Jump to content
The Big Bang Theory Forums
No Regrets

Conspiracy Theories

Recommended Posts

I'm firmly convinced Marilyn Monroe was murdered.
By who?

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tonstar17 said:

By who?

The establishment, likely the CIA.

She was involved with two Kennedy brothers, and people involved in, shall we say activities of questionably legality.

As such, she posed a serious risk to the country and the administration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The establishment, likely the CIA.
She was involved with two Kennedy brothers, and people involved in, shall we say activities of questionably legality.
As such, she posed a serious risk to the country and the administration.
I guess her association and alleged relationships with the Kennedy's could have got her killed..

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stephen Hawking said:

The establishment, likely the CIA.

She was involved with two Kennedy brothers, and people involved in, shall we say activities of questionably legality.

As such, she posed a serious risk to the country and the administration.

Interesting. How was she a threat ? Likely to blackmail someone, sell secrets to a foreign power ( which carried the death penalty anyway ) or accidentally reveal in public,perhaps while under the influence, things those in power didn't want the public to know ? How ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, she probably OD on her own, but I could see where the conspiracy theory comes into play, if she maybe tried to blackmail one or both of the Kennedy's.

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an online community that thinks the moon is hollow and an artificial satellite, spaceship built and moved to it present location by some highly intelligent beings. It's bonkers I know. But some of the evidence gives me food for thoughts.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/771246/Hollow-Moon-theory-aliens


Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, this one is rather easy to disprove.  Just go to any ocean shoreline, and watch the tides.  If it was hollow, it couldn't produce tides of that size.  Not to mention the orbital mechanics of the spacecraft that orbit the moon, wouldn't be in the orbits the spacecraft are in.    

But the biggest thing it has going against it is simply that David Icke (he of the lizard people controlling the Earth) supports it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, this one is rather easy to disprove.  Just go to any ocean shoreline, and watch the tides.  If it was hollow, it couldn't produce tides of that size.  Not to mention the orbital mechanics of the spacecraft that orbit the moon, wouldn't be in the orbits the spacecraft are in.    
But the biggest thing it has going against it is simply that David Icke (he of the lizard people controlling the Earth) supports it.  
This from the article.

If you divide the circumference of the Sun by that of the Moon and multiply by 100 you get the polar circumference of the Earth. 
"In fact, so precise are the measurements and correlations between the Earth, Sun and Moon that any differentiation in the figures would inevitably lead to vastly visible changes. "Take the solar eclipse for example; the Sun would no longer be able to conceal itself so perfectly behind the Moon. 
"That astoundingly perfect fit that we take for granted would cease to be."
It was also confirmed by NASA that the moon does ring like a bell when struck.
During Apollo 12 the shock waves made by the lunar module ascent were recorded by seismic equipment and showed that "Moonquake" tremors lasted for 55 minutes. 
Vibrations caused by the impact of Apollo 13’s Saturn rocket booster, which was equivalent to 11 tons of TNT going off, left the Moon shaking for three hours and 20 minutes, the same equipment showed.
Mr Robinson added: "There are many theories doing the rounds regarding the enigmatic nature of Earth’s Moon.
Many claim that the moon is an artificial satellite rather than a natural object. 
"It is hollow, which should be impossible were it a natural planetary object. 
"As noted astronomer Dr Carl Sagan wrote in 1966, 'A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object'.
"So, if the Moon is a hollow artificial construct as the facts lead us to understand, who built the Moon, how did they get it into its present orbit and why did they put it there? "How is it that our moon remains stationary in Earth’s orbit, never revealing the dark side to us? 
"Such questions will certainly not be answered overnight but the initial realisation that our Moon is not a natural object behaving naturally would raise a few eyebrows were it common public knowledge."

The moon, hollow or not is big and close enough to create it's own gravitational pull on the tidal waves on Earth, so I wouldn't use that as a way to disprove the theory. I don't believe the moon is hollow but it's an interesting read and debate and makes me wonder if it was built by aliens. Edmond Halley and H G Wells believed in the concept. But with no scientific prove, the moon is made of rock, just like all the other moons in the solar system.


Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Tonstar17 said:

This from the article.

If you divide the circumference of the Sun by that of the Moon and multiply by 100 you get the polar circumference of the Earth. 
"In fact, so precise are the measurements and correlations between the Earth, Sun and Moon that any differentiation in the figures would inevitably lead to vastly visible changes.

Why the polar circumference of Earth?  Why not compare the solar polar circumference to the Earths polar circumference?  For that matter, why multiply by 100?  Why not 50, or 200, or 2.718?  I can make the solar polar circumference equal the Earth's circumference just by picking a different number.  As a matter of fact I can make the same comparison for any planet, just by using a different multiplicative and or different circumference.   

 

48 minutes ago, Tonstar17 said:

"Take the solar eclipse for example; the Sun would no longer be able to conceal itself so perfectly behind the Moon. 
"That astoundingly perfect fit that we take for granted would cease to be."

It won't in the future.  It is moving away from the Earth,  at some point total eclipses will not happen.  

 

48 minutes ago, Tonstar17 said:

It was also confirmed by NASA that the moon does ring like a bell when struck.  During Apollo 12 the shock waves made by the lunar module ascent were recorded by seismic equipment and showed that "Moonquake" tremors lasted for 55 minutes.   Vibrations caused by the impact of Apollo 13’s Saturn rocket booster, which was equivalent to 11 tons of TNT going off, left the Moon shaking for three hours and 20 minutes, the same equipment showed.

NASA never said the moon rings like a bell.  That particular phrase was used in a "Popular Science" article, not in any NASA papers.  I'll also point out that the moment of inertia for the moon is not consistent with it being hollow, but is consistent with a increasing density as you go deeper.   The moon is also the only other object in the solar system with it's own seismographic network, so measurements of the seismic waves, on the moon, have been done.    Measurement of the lunar moonquakes indicate the core has a radius of around 160 km, the crust is no deeper than 45 km,  with a mantle of around 1500 km.

 

48 minutes ago, Tonstar17 said:

Mr Robinson added:...

snip

...common public knowledge

I can come back to these if you wish

 

57 minutes ago, Tonstar17 said:

The moon, hollow or not is big and close enough to create it's own gravitational pull on the tidal waves on Earth, so I wouldn't use that as a way to disprove the theory.

It's a perfect way to disprove it.   The tides depend on mass.  Less mass, less tides.  Earth tides are consistent with a moon composed of rock, at an average density of 3.3 g/cm,  with a slightly higher density (4.4 g/cm ) as you moved to the center.  This is consistent with the density of the Earth's mantle.    If the moon was hollow, then the rock around it, would have to be at a much higher density to match the density required for observed tides.  The rocks returned from the moon are not of a density required to offset any hollow areas within the moon.

  

57 minutes ago, Tonstar17 said:

I don't believe the moon is hollow but it's an interesting read and debate and makes me wonder if it was built by aliens. Edmond Halley and H G Wells believed in the concept. But with no scientific prove, the moon is made of rock, just like all the other moons in the solar system.

I'm not saying you believe it, I'm trying to refute the article.  🙂

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.