- You havn't studied much
Mechanics, have you?. If you're going to try to

prove that the moon doesn't really exist, you should at least look up

your facts. I read you page with "proofs" and find it interesting but

the part where you claim that the moon should fall down (if it exists

that is) is based on weak knowledge. I suspect that you are quite

familiar with something called the Centrifugal force. In kids terms you

could say that the moon stays up (if it exists) because it goes around

the earth with such speed that the Centrifugal force and the Gravity

cancel each other out.

So, conclusively. Maybe the
moon doesn't exist (I've never been there..)

BUT Newton's equations is
not the way to prove it.

Sincerely

Henrik

First of all, you say that the moon stays in orbit because it is moving so fast. Well, I've been moon-watching for quite some time and it doesn't look like its going very fast to me. So if you intend to make such an assertion, you're going to have to back it up with some FACTS.

But even assuming that this is true (and considering the intellectual
dishonesty that the Lunar Establishment has shown in the past, I'm not
willing to automatically take it at face value) it should be pointed out
that all you have shown is that the moon *could* exist, not that it
*does*.
The burden is on those who assert that this absurd object hangs above the
earth to prove it. Speculation on how such a thing
*might be*
*possible* is not sufficient, as you well know.

But it is gratifying to hear from a scholar who is open to the possibility that revisionism might someday be vindicated after all, and I thank you for your contribution.

Yours in science,

**THE MAD REVISIONIST**

We do not recruit, we convince

Truth has no need for coercion

http://www.reptiles.org/~madrev/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm