Moon light - the word of God vs falsely so called science

[eleos1954]

Well anytime you want to model that and prove the moon is lit by the sun. Let me know i would like to see your model in person.

It is simple just take a dark room take a sphere shape (to represent the moon) and a light source to represent the sun and light up the moon while keeping your room dark as seen in sciences outer space.

Oh and also do not show any light from the sun, lighting the moon, the moon should just shine in the room as if it is a light source itself.

The moon shines because its surface reflects light from the sun. And despite the fact that it sometimes seems to shine very brightly, the moon reflects only between 3 and 12 percent of the sunlight that hits it.

Why Does the Moon Shine?

 

[d taylor]

nasa better tell the Chinese and Japan to improve their fakes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

For what it's worth, and that may not be much, I find Tom's arguments here more convincing than yours. This is largely because his are arguments and yours seem more like assertions. It's the first occasion in reading hundreds of your posts that I've found myself at odds with your conclusions. Just something for you (and probably me) to reflect on. (Or not.)

Frankly it would be nice if he supported his arguments with a bit more than 'because I say so'. Even a poor link beats no links at all.

 

[Tom 1]

Frankly it would be nice if he supported his arguments with a bit more than 'because I say so'. Even a poor link beats no links at all.

I’ve given you a pretty comprehensive reading list to get started.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I’ve given you a pretty comprehensive reading list to get started.

Sorry, that is not the way it works. Try again. You need to support your claims. There is no onus on me to see if you are right or not.

 

[Tom 1]

Sorry, that is not the way it works. Try again. You need to support your claims. There is no onus on me to see if you are right or not.

I’m not interested in whether you think I’m right or not. If you are going to engage in discussion, it would be advisable either to educate yourself about it or stick to topics you have some knowledge of. Having some superficial discussion based on a few wiki pages or something of that sort is pointless, unless your aim is to avoid having to evaluate the notions behind your various disjointed comments. Actually I don’t get why your made any of them, what would you say is the point of simply making random assertions about something you know very little about?
Anyway this has been a waste of time, over and out.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I’m not interested in whether you think I’m right or not. If you are going to engage in discussion, it would be advisable either to educate yourself about it or stick to topics you have some knowledge of. Having some superficial discussion based on a few wiki pages or something of that sort is pointless, unless your aim is to avoid having to evaluate the notions behind your various disjointed comments. Actually I don’t get why your made any of them, what would you say is the point of simply making random assertions about something you know very little about?
Anyway this has been a waste of time, over and out.

Then why even respond if you cannot make a proper argument? If your evidence is so weak that you cannot even refute a few "superficial Wiki pages" then why bother posting. The work that others do in responding to you mirrors your own posts. You set the bar very low by merely claiming that there are sources that disagree with me.

 

[morse86]

If the moon makes its own light, why are there phases?

What does that have to do with producing light? Moon has phases but still produces light.

 

[tas8831]

What does that have to do with producing light? Moon has phases but still produces light.

How?

 

[morse86]

How?

Huh? The moon has phases where it produces light or it doesn't. What's the big problem?

 

[tas8831]

Huh? The moon has phases where it produces light or it doesn't. What's the big problem?

Huh? The fact that the moon is basically dust and rock is the big problem for it "producing" light.

 

[morse86]

Huh? The fact that the moon is basically dust and rock is the big problem for it "producing" light.

How do you know it's dust and rock? All you have is NASA's Telievision movie. Forget the fact they are still trying to get to the moon after losing the technology from Apollo. Forget the fact they are still trying to get through van allen radiation belts after doing so in apollo. Forget the fact that prius and tesla have decade battery life while voyager has been going almost 50 years with the same battery (and recharge).

I mean it's just ridiculous the people have become this gullible. I guess that's why the bible says many are deceived and it makes a distinction between REAL science and falsely so called $cience.

 

[tas8831]

How do you know it's dust and rock? All you have is NASA's Telievision movie.

If you say so.,

Forget the fact they are still trying to get to the moon after losing the technology from Apollo. Forget the fact they are still trying to get through van allen radiation belts after doing so in apollo. Forget the fact that prius and tesla have decade battery life while voyager has been going almost 50 years with the same battery (and recharge).

I will forget all of that phony conspiracy crap, thanks.

I mean it's just ridiculous the people have become this gullible. I guess that's why the bible says many are deceived and it makes a distinction between REAL science and falsely so called $cience.

The projective irony is astounding.

I note that you did not explain how the moon produces light. Which I would avoid doing if I relied on ancient middle eastern tales for my "science". I do wonder how the moon can 'turn off' its lights to coincide with the earth's shadow being cast on it.....
I'm sure there is a bible verse that will provide details, yes?

 

[morse86]

If you say so.,
I will forget all of that phony conspiracy crap, thanks.

The projective irony is astounding.

I note that you did not explain how the moon produces light. Which I would avoid doing if I relied on ancient middle eastern tales for my "science". I do wonder how the moon can 'turn off' its lights to coincide with the earth's shadow being cast on it.....
I'm sure there is a bible verse that will provide details, yes?

Do you realize what you are saying? Conspiracies happen all the time, all through out the world. Your own media tells you conspiracies happen.

Why do you dismiss so easily? Have you done proper research and VENTED both sides of the arugment? Have you PROVED all things using the word of God?

I work in IT and security, and let me tell you....both software and hardware has billions of bugs. Anyone in programming knows you can NEVER get it right the first time. The technology in the 50s were so primitive...it's just unimaginable, it boggles the mind how they could even get to outerspace using that trash.

Programming was so utterly bad that there's even a famous quote by the legend of structured programming edgar dijkstra, "you're doing it wrong". This garbage could not even get off the atmosphere as demonstrated by Neil Armstrong's hoax test flights.

Toyota Prius batteries are pretty much dead after 10 years. The voyager batteries kept on going for 50 years and NASA did not share technology? Really??????

 

[46AND2]

Toyota Prius batteries are pretty much dead after 10 years. The voyager batteries kept on going for 50 years and NASA did not share technology? Really??????

Prisuses don't use nuclear batteries.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you realize what you are saying? Conspiracies happen all the time, all through out the world. Your own media tells you conspiracies happen.

Why do you dismiss so easily? Have you done proper research and VENTED both sides of the arugment? Have you PROVED all things using the word of God?

I work in IT and security, and let me tell you....both software and hardware has billions of bugs. Anyone in programming knows you can NEVER get it right the first time. The technology in the 50s were so primitive...it's just unimaginable, it boggles the mind how they could even get to outerspace using that trash.

Programming was so utterly bad that there's even a famous quote by the legend of structured programming edgar dijkstra, "you're doing it wrong". This garbage could not even get off the atmosphere as demonstrated by Neil Armstrong's hoax test flights.

Toyota Prius batteries are pretty much dead after 10 years. The voyager batteries kept on going for 50 years and NASA did not share technology? Really??????

Wow! So much wrong. They had more than enough time to get the programming right. The computer systems were far simpler then. They could not have the complex computer programs of today. If you ever took any coding classes you will know that introductory programs are very easy to debunk. The programs on the LEM were not introductory level, but they are nowhere near even the simplest of programs that one sees in business today. There are sometimes advantages to having limited hardware. Second the videos that came back from the Moon show effects that would be impossible to do with the technology of that time. If you are in IT you would instantly realize this. Thirdly the Voyager batteries are totally different from Prius batteries:


Interstellar 8-Track: How Voyager's Vintage Tech Keeps Running

The batteries on the voyager are powered by radioisotopes, not by chemicals. Let's not compare apples and petunias.

 

[morse86]

Folks, use some discernment, prove all things:

That's Neil Armstring trying to flying the LEM on earth. This is with the worst programming languages around, worse hardware, just primitive garbage technology. A lot of it was rapidly changing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Prisuses don't use nuclear batteries.

Funny that one can't walk to the corner convenience store and pick up some. I guess that I will have to make my own. Do you know where I can buy some Plutonium-238? They don't seem stock it at Lowe's.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Folks, use some discernment, prove all things:

That's Neil Armstring trying to flying the LEM on earth. This is with the worst programming languages around, worse hardware, just primitive garbage technology. A lot of it was rapidly changing.

And with a gravitational force six times as strong it would be much more difficult to fly on Earth. Or did that fact escape you?

 

[morse86]

And with a gravitational force six times as strong it would be much more difficult to fly on Earth. Or did that fact escape you?

Maybe the water had fluoride?

Maybe the planets didn't align?

As a programmer myself, this is based on ONE VARIABLE. ONE VARIABLE. You mean these pathetic programmers of NASA didn't adjust for one VARIABLE??? BS, real programmers were busy working in the free market instead of fake BS NASA TV propoganda. You know, actually inventing real stuff.

You can read the struggles and battles of Commodore vs Intel for some context.