Moon landing coincidence?

Do you know what? Chicken butt.

Do you know why? Chicken thigh.

But where? Chicken hair.

Who knows when? Chicken fren.

But how? Chicken cow.

What if? Chicken bliff.

Was it China? Chicken vagina.

What about the sea of tranquility? Chicken civility.

WAIT!!! “Apollo”….. a pollo. Pollo is chicken. Apollo 11. Chicken in heaven.

OH MY ****ING GOD
 
  • Like
Reactions: JRS
No, I'm going by modern western tropical astrology, this is the school that I believe in, this seperates 12 houses around the elliptical earth that the sun will be in, on any hour, day, month, year, each sign is exactly 30 degrees apart from each other which equals the 360 degrees that fit 12 signs into it, this is why it is really called sun signs, and not star signs, it uses the same names as the constallation astrology that you are talking about, but precession does not affect tropical astrology at all, sorry, there is sidereal astrology that takes into account precesession, and relies on the constallations,but the the seperation of degrees for each house of sidereal constallation astrology is a bit messed up compared to tropical astrology, as the constalltions an be as little as 20 degrees apart, and and much as 50 degrees apart, compare this to 30 degrees apart in tropical astrology, and it's a lot different as it's based upon the seasonal cycle of the Northern hemisphere ... of which greece is a part of when tropical astrology was first used in greece, but both the sidereal, and tropical astrology have thier roots in babylonian tropical astrology, babylon also being in the northern hemisphere
most of the names are not greek btw, they are latin, or latinised greek, the latin word zodiac comes from the latin word ' zodiacus' which means, 'the reason behind the circle'[ of animals] the greeks called cancer the crab becauses certain tumours on the skin had raised swollen veins, that looked like crab limbs then then the latin word for the crab is cancer, which then became the word for a cancerous tumour, this was even taken on into old english, and then moved into middle english, into the word canker which you may know as meaning a lump, for example on the skin or even on a tree. [..]

So you're using Latinised Greek names for a Greek system apparently with roots in an earlier Babylonian system. A system based on fictional patterns of some stars as seen from the eastern Mediterranean area by the naked eye. Saying it's about Earth's position relative to the sun without changing anything about it is a neat rebranding, but it doesn't make any sense. If the old system is wrong, why still use it with nothing more than a claim it's about the sun when it isn't and never was? If it isn't wrong, why claim it's about the sun when it isn't and never was?

But more importantly, what is the mechanism by which some stars (and only some stars) determine the future and people's lives? Or the position of Earth relative to the sun, if you prefer to use the pretend rebranding of exactly the same system?

Citing coincidences is irrelevant. It's a result of the human tendency to see meaningful patterns even when they don't exist. Like signs of the zodiac, for example, let alone those things determining the future and people's lives. In the case of astrology it's also an example of confirmation bias.

For example, between 2000 and 2010 there was an extremely strong correlation between the divorce rate in Maine and the per capita consumption of margarine. A very strong pattern, a pattern that (unlike the "patterns" of stars making the signs of the zodiac) actually existed. A coincidence. Correlation is not causation.

And no, I'm not joking;


There are thousands of patterns like that;

 
  • Like
Reactions: JRS
So you're using Latinised Greek names for a Greek system apparently with roots in an earlier Babylonian system. A system based on fictional patterns of some stars as seen from the eastern Mediterranean area by the naked eye. Saying it's about Earth's position relative to the sun without changing anything about it is a neat rebranding, but it doesn't make any sense. If the old system is wrong, why still use it with nothing more than a claim it's about the sun when it isn't and never was? If it isn't wrong, why claim it's about the sun when it isn't and never was?

But more importantly, what is the mechanism by which some stars (and only some stars) determine the future and people's lives? Or the position of Earth relative to the sun, if you prefer to use the pretend rebranding of exactly the same system?

Citing coincidences is irrelevant. It's a result of the human tendency to see meaningful patterns even when they don't exist. Like signs of the zodiac, for example, let alone those things determining the future and people's lives. In the case of astrology it's also an example of confirmation bias.

For example, between 2000 and 2010 there was an extremely strong correlation between the divorce rate in Maine and the per capita consumption of margarine. A very strong pattern, a pattern that (unlike the "patterns" of stars making the signs of the zodiac) actually existed. A coincidence. Correlation is not causation.

And no, I'm not joking;


There are thousands of patterns like that;


He believes the sun goes round the earth mate - don’t waste your time or typing energy.
 
He believes the sun goes round the earth mate - don’t waste your time or typing energy.

Over the years I have met more than a few people who genuinely don't seem to get it. Perhaps a combination of not paying attention at school/never really thinking about it/not being particularly gifted intellectually. I remember a long discussion with a guy once who was adamant that we have seasons because the sun moves across the horizon. He was convinced that this proved the Sun orbits the Earth and that my wacky claim that the Earth has an axial tilt was crazy. At least it's a step up from being a Flat Earther and not as harmful as really believing in stuff like astrology.
 
I can't remember the chap's name on here, but I remember him saying that he 'knew from basic scientific facts that man hadn't left the atmosphere'.

So yeah, they do walk among us.

***edit***

Here we are. Used to go by groen as their username.

I know because of basic scientific facts that man has never left the atmosphere.
 
Last edited:
I looked out of my window the other night and took a photo of the moon.

Was reet good.

d3K9ieJ.jpeg
 
Anything can be called a coincidence or destiny if you look hard enough.
Astrology and the moon star systems are around about connected.

Do people think dates for moon landings are picked randomly? These are human people making the decision.

When you create a password do you select a random set of letters? Is it a word or based on a word? Is the password in English?

You talking about coincidence is like me saying your password is random. When it isn't. Your password is what you have thought about and made a decision.
 
Last edited:
Astrology and the moon star systems are around about connected.

Do people think dates for moon landings are picked randomly? These are human people making the decision.

When you create a password do you select a random set of letters? Is it a word or based on a word? Is the password in English?

You talking about coincidence is like me saying your password is random. When it isn't. Your password is what you have thought about and made a decision.

My password is generated by a password program and is a random selection of characters that probably had some rules to its algorithm.

Not entirely sure what your first two paragraphs are trying to say…
 
My password is generated by a password program and is a random selection of characters that probably had some rules to its algorithm.

Not entirely sure what your first two paragraphs are trying to say…
So you made a choice to create a password with a random set of characters.

The point I'm making is that if there is a human conscious behind something then it's not coincidence.

Coincidence is when two or more events happen with no knowledge of the other.

Astrology and space aren't unconnected subjects. Maybe the people deciding the dates were into astrology.
 
Last edited:
So you made a choice to create a password with a random set of characters.

The point I'm making is that if there is a human conscious behind something then it's not coincidence.

Coincidence is when two or more events happen with no knowledge of the other.

Astrology and space aren't unconnected subjects. Maybe the people deciding the dates were into astrology.

So if 2 people who have never met each other before decide to go to a party and they are both wearing the same dress, that ISN'T a coincidence in your eyes, because it involved "human concious" ?!

I don't think you have thought this through....
 
So if 2 people who have never met each other before decide to go to a party and they are both wearing the same dress, that ISN'T a coincidence in your eyes, because it involved "human concious" ?!

I don't think you have thought this through....
"a" means 1 human conscious.

In your example there are 2 human consciouses, so it would be a coincidence.

Of course they are - on the grounds that astrology is entirely made up and has no basis in the real world.
It's nothing to do with it being made up. Many scientists believe in religion.

If some genetic particle is Biblically named and the scientist is religious then it's not a coincidence.

If you created a computer game and you named it after a game you played as a kid, it would be like someone else saying the 2 games being named the same thing is a coincidence. When in reality it wasn't.
 
Astrology and the moon star systems are around about connected.

Do people think dates for moon landings are picked randomly? These are human people making the decision.

The point I'm making is that if there is a human conscious behind something then it's not coincidence.

Coincidence is when two or more events happen with no knowledge of the other.

Astrology and space aren't unconnected subjects. Maybe the people deciding the dates were into astrology.


Do you really think NASA picked the landing dates based on astrology then? Or d'you think it was more likely based on things like spacecraft and crew readiness, orbital profiles, political realities (the 'by the end of the decade' Kennedy mandate, the fear of the Russians getting a spacecraft to do a manned cislunar loop of the Moon in part forcing the schedule up for Apollo 8, and so on) and the weather at the launch site?
 
Do you really think NASA picked the landing dates based on astrology then? Or d'you think it was more likely based on things like spacecraft and crew readiness, orbital profiles, political realities (the 'by the end of the decade' Kennedy mandate, the fear of the Russians getting a spacecraft to do a manned cislunar loop of the Moon in part forcing the schedule up for Apollo 8, and so on) and the weather at the launch site?
Maybe it was both.

Why is it difficult to comprehend they are regular people just like us?
 
Maybe it was both.

Uh huh.

Why is it difficult to comprehend they are regular people just like us?

People involved, however peripherally, in scheduling a lunar landing during the Apollo era:

James E. Webb, director of NASA until October '68
Thomas Paine, succeeded Webb as director of NASA until April '71
James Fletcher, succeeded Paine as director of NASA until May '77

Hugh Dryden, deputy director until his death in '65
Robert Seamens, succeeded Dryden until Jan '68
Paine, until March '69
George Low, until June '76

Bob Gilruth
Wernher von Braun
George Mueller

All the folks at North American Aviation who designed and built the Command/Service module
All the folks at Grumman who built the Lunar module

Deke Slayton, head of the astronaut office
The astronauts themselves

Mission planners. Mathematicians. Scientists.

Training supervisors.

Plus, lest we forget, just how much got in the way of them during the program. The complexity of the task with building the CSM saw many delays on North American's end. Same goes for Grumman with the LEM. The Apollo 1 fire set the whole deal back many months (though probably made a net contribution to the success of the program, in one of those terrible twists of fate).

And you want to tell me that it's credible that NASA could schedule Apollo 11, the first attempt at a manned landing, for a date based on one form of astrology...not knowing if it would necessarily get up into space then, or if it would necessarily be successful? I mean, there but for the grace of $DEITY and the service module that eventually flew on 13 could have been assigned to 11 and Tom Hanks is playing Neil Armstrong in a Ron Howard movie set in '69 instead of Jim Lovell in '70...
 
And you want to tell me that it's credible that NASA could schedule Apollo 11, the first attempt at a manned landing, for a date based on one form of astrology...not knowing if it would necessarily get up into space then, or if it would necessarily be successful?

But that's the whole point.

Clearly if they hadn't picked such an auspicious astrological date where the signs of the crew etc. were aligned in accordance with ancient Babylonian principles, then the moon landing would never have succeeded!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: JRS
Back
Top Bottom