Mathematical impossibilities
Another impossibility that has always been an embarrassment to the scientific establishment is the obvious fact that an object as heavy as the moon, caught in the earth’s gravity, would inevitably come crashing down upon us at immense speeds. Responses to this argument from the Lunarists have always been weak, and always couched in that scientific newspeak designed to confuse the sincere questioner without actually saying anything.
The establishment most often cites the work of Isaac Newton in support of its story. Newton is well known for coming up with entirely theoretical notions such as the Law of Universal Gravitation, and his more famous Laws of Motion which serve to gloss over the more obvious inconsistencies in the moon story. What he is less known for is his "extra-curricular" pursuits, which he kept quite secret during his lifetime but which have since been uncovered. Newton was a dominating figure in the Royal Society, a fellowship riddled with members of the various secret societies whose goal to dominate the world has already been outlined. Newton himself possessed copies of Rosicrucian manifestos, and, as is evident in his notes, had studied them thoroughly. Many of his biographers suspect that he shared the religious beliefs of many of his colleagues. It does not take a genius to conclude that these beliefs may have influenced his scientific reasoning.

This is, of course, the reason why revisionists are excluded from academic institutions. The majority of scientists and professors of most universities are members of organizations such as these, as are most of the scientists who work for NASA. Those that are not realize that their livelihood depends on towing the establishment line, and therefore only a few have had the courage to speak out.

However, eminent scientists, working in defiance of the establishment, have proven conclusively, using the most scrupulous methods, that if an object such as the moon really existed, it could not remain fixed in the sky for very long. Proactive arguments in support of this finding return to a closer examination of the original mathematical formula generally referenced when rallying to solidify the moon’s improbable existence:

F = GMm/r2
Where F = gravitational attraction
G = the gravitational constant
M = mass of one body
m = mass of the second body
r = distance between the two bodies
Established by Newton himself, this numerical gem is based completely on the assumption that the moon travels in concentric circles around our planet. F (the gravitational attraction holding the moon to its "true" path) requires that r (the distance between the two celestial bodies) remains constant. Should the distance, r, decrease at any given moment, the gravitational force will increase in strength. When this event occurs the moon will be pulled towards this planet. According to Newton’s theory that a body set in motion remains in motion, such an incident would initiate a logical series of events with a singular chaotic result: propagated drawing of satellite to planet until the two massive bodies collide.

However, even the most fanatical Lunarists no longer cling to the absurd notion that objects in the solar system travel in concentric circles. These so-called "scientists" have changed their story so many times, who knows what to believe anymore? The currently fashionable dogma is that the route followed by celestial bodies is not circular but a concave oval with the origin point at the centre (in the case of the earth, the sun; in the case of the moon, the earth) followed by a spiraling series of pathways. Thus, the moon is not maintaining a constant distance from our planet. Our orbiting satellite is forever oscillating towards us, drawing near then distant, in a continuous cycle. Each successive approach brings this massive wonder closer to our midst.

In other words, the moon does indeed alter its distance from the earth. So why is it not widespread knowledge that the end – mathematically predicated BY NEWTON’S OWN FORMULA - has been anticipated and is drawing near? Due to some irrational explanation the moon has managed to defy those very laws of physics that were originally developed to justify its existence

Is all evidence equal? Just because someone says something, and it appears to make a bit sense on the surface, does that mean it's valid scientific evidence? Are there standards for saying that something is scientifically valid...or can one just say anything is valid because they believe it to be so?

Thinking about all this, I've come to the conclusion that perhaps the moon doen't exist at all! Now, don't laugh...there's a great deal of evidence indicating that this is the absolute truth.

Just looking at the mathematics involved alone makes it very clear that the moon simply cannot be!
Please go to this site...read all of the reasons why the moon simply does not exit. Don't be punked by the scientific establishment any longer!

Stop being sheeple and accept that your government has been lying to you.

"No photographs were ever taken of the moon until the 1850’s. Photographs such as this one, taken in 1852 by John Adams Whipple at the Harvard College Observatory, have been cited by Lunarists as proof of the existence of the moon. But considering the poor quality of the picture, this object could be anything, from an unusually round rock on a dark surface to someone’s bald head. We still require the help of self-appointed "experts" to tell us just what we’re looking at.

There were no pictures of the alleged "far side of the moon" until revisionist research pressured the Lunar conspiracy to fabricate one in 1959. This picture was allegedly taken by the Soviet satellite Lunik III. Note that these are the same Soviets who massacred 4,000 Polish officers in the Katyn forest in 1940, then tried to blame the atrocity on the Germans at Nuremberg. Surely if the moon story had any truth to it whatsoever, the conspirators could have found a more credible source."

However, even the most fanatical Lunarists no longer cling to the absurd notion that objects in the solar system travel in concentric circles. These so-called "scientists" have changed their story so many times, who knows what to believe anymore? The currently fashionable dogma is that the route followed by celestial bodies is not circular but a concave oval with the origin point at the centre (in the case of the earth, the sun; in the case of the moon, the earth) followed by a spiraling series of pathways. Thus, the moon is not maintaining a constant distance from our planet. Our orbiting satellite is forever oscillating towards us, drawing near then distant, in a continuous cycle. Each successive approach brings this massive wonder closer to our midst.

Firstly, the moon is in orbit at a place where it will not come down crashing. It was formed by coalescing rock anyways.
Or stop being idiotic and accept that the moon is real.
Mad revisionist, what kind of whack-job site is that?
His photographic proof is BS, they are the stupidest statements I have ever heard.

Straight from the site
The moon is actually moving farther and farther away

Wheres the evidence that it actually exists???

Ok now we have that out of the way we shall deal with the Kennedy assassinations……………………..

Irish

DISCLAIMER: All editorial content on this website is strictly not the writer’s/author’s opinion. THE MAD REVISIONIST, located on the moon, is owned and operated by accident. The content of this page is the copyrighted property of THE MAD REVISIONIST. Any copying or circulating of this page, in whole or in part, without the expressed permission of THE MAD REVISIONIST will be taken as a compliment.

I think you are missing the point of this site frogfish. It is, I suspect, a tongue in cheek dig at conspiracy theorist who will ignore all the evidence before them.

Their belief that governments are lying to them is so strong that they stop being sceptical and start becoming un-questioning followers of the belief. Meanwhile they start accusing all those that disagree with them of being mindless sheep.

The evidence given by this site is, clearly nonsense, in that way it does not differ from many, many conspiracy sites. As an example of how "facts" can be distorted and presented to support a ridiculous case this site is a worthwhile exercise in critical thinking.

This is the way of the cult, see only that which supports your belief how ever weak the evidence, ignore that which does not however strong. Many of the major conspiracy theories which now exist are indistinguishable from fundamentalist religion.

Wait? Wha? How does the moon not exist? Come on now, this is ridicolous, it's right there in the sky! How would the "government" be able to lie about something that's right up there with the stars?

You can see it. But think about it – without the help of so-called "experts", how do you really know what you’re looking at? It could be a hologram, projected from various government installations throughout the world. It could be a large, crudely painted balloon, held in place by helium and propelled by tiny sails and rudders (which is why it moves across the sky so slowly). Or, most likely, it could have been different things at different times and different places, depending on the technology available to the conspirators and the culture and beliefs of the population being deceived.

Yeah but it's been there for ages! Hell, even a book as old as the bible talks about the moon!

True, but think about this a little further!

ive just looked through the and its a load of rubbish they think the moon could be a projection of some sort.

so did they have projectors thousands of years ago when ancient people gazed at the moon?

Is all evidence equal? Just because someone says something, and it appears to make a bit sense on the surface, does that mean it's valid scientific evidence? Are there standards for saying that something is scientifically valid...or can one just say anything is valid because they believe it to be so?

Thinking about all this, I've come to the conclusion that perhaps the moon doesn't exist at all! Now, don't laugh...there's a great deal of evidence indicating that this is the absolute truth.

Just looking at the mathematics involved alone makes it very clear that the moon simply cannot be!
Please go to this site...read all of the reasons why the moon simply does not exist. Don't be punked by the scientific establishment any longer!

Oops...edited for typos!

My thoughts exactly, just non-sense, and what about how the moon affects the ocean there bud

The clouds are considerably closer to the moon, and much lighter than the oceans. One would imagine that if the moon had the power to raise the oceans, this same force would cause the clouds to go flying into space, yet this does not happen. This proves that the tides story is physically impossible.

Real scientists are busy researching the TRUE causes of the tides. But until their findings are made public, we can take this as merely another pseudo-scientific moon myth, shattered by the scholarship of revisionists.

are you acctually serious?

ok how can you not believe the moon exists?? look up in the sky you can fricken see it!!

But who could or would perpetrate such a hoax? Although it is impossible to fully fathom the depth of the deception without further research, the primary culprits are easy to spot. First of all, the various secret societies and religious orders to which the scientists responsible for propagating the moon hoax have belonged from the beginning. One can easily trace the history of this deception through the Templars, the Rosicrucians, the Illuminati and the Masons, by way of the various scientists – from Ptolmy to Copernicus to Newton – whose "observations" have been vital toward putting a scholarly veneer to the moon myth. To this day, universities and government agencies such as NASA are full of "scientists" of this kind.

However, responsibility cannot go solely to academic scientists who initiated the hoax, nor to the organizations to which they belong which have sought to use this deception in their struggle for world domination. Many other governments and institutions have been co-opted over the years, to the point where, today, belief in the moon is so nearly universal that it holds incredible sway over public opinion in our country

are you acctually serious?

Sure, why not? Is what I'm saying really all that different from, oh, let's say, the "common sense" applied to the question of the hoaxed Apollo moon landings? Which, since there really isn't any moon, is simply part of this greater conspiracy, see what I mean?

Lil..

That was brilliant!

the moon doesnt exist?...... hmmmm.....

so its safe to assume your brain doesnt exist either!

Who wrote that?

if the moon is fake, then how does it reflect light?

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 day
as well as the night. Clearly it must exist within our atmosphere, just like its neighbours, the clouds..

There was no moon in ancient times

The argument from evolution

"Lunatics"

Venus

Source of the myth

The Bible

The rise in belief in the moon

The modern religion

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 day
as well as the night. Clearly it must exist within our atmosphere, just like its neighbours, the clouds..

Do an experiment: take a rubber ball and suspend it above a bathtub full of water. Now slowly move the ball closer to the water. Does the level of the water change? Not even slightly. So much for the tides myth.

People could argue this argument until they are blue in the face, the fact of the matter is that unless I can touch it, I dont have to believe in it.

Thats not to say that I dont beleive in the moon, but I dont just accept things.
If you tell a lie enough it becomes truth, and this simple little concept is shaping the world we live in.

Is all evidence equal? Just because someone says something, and it appears to make a bit sense on the surface, does that mean it's valid scientific evidence? Are there standards for saying that something is scientifically valid...or can one just say anything is valid because they believe it to be so?

It's the Bible...the book of Job

Well, you don't *have* to believe in anything if taken to the extreme. But, is touch the only form of evidence you accept? Now, I've never been to China, but I accept that China exists. I have a feeling that you accept other forms of evidence (beyond touch) in your daily life. It would be pretty difficult to even function without some criteria of "reality acceptance" beyond that of touch. Example, I've never been to John Hopkins University, but my doctor's diploma was issued from this institution. I'm strongly inclined to think that John Hopkins is a *real* University!
Quite true, if one doesn't have some criteria with which to judge the evidence presented to them. So, in light of this I will ask again what I asked in my original post:

What I was trying to say is that I dont accept things because I am told to or based on evidence that can be manipulated.
Take photographic evidence for example. A photo of something cannot be regarded as evidence because of the means at our disposal to alter it.
Even if america suddenly decided to put someone on the moon again and had "live streaming video" it would be stupid to accept that at face value considering their track record at lies and deception.

I agree. Its quite obvious that the moon cannot and does not exit. There is no reeal evidence that it does. There IS evidence of it being a "stageing center" for government mind control. All the "scientic evidence" that states it exists is simply government spin and disinfo. The truth is right there in front of everyones eyes. Stop being sheeple and accept that your government has been lying to you.

Anyone is welcome to prove to me that it in fact exists..but present some REAL evidence!

Yeah I've seen it on TV before. Wasn't alive when it happened though, but I saw it on TV.

It's the Bible...the book of Job.

I think you are missing the point of this site frogfish. It is, I suspect, a tongue in cheek dig at conspiracy theorist who will ignore all the evidence before them.

Their belief that governments are lying to them is so strong that they stop being sceptical and start becoming un-questioning followers of the belief. Meanwhile they start accusing all those that disagree with them of being mindless sheep.

The evidence given by this site is, clearly nonsense, in that way it does not differ from many, many conspiracy sites. As an example of how "facts" can be distorted and presented to support a ridiculous case this site is a worthwhile exercise in critical thinking.

This is the way of the cult, see only that which supports your belief how ever weak the evidence, ignore that which does not however strong. Many of the major conspiracy theories which now exist are indistinguishable from fundamentalist religion.

I just have to answer your attempt to classify all people who believe in conspiracies as blindly following the cult leader who came up with the theory. BS