🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov4.203722.6838@engage.pko.dec.com> moroney@ramblr.enet.dec.com writes:
>In article <4586@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us>, snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes...
>> 
>> 
>>    Well  ,  it  sounds  like the willingness to cling to some kind of la-la
>>   land belief that our  government  wouldn't  lie  to  us  about  the  moon
>>   landings  won't  just  melt  in  the  face of straightforward ,elementary
>>   mathematics ,and piles of circumstantial evidence. I guess I'll just have
>>   to use even bigger piles of circumstantial evidence and MORE  math.  Here
>>   goes:
>
>Well, since if the Moon's gravity were 0.64G rather than around 0.16G, this
>would mean the Moon is 4 times as massive than it allegedly is as we know
>its diameter.  But if this were the case, the Earth-Moon mass ratio would be
>quite different, thus the barycenter would move, tides would be quite
>different, the motion of the Earth-Moon system around the sun would be
>different,  and so forth, none of which correspond to observed information.
>
>

Not if they have lied about the mass of the earth, the sun, the density of 
water, and perhaps even the gravitational constant (not to mention where they 
were when they said they were going to be working late!) :^)  ;^)  :^) .