This is typical among those who claim to be “enlightened” (who didn’t do well in their sciences and math curriculum) to all of a sudden know that alternative viewpoints are more acceptable without proof except in the form of youtube videos that they believe to be “truth” and that the current scientific method is a perpetual tool of control of how we think as humans. Whether these alternative viewpoints are fueled by creationists, apocalyptic christians, new-age pinal gland 5th dimensionists, they all seem to make outlandish claims and accept them as truth which fail to stand up on their own to reality, but instead try to gain traction by citing quite convoluted terms/expressions and dance around the rigeurs of proof.
The fearmongering is like a flame to the moths to get youtube views and advertising money.
Try to explain this full moon next to sun.
The official explanation of the moon phases is a lie. But don’t you want to believe in lies ?
The next article about the moon will make you mad, it will be like a headshot.
If they’ve been lying to us about the moon, what else have they been lying to us about?! I fear this goes deep. Perhaps Snapple isn’t really made with the Best Stuff on Earth!
I was about to cut a bitch for being the newbie who revived this zombie, but I see it’s just Karol bumping his own thread.
Dude, you know it’s just going to get locked down, right? You have no real proof, you post no direct substantial replies to people who try to engage, and you’re snaky to people when they attempt to show evidence to you.
Karol, we have two explanations of these images proposed here:[ol][li]the “moon” is a camera lens reflection, or[*]the real moon is in the wrong place astronomically, and may even be in front of some clouds, so it’s only a few miles above the Earth.[/ol]The first explanation fits everything we know about optics, physics, history and photography, the second requires a major change to every physics book and equation ever written, and makes it impossible for space flight, aeronautics, and satellites to exist.[/li]
So what makes you choose explanation #2 over #1?
Karol, I know the sky. I watch the sky. I’ve seen the moon and the sun with my own 2 eyes and will tell you with 100% certainty that what you show in your picture never happened. You’re the worst kind of fool. Many others have peddled bullshit on this site but at least they had the courtesy to be entertaining. You’re just a bore.
That one’s easy. It’s a wide angle shot showing 180º+ of the sky. The angle of lighting on the moon is a product of camera optics, not lunatic-fringe cosmology.
On the other hand, what is your explanation for the full moon next to the sun? I fail to see how being inside a concave earth would produce that arrangement.
It’s round and we live on the outside surface. Well, most of us do.
Yeah, it is. And it gets more tired and pathetic every time you start one like it.
No you don’t. You count on people ignoring centuries of scientific evidence and rushing to support your lunatic fringe theories. How is that going for you?
You’ll have in the next article. So far you’re utterly wrong about this one, this not some optical malformation, sorry. http://koti.kapsi.fi/~leknu/moon-sun.jpg
