On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Richard G. Philllips wrote:
> Would you please name one --JUST ONE-- person having some sort of
> scientific credibility who has challenged the conventional notions of the moon.
Me. I have a BA in history, and often do machine code programming on my old ZX-Spectrum. I even do hardware extensions, e.g. solder joystick adapters. Therefore I qualify as engineer and consequently can be regarded as scientifically credible. I have done a forensic examination of the said matter, namely an empirical study in which I have thrown a given number of objects at the moon, a number large enough to be of statistical relevance. Here is my data:
> The problem with your "analogy" is that MANY persons have challenged
> conventional notions of the Holocaust and done so in ways that certainly
> deserve to be taken seriously. No one has done the same regarding the moon.
Here we see yet another conventionalist fall into the trap of thought-conservativism. Why should we believe the moon-hoax just because the moon-huggers have told us to believe for centuries? Why should we believe stories like the one by the famous "moon-scientist" Cyrano de Bergerac who claims to have fallen "down the moon" which is - as we all know - phyiscally impossible. The number of moon-revisionists is growing every day.
We deserve to be taken at least as seriously as the Holocaust-revisionists!
"Work is the curse of the drinking class."
Feedback: A Dissenting Interpretation of the above results
Back to THE MAD REVISIONIST