Customer Reviews
astonishing facts but unfounded and illogical conclusions. - By: Alpo, 28 Nov 2007 
Firstly I'm not sure if I'm a critic or a supporter of this book. I've given it 4 stars because the actual data & numbers that are given are extremely interesting & need to be known by the world. The ratios of days, orbits & diameters, are correct, even if not worded properly: "The moon is exactly 400 times smaller than the sun" should be "the diameter of" the moon, sun etc.
There is clearly somethingin this that needs further research, but there are a couple of things that bother me about the book.
I personally will not come to a conclusion about what all this means until I have analyzed it far more thoroughly. I might never come to a conclusion about it ever, unless there is an actual fact that proves or disproves something.
That is my main problem with this book, the conclusions the authors come to, have no evidence to support them, its pure speculation. Don't get me wrong, the planetary mechanics & ratios are amazing, & are far too perfect to be coincidence, but that doesn't mean that people from the future did it all, which is what the authors state is their best theory. Theres just as much evidence to support that idea as there is to say the whole solar system is the poo of a giant space fish.
I recommend everyone reads this book before they come to any conclusion & once they've read it don't just settle with the authors ideas. there are more possibilities than just god, aliens or people from the future. Perhaps the solar system is a living organism or maybe theres a completely natural phenomenon where for some reason not yet known to physics, planets harmonize themselves with each other on many different levels ie size, rotation, who knows?
Once these facts become more well known, everyone from Jehovahs witnesses to star trek fans are going to jump on the band wagon & try to use this to support their views.
What I'm trying to say is, the implications of what this could mean are endless, so please don't dismiss these remarkable figures just because someone says it means we are all slaves of the reptilians, or that these facts prove the plot to the terminator films actually happened.
And no matter what anyones opinion is,
The Earth still rotates about 366 times per orbit of the sun, & has a polar diameter 366.0431 percent larger than the moons.
The moon has an orbital period of 27.32 days & has a diameter 27.32 percent that of the Earths polar diameter.
The suns diameter is 109.2 times the size of Earths diameter, & the distance from the earth to the sun when we are at our furthest from it is 109.2 sun diameters.
if you divide 109.2 by 4 you get 27.3
366 moon orbits equal 10000 days
I could go on & on but the fact is you keep on getting the same recurring numbers & multiples of them again & again:
4
27.32
100
109.2
366
Mathematical idiocy - By: Yahzi, 19 Nov 2006 
The synopsis tells you all you need to know about this book,in the sentence: "the Moon is exactly 400 times smaller than the Sun."
This is false, of course. The diameter of the moon is 400 times smaller than the diameter of the sun; but that does not mean the moon, as a whole, is 400 times smaller. The moon existsin 3 dimensions, not one. For example, the mass of the moon is about 27 million times smaller than the sun.
This is typical of the logicin this book. They go looking for correspondences, & they find them: even if they have to treat celestial objects as one-dimensional to make their numbers look interesting. They simply stir the facts togetherin a great big soup, until two disassocated numbers look similar. Then they pluck out the pair & declare "Mystery!"
The fact that a book like this could get published is pathetic. If you want science fiction, there's vastly better & more interesting out there; if you want science, there's simply nothing here. If you want baseless, juvenile speculation, then go hang out with your mates on Friday night & have a few beers. It'll be a lot more fun.
Luna paradox - By: David M. Williamson, 12 Nov 2006 Dear all, this book provided several interesting facts about the moon's dimensions & location, that appear to be beyond coincidence. I went to the NASA web-site to check the information. I was surprised that the Author didn't expressin detail the fact that the Moon's rotation is exactly the same as the time it takes to orbit the Earth, which is why we always see the same face of the moon, it's perfectly syncronised, maybe this is to make us seek what isin the Farside perhaps (by following the Author's logic); though I suspect this was deliberate as the majority of the moonsin our solar system share this feature & the Author wanted to demonstrate the uniqueness of our moon, which was achieved by other facts.
The Author's arguments were unbalanced & inconsistentin several areas. After debunking the Conspiracy theory that Man has never been to the Moon, he stated later that Darwin's Natural Selection was correct, however it is clear that Natural Selection remains only a theory of Evolution & has it's fair share of obvious weaknesses, which Darwin confessed.
Strangely enough the Author stated Darwin was correct having just written a chapter explaining how the Evolution of DNA by a Random accident was statistically impossible & therefore it had to have been created. Therefore, I assume, Selection need not have been Natural afterall but part of a created process or program, by following this logic. (I sense the Author was playing it safe by trying to please both Neo-Darwinists & Creationalists.)
If you are a supporter of the Faked Moon Missions then this book is a must read because far from debunking, I found that certain parts of this book actually support the conspiracy (unintentionally). The Author states that several explanations of the Moon's creation were invalid because Moon Rock was identical to certain Rocks from the Earth... meaning the Moon had to have been created from the Earthin the past.. this could also be interpreted by a Conspiracy theorist differently e.g. we never went to the moon & the rocks were actually from the Earth all along, which is why Moon Rock is the same as Earth Rock.
The Final theory of the book is really the weakest argument throughout, creating an obvious Paradox & the Author must have forgotten his earlier claims that Life could not have existed on the Earth without the Moon being there from the start of Life.
Despite the weaknesses this is a worthwhile read & I certainly discovered new facts about the Moon that are intrigueing.
Read it.
NB..
I would still question why it is taking so long to reach the Moon this time with advanced technology available when it was supposedly achievedin the 1960's within a very short-period of time, why couldn't NASA land men back on the Moon within a few years???
Strange but a very thought provoking argument - By: Hector Wright, 15 Jun 2006 
Quite remarkable. I came to this unusual book after it was studied by the National Science Teachers Association & found to have a case that required an answer. The maths usedin this book are simple, clear & inescapably accurate. I see one reviewer has suggested (without substantiation) that the authors arein some way numerically illiterate. Not so.
People prefer to see proof of what they already believe to be true & it is obviously disconcerting when a book like this brings up so many inconvenient facts. A growing number of scientists are now realising the dishonesty that exists to protect old ideas. Terance Kealey a clinical biochemist & the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Buckingham has observed "Scientists actually treat facts the way barristers treat hostile witnesses... it is a myth that working scientists always respect falsifiability. Scientists often ignore inconvenient findings".
Anyone who likes to think for themselves should read this fascinating book & deal with the facts as they stand.
Pseudoscience - By: Mr. Rohde, 28 May 2006 
It's always good to exercise one's mind with new ideas... thinking impossible thoughts can flex your mind. This book could be fun exercise for your imagination & inspire aspiring science fiction writers. But to claim that this is solid science would make Occam spinningin his grave.
The authors should have taken the trouble of reading John Allen Paulos "Innumeracy: Mathematical Illiteracy & its Consequences", before they wrote this book.
To quote Paulos: "... rarity by itself shouldn't necessarily be evidence of anything. When one is dealt a bridge hand of thirteen cards, the probability of being dealt that particular hand is less than onein 600 billion. Still, it would be absurd for someone to be dealt a hand, examine it carefully, calculate that the probability of getting it is less than onein 600 billion, & then conclude that he must not have been dealt that very hand because it is so very improbable."
Likewise, the authors claim is that since the moon's location, seize & weight is miraculously accommodating for life, it cannot be a coincidence - It must be built by some unknown force/agency...
