sun. Thus, the maximum degree of polarization occurs in a circular band 90° from the sun. In this band, degrees of polarization near 80% are typically reached.
And moonlight is just reflected sunlight.
The moon, as you likely have heard, is self luminous. Yes, not all polarized light is dangerous, just those let off by the lunar organisms.
If only you had some evidence it was self luminous. That would be really helpful.

*

Crutchwater

  • 2151
  • Stop Indoctrinating me!
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #65 on: June 02, 2018, 08:58:53 AM »
Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
Rayleigh scattering polarises the the light from the sun and the moon:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Rayleigh sky model

The Rayleigh sky model describes the observed polarization pattern of the daytime sky. Within the atmosphere Rayleigh scattering of light from air molecules, water, dust, and aerosols causes the sky's light to have a defined polarization pattern. The same elastic scattering processes cause the sky to be blue. The polarization is characterized at each wavelength by its degree of polarization, and orientation (the e-vector angle, or scattering angle).

The polarization pattern of the sky is dependent on the celestial position of the sun. While all scattered light is polarized to some extent, light is highly polarized at a scattering angle of 90° from the light source. In most cases the light source is the sun, but the moon creates the same pattern as well. The degree of polarization first increases with increasing distance from the sun, and then decreases away from the sun. Thus, the maximum degree of polarization occurs in a circular band 90° from the sun. In this band, degrees of polarization near 80% are typically reached.
And moonlight is just reflected sunlight.
The moon, as you likely have heard, is self luminous. Yes, not all polarized light is dangerous, just those let off by the lunar organisms.

Do these luminous "Lunar organisms"  migrate in highly predictable patterns, to account for the phases we see?

Do they also coordinate their luminosity to present the shadows we clearly see on the lunar surface?

You sir, are a madman. Anyone who believes this excrement is a horrendous drain on the human gene pool.

I will always be Here To Laugh At You.

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #66 on: June 02, 2018, 09:27:54 AM »
Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
Rayleigh scattering polarises the the light from the sun and the moon:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Rayleigh sky model

The Rayleigh sky model describes the observed polarization pattern of the daytime sky. Within the atmosphere Rayleigh scattering of light from air molecules, water, dust, and aerosols causes the sky's light to have a defined polarization pattern. The same elastic scattering processes cause the sky to be blue. The polarization is characterized at each wavelength by its degree of polarization, and orientation (the e-vector angle, or scattering angle).

The polarization pattern of the sky is dependent on the celestial position of the sun. While all scattered light is polarized to some extent, light is highly polarized at a scattering angle of 90° from the light source. In most cases the light source is the sun, but the moon creates the same pattern as well. The degree of polarization first increases with increasing distance from the sun, and then decreases away from the sun. Thus, the maximum degree of polarization occurs in a circular band 90° from the sun. In this band, degrees of polarization near 80% are typically reached.
And moonlight is just reflected sunlight.
The moon, as you likely have heard, is self luminous. Yes, not all polarized light is dangerous, just those let off by the lunar organisms.

Do these luminous "Lunar organisms"  migrate in highly predictable patterns, to account for the phases we see?

Do they also coordinate their luminosity to present the shadows we clearly see on the lunar surface?

You sir, are a madman. Anyone who believes this excrement is a horrendous drain on the human gene pool.
I think he's just a conman. He likes the attention he gets from his occasional interview and such.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #67 on: June 02, 2018, 11:56:29 PM »
Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
Rayleigh scattering polarises the the light from the sun and the moon:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Rayleigh sky model

The Rayleigh sky model describes the observed polarization pattern of the daytime sky. Within the atmosphere Rayleigh scattering of light from air molecules, water, dust, and aerosols causes the sky's light to have a defined polarization pattern. The same elastic scattering processes cause the sky to be blue. The polarization is characterized at each wavelength by its degree of polarization, and orientation (the e-vector angle, or scattering angle).

The polarization pattern of the sky is dependent on the celestial position of the sun. While all scattered light is polarized to some extent, light is highly polarized at a scattering angle of 90° from the light source. In most cases the light source is the sun, but the moon creates the same pattern as well. The degree of polarization first increases with increasing distance from the sun, and then decreases away from the sun. Thus, the maximum degree of polarization occurs in a circular band 90° from the sun. In this band, degrees of polarization near 80% are typically reached.
And moonlight is just reflected sunlight.
The moon, as you likely have heard, is self luminous. Yes, not all polarized light is dangerous, just those let off by the lunar organisms.
If only you had some evidence it was self luminous. That would be really helpful.
The evidence towards it being dangerous is indeed the same evidence that says it is self luminous.

Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
Rayleigh scattering polarises the the light from the sun and the moon:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Rayleigh sky model

The Rayleigh sky model describes the observed polarization pattern of the daytime sky. Within the atmosphere Rayleigh scattering of light from air molecules, water, dust, and aerosols causes the sky's light to have a defined polarization pattern. The same elastic scattering processes cause the sky to be blue. The polarization is characterized at each wavelength by its degree of polarization, and orientation (the e-vector angle, or scattering angle).

The polarization pattern of the sky is dependent on the celestial position of the sun. While all scattered light is polarized to some extent, light is highly polarized at a scattering angle of 90° from the light source. In most cases the light source is the sun, but the moon creates the same pattern as well. The degree of polarization first increases with increasing distance from the sun, and then decreases away from the sun. Thus, the maximum degree of polarization occurs in a circular band 90° from the sun. In this band, degrees of polarization near 80% are typically reached.
And moonlight is just reflected sunlight.
The moon, as you likely have heard, is self luminous. Yes, not all polarized light is dangerous, just those let off by the lunar organisms.

Do these luminous "Lunar organisms"  migrate in highly predictable patterns, to account for the phases we see?

Do they also coordinate their luminosity to present the shadows we clearly see on the lunar surface?
If the first is true, the second would happen naturally due to the geography of the surface of the moon.
Quote
You sir, are a madman. Anyone who believes this excrement is a horrendous drain on the human gene pool.


Well, if it is of any man to judge what genes are best and what aren't, I guess you are the man?!

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #68 on: June 03, 2018, 12:00:17 AM »
Why would I be worried about reflected sunlight? You know polarized light is just light oriented in a certain way, right? And actually, you get polarized light from reflections.
Rayleigh scattering polarises the the light from the sun and the moon:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Rayleigh sky model

The Rayleigh sky model describes the observed polarization pattern of the daytime sky. Within the atmosphere Rayleigh scattering of light from air molecules, water, dust, and aerosols causes the sky's light to have a defined polarization pattern. The same elastic scattering processes cause the sky to be blue. The polarization is characterized at each wavelength by its degree of polarization, and orientation (the e-vector angle, or scattering angle).

The polarization pattern of the sky is dependent on the celestial position of the sun. While all scattered light is polarized to some extent, light is highly polarized at a scattering angle of 90° from the light source. In most cases the light source is the sun, but the moon creates the same pattern as well. The degree of polarization first increases with increasing distance from the sun, and then decreases away from the sun. Thus, the maximum degree of polarization occurs in a circular band 90° from the sun. In this band, degrees of polarization near 80% are typically reached.
And moonlight is just reflected sunlight.
The moon, as you likely have heard, is self luminous. Yes, not all polarized light is dangerous, just those let off by the lunar organisms.

Do these luminous "Lunar organisms"  migrate in highly predictable patterns, to account for the phases we see?

Do they also coordinate their luminosity to present the shadows we clearly see on the lunar surface?

You sir, are a madman. Anyone who believes this excrement is a horrendous drain on the human gene pool.
I think he's just a conman. He likes the attention he gets from his occasional interview and such.
Yeah, setting aside time each week to work on my passion, truth, really gets me off. There is nothing so exuberant as the feeling gotten by being a second hand citizen in intellectual discussion - while still standing by truth. Yes, I do like it when our views are noticed as interesting, and garner attention. Because they deserve attention and are the truth of the matter. Attention towards myself? I'd like less of it.

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #69 on: June 03, 2018, 12:12:56 AM »
What are the real dangers of the moon, and how is it self-luminous ? Since the topic is ''Dangers of the moon''. I looked at tje other tomic which tells us about dangers, and those ''recent researches'' web urls are 1910's newspapers.
Pretty much the kind of serious researches.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2018, 12:16:10 AM by Vanane »

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #70 on: June 03, 2018, 12:19:37 AM »
Madness, blindness, seizures, and general malaise.

Usually, this can be seen by noting accented symptoms in patients already showing chronic symptoms, as is typical to many long onset diseases. Often, when the symptoms delta are enough to measure, you are too far down the road of a disease to do much about it. This is why prevention is so important.

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #71 on: June 03, 2018, 12:42:25 AM »
1914. In 1914, in France, there was no running drinking water, treatments were pretty not like today, food was poor quality, etc. Probably the same case in most of ''civilised'' countries. Beside science was way less advanced compared to now. Obviously there was many sickness, seizures etc, because of the poor quality of life. And the ignorance of people made them bemieve that the full moon is the cause. Geniuses.

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #72 on: June 03, 2018, 12:46:38 AM »
This reminds me of toutankhamon's curse... Newspapers were lile ''OMG A CURSE WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE''
Finally, today's science explained what exactly happened. That's nothing about curses and stuff like that

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #73 on: June 03, 2018, 12:49:22 AM »
Isn't your example a prime example proving my point? That our ignorance often causes us to dismiss or accept true causes when we shouldn't? Why wouldn't that apply to this case, except because you say so?

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #74 on: June 03, 2018, 01:04:24 AM »
Our ignorance does cause us to do so, but since NASA, governments and ''they'' sent satellites, space rockets and the big ISS is hovering Earth, the ignorance in this case is rejecting every proof and pictures of a round earth. I mean, people litteraly are seeing a round earth, right now, in the space.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #75 on: June 03, 2018, 01:05:25 AM »
Our ignorance does cause us to do so, but since NASA, governments and ''they'' sent satellites, space rockets and the big ISS is hovering Earth, the ignorance in this case is rejecting every proof and pictures of a round earth. I mean, people litteraly are seeing a round earth, right now, in the space.
What would you expect a flat object to look like in curved space?

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #76 on: June 03, 2018, 01:09:09 AM »
A curved space ?

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #77 on: June 03, 2018, 01:10:35 AM »
Is space not curved?

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #78 on: June 03, 2018, 01:26:26 AM »
I don't get the link between curved space and the aspect of an object from space. Satellites and stuff took pictures of every angle of Earth, which seems to be round and without antarctica's wall

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #79 on: June 03, 2018, 01:53:33 AM »
Is space not curved?
Spacetime (not just space) in the vicinity of earth is very slightly curved . You might read The Physics Mill, Our Local Spacetime.
The curvature in the spacelike component of spacetime has virtually no effect on us because we travel so slowly in space (compared to c).
The curvature in the timelike component of spacetime, however, has a very significant effect because we travel at, you guessed it, one second/second.
This timelike component of spacetime is curved towards large masses (see the above mentioned article), so the object is accelerated towards the mass.

But this minute curvature of the spacelike component of spacetime does not even make straight lines appear to "curl up" but simply makes the effective diameter of a spherical mass the size of the earth seem a few millimetres larger that it would in Euclidean space.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #80 on: June 18, 2018, 08:09:26 AM »
Is space not curved?
Spacetime (not just space) in the vicinity of earth is very slightly curved . You might read The Physics Mill, Our Local Spacetime.
The curvature in the spacelike component of spacetime has virtually no effect on us because we travel so slowly in space (compared to c).
The curvature in the timelike component of spacetime, however, has a very significant effect because we travel at, you guessed it, one second/second.
This timelike component of spacetime is curved towards large masses (see the above mentioned article), so the object is accelerated towards the mass.

But this minute curvature of the spacelike component of spacetime does not even make straight lines appear to "curl up" but simply makes the effective diameter of a spherical mass the size of the earth seem a few millimetres larger that it would in Euclidean space.

We both know you don't know what you are talking about. Why should I trust your interpretation of this? Or some hack pop science writers?

*

THEREALDILL23

  • 76
  • A dreamer and a logical powerhouse
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #81 on: June 18, 2018, 08:34:38 AM »
I love how fast this got off topic, seriously guys do have some respect for people. Even us flat earther's don't go around barking at others without some type of reasoning. Evolution is one of the biggest lies in the world. Kent Hovind, is the a very good man to research regarding evolution and the age of the earth. ITS A VERY BIG CLUB, AND WERE NOT IN IT.
Not you or me or nobody hits harder than life, but its not about how hard you can hit; it about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. Take the punches and keep moving forward. THAT"S HOW WINNING IS DONE!

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #82 on: June 18, 2018, 09:33:10 AM »
They will take any chance to derail a thread rather than admit that a flatist might be correct.

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #83 on: June 18, 2018, 04:31:18 PM »
They will take any chance to derail a thread rather than admit that a flatist might be correct.

As long as a flatist stays in Plato's Cave, he is right, but the real world is outside of Plato's cave.
Where 12 men have walked on the moon, and the ISS orbits the earth.
And there is no threat from Moonlight.
The the universe has no obligation to makes sense to you.
The earth is a globe.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 49695
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #84 on: June 18, 2018, 04:50:18 PM »
You sure do love Plato's Cave, I bet you get a little tingle in your pants every time you say that.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #85 on: June 18, 2018, 05:13:22 PM »
You sure do love Plato's Cave, I bet you get a little tingle in your pants every time you say that.

YES and you are lost in it, and until you are able to understand that, you will not accept the real world outside of it.
You do see the world differently, and believe it, and that is why I will not call you a liar.
12 men that walked on the moon, during moon light, found no signs of life that would produce light, or any life whatsoever.
The the universe has no obligation to makes sense to you.
The earth is a globe.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #86 on: June 18, 2018, 07:40:37 PM »
Is space not curved?
Spacetime (not just space) in the vicinity of earth is very slightly curved . You might read The Physics Mill, Our Local Spacetime.
The curvature in the spacelike component of spacetime has virtually no effect on us because we travel so slowly in space (compared to c).
The curvature in the timelike component of spacetime, however, has a very significant effect because we travel at, you guessed it, one second/second.
This timelike component of spacetime is curved towards large masses (see the above mentioned article), so the object is accelerated towards the mass.

But this minute curvature of the spacelike component of spacetime does not even make straight lines appear to "curl up" but simply makes the effective diameter of a spherical mass the size of the earth seem a few millimetres larger that it would in Euclidean space.

We both know you don't know what you are talking about. Why should I trust your interpretation of this? Or some hack pop science writers?
Well, I know what I am talking about but you clearly don't know squat about General Relativity.

Please show some evidence that Einstein's General Relativity predicts any significant curvature of "space" near the earth or even near the sun.

You don't have to trust my "interpretation of this". Who would you suggest as an authority?


*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #87 on: June 18, 2018, 08:43:52 PM »
Its ok relativity is completely irrelevant.

Samuel Rowbotham
Damp and cold, powerfully sceptic
   “It is said that he moon has a pernicious effect upon those who in the East, sleep in its beams; and that fish having been exposed to them for only one night become most injurious to those who eat it” - rev j gadsby
   “At peckham rye, a boy named Lowry has entirely lost his sight by sleeping in a field in the bright moonlight”
   “If we place in an exposed position two pieces of meat, and one of them be subjected to the moon’s rays, while the other is protected from them by a screen or cover, the former will be tained with putrefaction much sooner than the other”, LEctures on Astronomy M. Arago

   In hindus, the sun is “Nidaghakara” creator of heat
         The moon is Sitala Hima “The cold” and “Himan’su” or “cold darting / radiating”

   
Evidence that educated people have believed Lunacy throughout history:

The Romans even believed that Moonlight solidified to form the gem known as Moonstone.

460 BC - 370 BC    Hippocrates and Aristotle
“No physician should be entrusted with the treatment of disease who was ignorant of the science of astronomy” Hippocrates


23 AD - 79 AD       Pliny The Elder
The moon “leads to the brain to be 'unnaturally moist' leading to madness.”

1493 AD - 1541 AD    Paracelsus
"mania has the following symptoms: frantic behaviour, unreasonableness, constant restlessness and mischievousness. Some patients suffer from it depending on the phases of the moon."

1564- AD - 1616 AD    William Shakespeare
"It is the very error of the moon, She comes more near the earth than she has wont, And makes men mad." Othello Act 5 1564- 1616

1723 AD - 1780 AD   Lord Blackstone
1834 AD - 1918 AD    Ewald Hering
"with full moon, increasing mania."


Today         
45% of educated college students believe in the moons dangerous effects
Over 50% of those in the field of medicine are likely to believe
   


General: craps, sea lice, worms and midges moon related behavior in lab
Modern Studies and Evidence
Animals
Increased Violence
Many animals make use of the weakened state of their prey and increase hunting
Fleas, Bradford Royal Infirmary in English, 2 years worth of records - higher bite count for humans admitted
European Eagle Owls
Aye Aye
Lions kill more the day after, when they usually hunt at night
More likely to kill humans 2011 PLOS ONE journal
11,613 cases of aggravated assault in a 5-year period: assaults occurred more often around the full moon.
Reference: Human aggression and the lunar synodic cycle (1978)
34,318 crimes in a 1-year period: crimes occurred more frequently during the full moon. 
Reference: J. Psychology, vol. 93:81-83, 1976.
Lieber  in National Criminal Justice RS showed an increase in homicide and aggravated assault around the full moon


Neurological Stress
Man sleeps worse
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-23405941
33 individuals over 30 days, longer to sleep up to 4 days prior and following the full moon
Crime rates are increased
"The increased incidence of crimes on full moon days may be due to "human tidal waves" caused by the gravitational pull of the moon."
Full Moon And Crime, Thakur CP, Sharma D.,
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6440656)
The incidence of crimes reported to three police stations in different towns (one rural, one urban, one industrial) was studied to see if it varied with the day of the lunar cycle. The period of the study covered 1978-82
Madness is increased   
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/644065
Seizure rates are increased
2008 Department of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, Institute of Neurology UCL
341 day study
Links seizure to moonlight
Correlation between intensity of the light and the seizures that incurred
Blocking the moonlight locally resulted in a drop in frequency and duration of seizures
Doodlebugs dig larger holes (even in the dark?)


Malaise
Acomys Cahirnus show drops in body temperature
Belize armadillos
Wolves hunt less,
Some scorpions glow, due to the moo   n attacking certain protein groups
Hospitalization Rates are increased
Surger success lower
Interactive Cardiovascular and thoracic surgery journal
Stayed 4 days less and less likely to die
Vet rates increased


A 2007 study of nearly 12,000 pet-injury cases at the Colorado State University Veterinary Medical Center revealed emergency-room visits were 23 percent higher for cats and 28 percent higher for dogs on days around the full moon.
Mating
Corals go into mating frenzy
Tungara frogs
Man’s reproductive cycle
Moon induced baby boom , Kyoto Japan, moon near the earth (super moon) showed more
US National Institutes of Health - increase in birth rates in Kyoto Japan, when the moon was closest and brightest
Lyme Disease Life Cycle
Food spoils faster
http://idnc.library.illinois.edu/cgi-bin/illinois?a=d&d=TUC19140217.2.21
Fish rots when left in the moonlight
Germ Activity increases
http://idnc.library.illinois.edu/cgi-bin/illinois?a=d&d=TUC19140217.2.21&srpos=10&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-moonlight+dangerous------
Reducing self exposure:
Bats reduce hunting
Nightjars (little brownbird) reduce hunting
May react otherwise
Pet visits increase during full moon
Microscopic
Lyme Disease is more dangerous   
Life cycle sinks up with moon
Darwin suggested that the fear of darkness
Specific Pathology On Man
« Last Edit: June 18, 2018, 08:46:20 PM by John Davis »

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #88 on: June 18, 2018, 08:47:19 PM »
No evidence. its a completely bunk idea that no one puts any credence to - you know except all of man. For all time.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Dangers of the Moon: Radio Edition
« Reply #89 on: June 18, 2018, 11:39:35 PM »
Its ok relativity is completely irrelevant.
You asked
Is space not curved?
And I answered with
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Spacetime (not just space) in the vicinity of earth is very slightly curved . You might read The Physics Mill, Our Local Spacetime.
The curvature in the spacelike component of spacetime has virtually no effect on us because we travel so slowly in space (compared to c).
The curvature in the timelike component of spacetime, however, has a very significant effect because we travel at, you guessed it, one second/second.
This timelike component of spacetime is curved towards large masses (see the above mentioned article), so the object is accelerated towards the mass.

But this minute curvature of the spacelike component of spacetime does not even make straight lines appear to "curl up" but simply makes the effective diameter of a spherical mass the size of the earth seem a few millimetres larger that it would in Euclidean space.
So my bringing relativity into the discussion was not completely irrelevant.

I'll let you ramble on all you like about moonlight which is, of course, nothing more than very greatly attenuated sunlight.