Subject: more evidence that the moon is a fake
Date: Tue 01/30/2001 5:20 AM
Regarding your research regarding the so-called moon:
At last, someone has the courage to expose the emperors new clothes! However, I believe that some of your arguments may backfire. For example, you experiments with throwing things at the moon may be used by your enemies as evidence that your arguments are not scientifically rigourous. Most people cannot throw more than a couple of hundred feet, while the moon is at least half a mile up.
You have also missed some of the most damning evidence against the Great Hoax:
1. The moon can be seen in the day time.
The greatest argument used by the moon hoaxers is that "you can see it."
However, that is also their undoing. The moon is often visible during
the day, when the sun is out. The sun is so bright that you cannot even
see stars during the day. And the stars generate their own light! As anyone
can see at night, the moon, though larger, does not shine as brightly as
the stars. So if the moon is a celestial body as they claim, it could only
be seen when the stars are seen first. Yet the moon can be seen in the
as well as the night. Clearly it must exist within our atmosphere, just like its neighbours, the clouds.
2. There was no moon in Ancient America.
America is the great test of the moon hoax. If they knew of the moon, it must be genuine. If they did not, it must be fake. It is known that the ancient Maya and Inca peoples were great astronomers. So what happens? As soon as the europeans arrive, they burn all the ancient books (according to Diego di Landa, the sixteenth century Franciscan Friar responsible). Next, they try to destroy or assimilate the American culture. Finally, EUROPEAN "experts" move in who "discover" references to the moon in the ancient traditions. All a little too convenient. What are trying to hide? Simple. That the ancien Americant peoples did not have any concept of a "moon."
3. The argument from evolution.
It is well known that many animals (e.g. wolves) exhibit unusual behavior
at the time of the full moon. Clearly this is something that makes animals
uneasy. However, if the moon had existed since ancient times, animals would have got used to it from now.
Earlier generations did not take the moon as seriously as we do today. They knew it was a man-made idea, and a crude one at that. The original meaning of "lunatic" was one who believes in the moon. In Shakespeare's day, for example, the moon was not very reliable. Its human origins were obvious. Anyone who really believed the official story - that this was a natural phenomeonon in the heavens - was considered a fool. Even today, in England, to "moon" someone is to expose one's buttocks in ridicule.
As Velikovsky has pointed out, to ancient peoples the major heavenly body after the sun was Venus. To account for this, Velikovsky has constructed an elaborate re-working of history. But the simpler answer is staring us in the face. Venus as important because it was the next brightest object in the sky. Later redactors have tried to identify another object as "the moon" but whatever they refer to was clearly not the large imposing circle we see today.
6. The source of the myth
As scholars have long known, from Darwin to Freud, from the most ancient civilisations to the modern "experts," the sexual urge dominates human existence. Almost everything can be explained in terms of the desire to reproduce. Can it be coincidence that the world's greatest hoax - a four week long cycle of signs in the heavens - coincides with the female reproductive cycle? Can anyone believe that the two most obvious and important human time keepers - the female cycle and the moon - just happened, by chance, to keep the same period? What better way for a male dominated society to control women than to invent a huge sign in the heavens? It is a constant reminder that a woman's sexual cycle must be subservient to the male gods. The moon was invented as a female deity - which could then be made subservient to the male deity.
7. The Bible
The earliest parts of the Bible are silent regarding the moon. For examlple the creation story in Genesis simply refers to "thelesser light" at night - e.g. the stars. The word translated as "moon" is "yareach" (Strong's number 3394), which is based on the word for a woman's monthly cycle (Strong's 3391). In other words, the woman's cycle came to be associated with the calendar, as did the movements of the stars. This explains every reference in the Hebrew Bible. (It is only later translators who tried to personify this sexual cycle as something called "the moon.") This explains the clear meaning of the "moon" prophecies. E.g. Acts 2:18-20:
"And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: And I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come."This is a simple case of poetic parallelism (the favorite mode of Hebrew prophecy): The servants (men) and handmaidens (women) will be moved upon by God. There are wonders in heaven (male, above) and earth (female, below). The sun is dark (the heavens, above), and "moon" (the woman's sexual cycle) is blood (mixing menstruation with the image of death).
The other so-called "moon" scriptures can be explained in similar ways.
8. The rise of belief in the moon
While ancient people saw the monthly cycle for what it was, and medieval saw belief in a physical moon as the sign of a "lunatic," later peoples have become more convinced that it is a physical reality. This belief parallels the advances in sciencethat allowed the moon hoax to becoem more and more convincing. Moon belief was greatly strengthened after the Montgolfier brothers discovered how to keep a large object in the sky for a long period. Moon belief became unquestioned by the mid 20th century, when advanced technology made more spectacular illusions possible. If the moon had in fact been present since antiquity, we should expect modern man, as he became more scientifically literate, to become more willing to question the moon, not less.
9. The modern religion
Since time immemorial, mankind has worshipped deities who live in the sky. This is as much part of being human as having two arms or two legs. Every religion involves man's communion with the divine. Today, the deity is "science" as represented by man's landing on the moon. We are told that every previous generation was wrong, and our generation is different. Really? Didn't every generation believe that? Is it really likely that we have changed? Or isn't it far more likely that all the evidence is correct, and human nature has not changed one bit.
- Chris Tolworthy
|Back to: THE MAD REVISIONIST
We do not recruit, we convince
Truth has no need for coercion