I haven't done enough research to figure out what or if there's a catch to James Horak, so I wont mislead you with full-on high-weirdness evangelism just yet. I first listened to an interview of him yesterday, and I will upload that mp3 file to Youtube when I've converted it to a movie file.
I began to take James a lot more seriously stated that the moon is not in orbit at a random distance from the planet - it was put there. That's a classic neo Galileo thinking. A person who isn't afraid to stand up to the Vatican, or Wired magazine (otherwise known as cut and paste science) or whatever body holds a persons reality together more than their own intellectual clout.
I mention that because walking home from a run yesterday I realised there's a much better way of explaining the artificiality of the moon than I have achieved so far. My attempt invariably has people scratching their heads and attempting to change the subject.
It's fairly important because the entire edifice of mickey mouse materialist science begins to crumble if normal people realise that the scientific establishment is either too stupid to figure out a doozy of a question or even just lying to us at a very basic level.
That prompts even more dangerous questions.
I want to do an "artificial moon" explanation to web cam instead of writing about it because it's not rocket science if you excuse the pun. Anyone can figure out that the moon was carefully put into place if they are curious enough. Arousing that curiosity is the challenge. It's about asking a better question, but for the time being I've only got a better answer. So that will have to do.
