Who Built the Moon?

[imported_tss4]

The author seems to get a lot of mileage on the megolethic yard. He seems convinced that since most ancient buildings can be measured by intervals of this yard AND the distribution of slight variations from this yard are heavily centered toward one value (and not evenly distributed) that its proof that a single value was used.

HOWEVER, since the yard was based on a measurement of a human body part, statistically, it would center sharply on one measurement anyway (the average of that body part - It would probably be a guassian curve). His conclusions on some of these basic details are just plain wrong. I've read the first chaprter so I can;t comment on the later chapters other than to say, if he messes up on the basics this early on, I doubt there is much to his later and more radical conclusions.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

I haven't read the book, and I doubt I'd waste my time, but the review makes some odd comments, such as:

"The Metric system, which is now universally adopted across the world for scientific measurement, appears to have been created specifically to highlight the peculiarities of the Moon."

The metric system was created to define the distance from the equator to the North pole as 10 million meters. With such a relatively small measurement, I guess you can find all kinds of odd relationships when applied to large objects such as the sun, earth, and moon.

His thesis seems to rely on the positional relationship between he sun, earth, and moon as well. That's fine for now, but the distance between the earth and the moon is increasing at a steady rate of 3.8 centimeters a year. Additionally, the tidal interaction between the earth and moon is slowing the rotation of the earth down. So it seems this guy's calculations won't be valid in the long term future since some of the values are changing as we speak.

 

[engineereeyore]

Possibly off the topic of the moon, but here's an idea. I'll state first that I am a believer of religion and do believe in God. However, I also believe God to be the greatest scientist even known. Let's face it. If he did everything some of us think he did, he'd have to know a bit about science.

Anyway, on to the "idea." Is it possible that the reference in the Bible to the creative periods, specifically the word "day," was not quite as we understand it today. Perhaps a better word would have been "era" or "time period." If this is the case, why is it not possible that God actually used evolution to create man? I mean, I don't see monkeys turning into humans today, though granted, I don't get out much. Who's to say the creation of the world didn't take a long period of time and the evolution wasn't a part of it?

Just an idea, not presenting this as doctrine or pure scientific understand or any crap like that. Just want to know what people think. Is it possible?

 

[ExpertNovice]

"Using cast-iron proof"

"proves conclusively"

Can't argue with that "logic."




"no matter how clever we think we are today, greater minds have existed in the remote past"

Of course. There is always a range of intelligence and knowlege.

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: MrNutz


Over time ethniticities have merged, inducing unpure, weak links in our DNA structure.

Yea, can't have them darkies mixing in with the whites.

 

[glugglug]

The #s are fudged (wrong) to make their point. For example, the moon revolves around the Earth in 29.5 days, not 27.32.

Agnostic my ass.

Is that site a parody?

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: tss4
HOWEVER, since the yard was based on a measurement of a human body part

<looking down>
dayum, and I thought I was well hung!
</looking down>

 

[sourceninja]

God created evolution. He wanted to see what would happen if he made some random stuff as his perfect creations (angels) where getting annoying as they were too perfect. Obviously god is flawed though, because he could not forsee a revolt in heaven. So he wasn't sure what would happen. After things got rolling he decided to make a few changes (flood earth, burn citys down, etc). But eventually he lost interest a few thousand years ago and has sense moved on to bigger and better things. I doubt he even pays attention to earth anymore. This is why we have not had any huge mega divine intervention in the last few thousand years.

Now it is all running out of control and crazy stuff is happening. See I just explained the universe.

 

[Carazariah]

Originally posted by: MrNutz
I guess I see what you're getting at, but your point seems to be backwards. If evolution does not involve an intelligent designer, then over the course of the Earth's history we were never "created"... instead we came to be after many things "evolved" to a point to sustain us. To tell you the truth, I used to strongly believe in evolution, even after I was saved.

But after looking at the Earth from the perspective that God does exist, my theories on evolution become dimmer and dimmer. I guess the majority of the reason is that my bias for evolution was that I had never seen absolute proof that God exists so evolution was a better claim on how everything came to the state it is now. And really most of my arguments were'nt to prove evolution, just to prove against intelligent design, or as you say "ID" for brevity.

Now that I have accepted Jesus as my savior and have personal conviction in God's existance and intervention in my life, my mind is free to look at both of these points as facts (ID and evolution)... yet evolution just doesn't add up. Over history we have digressed in our DNA not improved. --As I like to say, "I've got brown hair and a red goatee so I'm an american mutt". Mildly humorous joke, (irish, french, german, and scottish mixed) but very true of most everyone in this world. Over time ethniticities have merged, inducing unpure, weak links in our DNA structure. Also, as time progessed so did human lifetimes due to improved education and health which furthers the lineage of those that would have lost the "natural selection" struggle of prior mankind.

Yet if this process has been going on for thousands of years, why is the Earth so spectacular with life in comparison to other planets? Everything on Earth and within the moral nature of people is perfect. One insect interacts with another that sustains the life of a bacteria that solely completes a specific animals digestive process so that it may thrive long enough to spread certain plants seeds through it's feces allowing the plant to mature properly and recycle the air that we rely on. -- Just look at any of God's creatures and start building a chain. - Everytime you will claim "Eureka!" once you understand the perfect purpose that organism completes to sustain life in this world.

And even as humans, we claim absolute strength over other creatures... claiming them to be only "mankind". Yet not one of us can set an absolute date as to when our body will perish in the this world nor can we absolutely extend our life one day. It's common knowledge that everyday is a gamble. -That's why we grieve when our loved ones pass from this world... the time is always unexpected.

I came to that realization over a year ago when I finally admitted I didn't have all the answers, nor will I ever. But if there was a creator, an absolute God that cherished me over everything in this world and wanted the best for me.. then I was willing to seek Him out and discover why He created such an perfect world and why He put me in it. Now I know absolutely that was the best decision I ever made for the rest of eternity.

Well said. .
C

 

[RichPLS]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: MrNutz
I guess I see what you're getting at, but your point seems to be backwards. If evolution does not involve an intelligent designer, then over the course of the Earth's history we were never "created"... instead we came to be after many things "evolved" to a point to sustain us. To tell you the truth, I used to strongly believe in evolution, even after I was saved.

But after looking at the Earth from the perspective that God does exist, my theories on evolution become dimmer and dimmer. I guess the majority of the reason is that my bias for evolution was that I had never seen absolute proof that God exists so evolution was a better claim on how everything came to the state it is now. And really most of my arguments were'nt to prove evolution, just to prove against intelligent design, or as you say "ID" for brevity.

Now that I have accepted Jesus as my savior and have personal conviction in God's existance and intervention in my life, my mind is free to look at both of these points as facts (ID and evolution)... yet evolution just doesn't add up. Over history we have digressed in our DNA not improved. --As I like to say, "I've got brown hair and a red goatee so I'm an american mutt". Mildly humorous joke, (irish, french, german, and scottish mixed) but very true of most everyone in this world. Over time ethniticities have merged, inducing unpure, weak links in our DNA structure. Also, as time progessed so did human lifetimes due to improved education and health which furthers the lineage of those that would have lost the "natural selection" struggle of prior mankind.

Yet if this process has been going on for thousands of years, why is the Earth so spectacular with life in comparison to other planets? Everything on Earth and within the moral nature of people is perfect. One insect interacts with another that sustains the life of a bacteria that solely completes a specific animals digestive process so that it may thrive long enough to spread certain plants seeds through it's feces allowing the plant to mature properly and recycle the air that we rely on. -- Just look at any of God's creatures and start building a chain. - Everytime you will claim "Eureka!" once you understand the perfect purpose that organism completes to sustain life in this world.

And even as humans, we claim absolute strength over other creatures... claiming them to be only "mankind". Yet not one of us can set an absolute date as to when our body will perish in the this world nor can we absolutely extend our life one day. It's common knowledge that everyday is a gamble. -That's why we grieve when our loved ones pass from this world... the time is always unexpected.

I came to that realization over a year ago when I finally admitted I didn't have all the answers, nor will I ever. But if there was a creator, an absolute God that cherished me over everything in this world and wanted the best for me.. then I was willing to seek Him out and discover why He created such an perfect world and why He put me in it. Now I know absolutely that was the best decision I ever made for the rest of eternity.

You should give credite were credit is due, most of that is Hovind.
What isn't you just mede up.

So hovind is made up and your speeach is made up, that fits's the description of ID, made up.

Sell me something new.

And yeah, hello old fiiends, netopia, moonbeam, nutxo,n0c and others.

We love you tabb we alway have.

Well said.

 

[Bitek]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
Possibly off the topic of the moon, but here's an idea. I'll state first that I am a believer of religion and do believe in God. However, I also believe God to be the greatest scientist even known. Let's face it. If he did everything some of us think he did, he'd have to know a bit about science.

Anyway, on to the "idea." Is it possible that the reference in the Bible to the creative periods, specifically the word "day," was not quite as we understand it today. Perhaps a better word would have been "era" or "time period." If this is the case, why is it not possible that God actually used evolution to create man? I mean, I don't see monkeys turning into humans today, though granted, I don't get out much. Who's to say the creation of the world didn't take a long period of time and the evolution wasn't a part of it?

Just an idea, not presenting this as doctrine or pure scientific understand or any crap like that. Just want to know what people think. Is it possible?

The thing that bothers me about certain proposals of this (such as some of the ID incarnations) that once you introduce God into directing Evolution you remove Free Will.

Were all the trillions of selection events that led to our evolution controlled by God or were they the result of the natural competition. Does the deer that visits the waterhole to get eaten by the aligator go because God compelled it or bc it was thirsty (does God make it thirsty?) God would have to be involved to the molecular level to direct much of the important evolutionary events. Does God direct the free-radicals to the specific nucleotide to cause the intended mutation? Does He manipulate Meiosis to produce the necessary cross-overs of DNA? Does God then direct the copulation when that egg or sperm is available, then does the hand of God guide that sperm through the vagina & uterus so that it survives the harsh chemical and biological environment and beats out all the other millions of sperm racing ahead?

See what I'm getting at? The idea seems workable on a very general scale in our minds, but as soon as you try to flesh out a mechanism some rather disturbing or absurd requirements some into play.

However, I think you could move it back to say it is the likely destiny of Evolution to produce some intelligent being, but whose exact form is irrevelevant. (Would God really care if we had 8 toes as opposed to 10? etc etc) To some level I do think this is true. Given enough time and favorable environment, a being could evolve with sufficient physical and mental capability to understand and conciously manipulate his environment. Such a being could then gain capability to leave the confines of his environment (and planet) and would spread life to areas where it did not previously exist.

If I could get a little esoteric, I think this is may be "purpose" of mankind. Say we chose to view the Earth a single living organism, the lifeforms that define it could be seen as the tissues that form its bodyand the individuals its cells (the oceans its blood, forests its lungs, bacteria is GI system ( don't be too literal.) Among many other powerful things, we could also be seen as its reproductive system. We will eventually colonize another planet, bringing the necessary organisms from Earth to create a hospitable biosphere in our new environment. No planet will be exactly like ours, so the new biosphere will be a derivative of the Earth environment but unique unto itself. A daughter if you will.

The Earth itself is under extinctionary pressures. The Sun will continually expand and warm until our planet is eventually baked and later consumed (billions of years from now.) Large meteor impacts are rare but inevitable on a long enough timescales. Large enough ones can nearly wipe out all life, or at least knock it back so far the evolutionary build-up must start again. We've had a few of these in Earth's history. The race will be to reproduce the Earth before its envitable death. Life will spread to other planets, then systems and so forth. In that way, our form does not matter so much as our abilities and accomplishments.

 

[firefaux]

the matrix built the moon.

 

[Jakebrake]

Intellignet design is a creation story, just like Greek, Roman, Native American, Hindu and the many, many other religious creation stories. It's not science. Period.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: Hafen

The thing that bothers me about certain proposals of this (such as some of the ID incarnations) that once you introduce God into directing Evolution you remove Free Will.

Were all the trillions of selection events that led to our evolution controlled by God or were they the result of the natural competition. Does the deer that visits the waterhole to get eaten by the aligator go because God compelled it or bc it was thirsty (does God make it thirsty?) God would have to be involved to the molecular level to direct much of the important evolutionary events. Does God direct the free-radicals to the specific nucleotide to cause the intended mutation? Does He manipulate Meiosis to produce the necessary cross-overs of DNA? Does God then direct the copulation when that egg or sperm is available, then does the hand of God guide that sperm through the vagina & uterus so that it survives the harsh chemical and biological environment and beats out all the other millions of sperm racing ahead?

See what I'm getting at? The idea seems workable on a very general scale in our minds, but as soon as you try to flesh out a mechanism some rather disturbing or absurd requirements some into play.

However, I think you could move it back to say it is the likely destiny of Evolution to produce some intelligent being, but whose exact form is irrevelevant. (Would God really care if we had 8 toes as opposed to 10? etc etc) To some level I do think this is true. Given enough time and favorable environment, a being could evolve with sufficient physical and mental capability to understand and conciously manipulate his environment. Such a being could then gain capability to leave the confines of his environment (and planet) and would spread life to areas where it did not previously exist.

If I could get a little esoteric, I think this is may be "purpose" of mankind. Say we chose to view the Earth a single living organism, the lifeforms that define it could be seen as the tissues that form its bodyand the individuals its cells (the oceans its blood, forests its lungs, bacteria is GI system ( don't be too literal.) Among many other powerful things, we could also be seen as its reproductive system. We will eventually colonize another planet, bringing the necessary organisms from Earth to create a hospitable biosphere in our new environment. No planet will be exactly like ours, so the new biosphere will be a derivative of the Earth environment but unique unto itself. A daughter if you will.

The Earth itself is under extinctionary pressures. The Sun will continually expand and warm until our planet is eventually baked and later consumed (billions of years from now.) Large meteor impacts are rare but inevitable on a long enough timescales. Large enough ones can nearly wipe out all life, or at least knock it back so far the evolutionary build-up must start again. We've had a few of these in Earth's history. The race will be to reproduce the Earth before its envitable death. Life will spread to other planets, then systems and so forth. In that way, our form does not matter so much as our abilities and accomplishments.

Excellent post! I honestly can't say I agree with everything, but it's definitely worth thinking about. Brings up two ideas to me though. Let's see what people think about this.

1) Could evolution simply have been something that just had to be put into motions, rather than monitored on a consistant basis? That way, God wouldn't have to be involved in everything, he'd just have to put it in motion properly. Thus, free will wouldn't be violated.

2) Would it not therefore be possible that this planet is not just, as you considered it, the "offspring" of another planet?

Originally posted by: Jakebrake
Intellignet design is a creation story, just like Greek, Roman, Native American, Hindu and the many, many other religious creation stories. It's not science. Period.

Why not? If you believe in God and that he did perform all the miracle that are told, why couldn't he have just used science to perform them? It wouldn't take away from his ability or position. To me it would prove his superiority. After all, he healed peoples illnesses. Is this not also the role of a doctor, who is also a scientist?

Again, just a thought. Just want to know what people think.

 

[piasabird]

This is a very interesting book. It does not go off the deep end, but
it tries to look at the subject matter in an open minded and scientific
manner.

The subject matter of this book requires readers to open their
minds to a softer, more yielding worldview that dissolves preconceptions
and temporarily allows the mind to roam freely over the subject
matter, thereby allowing consideration of possibilities that might
otherwise be missed. The principle that appears to underpin standard
academia these days can reasonably be called ?stepping stone? logic,
where deductions are often only encouraged in a strictly linear fashion.
By this mode of reasoning one can only proceed by confirming each
step before looking for an incremental way forward.While it sounds
entirely sensible, it can blind the researcher to factors that are outside
their expectations. Albert Einstein is famously said to have observed
that ?Imagination is more important than knowledge?. Surely the great
man has to be right: true insights come from thinking outside the box
rather than simply ticking procedural boxes in a neat row.
A very famous archaeologist once said to Alan that all of his
findings must be dismissed because his starting point was, in his
opinion, wrong.How foolish. Even if someone does start with an error
it is entirely possible that subsequent discoveries could be right if
validated without reliance on the original premise.
The mode of reasoning that we invite you, the reader, to adopt
while reading this book is one we call the ?tepee method?. This is a
multi-dimensional approach to logical deduction rather than a classical
linear ?stepping stone? process. It simply requires that each piece of
evidence is seen in its own right and is not forced to conform to any
preconceived notion of what should be. Even where different elements
of evidence appear to be mutually exclusive, we suggest that they
should be allowed to coexist until the time comes for a final analysis.
With the tepee method each strand of evidence is considered to be a
potential supporting stick ? and only if there are eventually enough of
them that work together does the argument stand.We believe that this
is the only approach to examining the distant past that is likely to
produce a cogent picture, one that does not pick and choose which
facts it prefers to accept as ?real?. As we conducted our research there
were many occasions where we felt the urge to reject a finding as a
coincidence because it did not fit with what we expected to see. We
suspended our judgement and eventually, as a new picture emerged,
we were very glad that we had not tried to force our preconceptions
on the evidence.
Any readers who feel unable to open their minds right up at this
point should close the book now.
The Ancient Egyptians
The Great Wall ofHistory has distorted the way most people view the past

I just love the part about the Teepee Logical model and how he examines the
neolithical sites from the view of an Engineer. Instead of looking at one speicific artifact
and trying to determine what it can tell you about historical people, he looks at all of the facts and then comes up with logic based on the big picture.

 

[GoPackGo]

none of us or this is real, so whats your point?

 

[Whaspe]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I haven't read the book, and I doubt I'd waste my time, but the review makes some odd comments, such as:

"The Metric system, which is now universally adopted across the world for scientific measurement, appears to have been created specifically to highlight the peculiarities of the Moon."

The metric system was created to define the distance from the equator to the North pole as 10 million meters. With such a relatively small measurement, I guess you can find all kinds of odd relationships when applied to large objects such as the sun, earth, and moon.

His thesis seems to rely on the positional relationship between he sun, earth, and moon as well. That's fine for now, but the distance between the earth and the moon is increasing at a steady rate of 3.8 centimeters a year. Additionally, the tidal interaction between the earth and moon is slowing the rotation of the earth down. So it seems this guy's calculations won't be valid in the long term future since some of the values are changing as we speak.

So good points TLC, however I'm curious about your claim (see bolded). Isn't the metric system part of the larger SI or Systeme International d'Unites? It was created for scientific purposes. The metre was defined in 1983 as the distance traveled by light in a vacuum during a time interval of 1/299792483 of a second. (had to look that up)

To go on a tangent here, I don't know why the US has held on so tightly to outdated units of measurement. is. the Fahrenheit scale was invented by taking a hot and cold substance and placing 100 units inbetween these values. In Fahrenheits experiments the coldest thing was ammonia in ice water, and the hottest thing was the stomach of a cow.

 

[Fritzo]

The guys figures are a bit off. The earth rotates 365.25 times during a year if memory serves. If that's correct, I'm sure his other figures are off too.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: MrNutz
Who Built the Moon?

I cannot tell a lie. I did it. Of course, things didn't turn out exactly the way I planned it. I meant it as a point of reference to help people understand what they meant when they said they were mooning somone, but then, all these skinny ass and lard ass people sneaked in, and not enough people's asses matched the description, anymore. :moon:

Guess my intelligence kinda let me down. Next time, I'll think of a better expression before I launch anymore satellites, at least around this planet.

Of course, I still have to figure out WTF I was thinking when I put all those other moons around Saturn, and why I bothered to name a planet after a freaking car. :sun:

• :wine: :laugh: :music:

 

[luigi1]

As far as the origional defenation of the meter I've heard a few stories, Distance around equator, distance from equator to pole. Its a french yard, get over it. As far as the US being on metric system , it has for a good long while. All engineering is done in both units (well OK, at least most). Joe Sixpack dosnt know anything about it, but that dosn't even start the list of things that Joe doesn't know about.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: The Scientist
ID is a sham, anyone with half a brain can understand that.

Half a brain would be a vast improvement for believers in ID.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: The Scientist
ID is a sham, anyone with half a brain can understand that.

Half a brain would be a vast improvement for believers in ID.

:beer: :thumbsup:

 

[judasmachine]

ID does not prove the christian god anyway. It does sound like an explanation for a cult, any cult from Gaia, to Allah. Improbabilities can be used to satiate simple minds, but to anyone who uses even 2% of their own mind can see that fallacy of such a stance. Everything is improbable.

 

[shira]

Hmm.

Since if we go to, say, 10 significant digits, I'm absolutely certain that (say) the number of earth rotations in a sidereal year is not the same as the number of moon rotations in a sidereal year, does that mean the God exists only as a rounding error?

 

[engineereeyore]

Ok, I just have a question. I understand that many people on this board are what might be considered "non-believers" in God. I just don't understand what seems to be the cause of the adamant distaste or hatred that these feelings produce. I mean, I believe in God and would like to think that I do have at least half a brain. To be honest, I suffered a head injury as a child and did lose part of my brain. I'm not sure of the exact percentages, but I think I have more that 50% left.

Anyway, even if I'm wrong and God doesn't exist, my belief provides me a couple things. It provides me with a belief that I can be together forever with my family, that my life on this earth has a meaning, and that it's not all over after I die. Personally, even if I'm wrong, it's a nice belief to live under. Makes the days much nicer anyway.

So, while I strongly encourage people to find what works for them, I guess I just don't understand the intolerable distaste for those that believe in God, or ID, or whatever. Even if we're wrong, it makes our lives much nicer. So just wondering if someone could explain that to me in terms a little nicer than "you don't have half a brain."

Sorry if this is a bit off topic.