The Moon

Ok if it makes you guys happy.

IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!

In the end I think that this example is very interesting.
Abu Loren insists that he has "really seen" it, whereas the others (me included) doubt that the observation which he certainly made contains any "physical truth" in the sense that the moon really changed it's speed.
The reason why I think that this example is relevant is because it illustrates the (frequent) divergence between what we feel and think and the measurable "objective" world. Besides the laws of physics one of my strongest arguments against his interpretation is (please see the second post at the beginning of this thread) that nobody else in the world has observed it (at least nobody reporting to it to any newspaper for example). It means probably millions of independent observation in conflict with one (or two) local observations. In addition there have been measuring devices all over the world which didn't detect anything either.
I don't doubt that you (Abu Loren) really "felt" it the way you describe, but there is (I repeat myself) very strong outer evidence that [the interpretation of]your observation is flawed. May be this can serve as an example that what we feel (as strong as the feeling may be) is not necessarily correct. Independent (multiple) observation, confirmation and measurements (preferably intercultural) from outside are likely to bring you closer to the "truth".

Up to you to draw further conclusions about [your] religion from it.

Airmano

Edited by airmano - 14 June 2014 at 3:24am

airmano wrote: In the end I think that this example is very interesting. Abu Loren insists that he has "really seen" it, whereas the others (me included) doubt that the observation which he certainly made contains any "physical truth" in the sense that the moon really changed it's speed. The reason why I think that this example is relevant is because it illustrates the (frequent) divergence between what we feel and think and the measurable "objective" world. Besides the laws of physics one of my strongest arguments against his interpretation is (please see the second post at the beginning of this thread) that nobody else in the world has observed it (at least nobody reporting to it to any newspaper for example). It means probably millions of independent observation in conflict with one (or two) local observations. In addition there have been measuring devices all over the world which didn't detect anything either. I don't doubt that you (Abu Loren) really "felt" it the way you describe, but there is (I repeat myself) very strong outer evidence that [the interpretation of]your observation is flawed. May be this can serve as an example that what we feel (as strong as the feeling may be) is not necessarily correct. Independent (multiple) observation, confirmation and measurements (preferably intercultural) from outside are likely to bring you closer to the "truth". Up to you to draw further conclusions about [your] religion from it. Airmano

This has nothing to do with religion.

It's just a report of an unusual occurrence as seen by two guys.

One minute the moon was directly overhead then next it was disappearing below the horizon.

Science can't explain it.

Ron Webb wrote: Abu Loren wrote: One minute the moon was directly overhead then next it was disappearing below the horizon. "One minute"?  Your first post said it took two hours. See how these anecdotal reports tend to get exaggerated in the retelling?  Next you'll be saying that the moon split. Science can't explain it. Sure it can.  One part optical illusion, one part hyperbole, and one part observational error.

"One minute" is a brit term for a short time.

Every time something weird happens you guys reach for your science books. When you open it and you see "E=MC2" then you are happy. If it doesn't then you are all bewildered.

What I'm saying is that you guys just cannot think outside the box.