http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ … 95870.aspx

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid … 1829859642

I heard a guy on an organic cooking show say something which proves true in more than
cooking.  "Convenience is bad for the soul."

Also, in George Orwell's 1984, information which no longer served Big Brother was stuffed
down the "memory tube" to disappear.

By the way, it may be colder the higher you get in the atmosphere, but it get's hotter when
you think about the radiation that the thinner atmosphere is not shielding you from.

Didn't mean to sidetrack the thread.

TP

Who needs libraries anymore?  That's a good question.
But notice how easily data can be deleted or altered in cyberspace.
At least books tell it like it used to be with hard printed copies.
Farenheit 451 here we come.

Amen!!  Reminds me of that scene in Star Wars Episode 2 where Obi-Wan is trying to locate the cloners planet and it doesn't show up in the archives.  The librarian's response is exactly what we're headed for, "If it's not in the archives, it does not exist."

Actually, I should clarify... I agree with you, Lyra, that the internet is an invaluable resource for so much information, and I use it nearly every day for a myriad of information, too. 

What actually infuriates me is the predictability of the human race to take something wonderful and FUBAR it.  There's a large percentage of the population that uses valuable resources for their own twisted agendas.  Some country's governments (including our own) are already throwing fits about how they are unable to "regulate" (aka. control) the information on the internet.  And slowly, but surely, the internet will become the only source that most people go to for information.  But that information is quickly becoming "sanitized" by various concerned organizations.  I just hope it doesn't become a mecca for disinformation that becomes "the truth" in the future.

Who needs libraries anymore?  That's a good question.
But notice how easily data can be deleted or altered in cyberspace.
At least books tell it like it used to be with hard printed copies.
Farenheit 451 here we come.

Oh, it's all in good fun.   I love books myself.  But it's just funny to think back on the 'good old days' when people would go to the library to find something out.  Now, it's all about the internet.   Instanteous information!  It's amazing.  You can find out anything and look up anything in 2 seconds flat with a couple of clicks.  Yesterday here at work one of the guys in the company calls me up and is like, "Can you tell me where area code 347 is?"  He had more answer than he could ever hope for in under 10 seconds!!!   Hopped on google, and soon I was reading the Wikipedia entry to him about 347, and how it's a NYC area code for the Bronx, Queens, Staten Island and Brooklyn, used as an overlay for area code 718 and 917, for cell phones, pagers and mobiles.    !!!!!!!   10 years ago, I would have had to tell him, "Okay, let me research that and I'll have to call you back..." then combing through the area code map of the US at the front of every phone book.  But even that's not sufficient.  So he would have been s.o.l, most likely.    Not anymore though.  Welcome to the 21st century.  The 'net has changed the face of EVERYTHING in our reality, in so many ways.  Anyway, enough of my "marveling at the wonders of the internet" ramble. 

I always wondered about the sun. Why is it hotter at sea level, but the closer you get to it, the colder the air is? Why doesnt it heat up outer space? Or did I miss the answer in science class?

From:
http://www.whyy.org/tv12/franklinfacts/APR1200ff.html

Let's hear it for Google!   Who needs libraries anymore! 

The great occult teacher and writer Manly Palmer Hall wrote a criptic note at the end of one
of his monographs:  The moon is a skull.  At the time I read it I thought he was just being
mysterious or poetic.  Maybe not.

Another quirk about our moon is the "coincidence" that we only ever see one side of it... It rotates at a rate that keeps only one side of it visible..... but that side is strewn with craters from impacts... never made sense to me, and when I'd asked my Astronomy professor about it, he'd told me that I was only the second person ever to pose that question to him and informed me that at some point in the past that the moon did have a faster rotation speed, but that now it's slowed down to a point that just so happens to be perfectly in line with our ability to only see one side.  Yeah, sure, I thought.

Pinky, wow I was thinking about posting that exact observation a day or two ago.  It's messup up isn't it, from a physics standpoint?  How many other planets have flippin moons which don't spin?? 

I wonder if it's related at all to the earth's year being increased from 360 to 365 days several thousand years ago.  Hmm... maybe energy transference between the two bodies?  (Maybe not, that doesn't sound like it would compute, even if a transference of energy/force was possible.)  Any astronomers / physics ppl have any thoughts on this?

Yeah, I'd followed the link Xenopope listed above to Lyra's post, and it's extremely fascinating stuff.  I used to think it was all just a bunch of bunk... too Star Wars "death star" kind of conspiracy theory, but then a few years back, I'd read Jim Marrs' book, Alien Agenda, and one of the chapters talks about the seismic experiments the astronauts conducted on the moon, leading to the "hollow moon theory".  Had me scratching my head because I'd been seeing/reading things on the internet years ago about how people thought the tapes of the first landings had been faked.  So, the only conclusion that makes sense to me is that they're both correct.  Most of the disinfo that our gov't puts out, it seems, centers around only giving the public half truths and faking the rest with very boring, unimaginitive filler fluff.  The real truth is often times stranger than fiction.

Another quirk about our moon is the "coincidence" that we only ever see one side of it... It rotates at a rate that keeps only one side of it visible..... but that side is strewn with craters from impacts... never made sense to me, and when I'd asked my Astronomy professor about it, he'd told me that I was only the second person ever to pose that question to him and informed me that at some point in the past that the moon did have a faster rotation speed, but that now it's slowed down to a point that just so happens to be perfectly in line with our ability to only see one side.  Yeah, sure, I thought.  I think Pink Floyd had it right:  "There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark."

~Pinky

I would encourage interested people to read lyra's post on "Who built the Moon?" and the
subsequent posts after that.  Verrrry interesting to say the least.

TP

It dosen't necessarily mean there was no real moon mission. Possibly that the moon landing was failed or even merely not 'satisfactory'.

.....or they didn't want the public to see what they really encountered/saw/found there, so they created the "public release" version of events, and then the "real" version is somewhere under lock and key (like many of NASA's other discoveries).

Ok, but why do you think that?

Secret Space presents the evidence which makes this argument.

http://forum.noblerealms.org/viewtopic.php?id=3803

The space program was forced to have readied this evidence as a safeguard to negate the possibility of a failed moon landing being televised nationwide. It dosen't necessarily mean there was no real moon mission. Possibly that the moon landing was failed or even merely not 'satisfactory'.