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
So what are you saying, that the price of silver will crash when the moon lands and all we have to do is drive a dozer up to it to mine it's silver and gold?
Ha ha ha it was a cut paste, but the pointe the same, saw Icke talking about it, is it hollow? It also rings like a bell when explosions were set off on it. Maybe not best article to quote but look in and you will find plenty of physics equations that point to it no existance
Argh - just no.....NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-body_problem Incidentally the mass of the moon is not hollow.......
David Icke is a conspiracy theory nutcase who once claimed he was the son of God, and anyone who believes that the moon is hollow does NOT know what they are talking about. Physics simply will not allow large bodies like the moon to be hollow at their center. This is because the gravitational forces at the center of every planet are enormous. For an example look at the enormous pressure exerted 5 miles down in the ocean. (sure water is a liquid but as one goes further down through Earth's crust that also eventually becomes liquid. Ex - volcanos) Now imagine what that pressure could reach at the center of a planet or moon. .
