What Rational Reason Does Mr. Lundahl Have for Questioning the Moon Landings, But Believing that the Talking Snake and Magic Fruit Trees of Genesis 3 are Real?
Kevin R. Henke
November 14, 2022
As discussed in Henke (2022ko), Mr. Lundahl in Lundahl (2022w) made some totally inappropriate remarks about the contents of my recommended physics book, Orear (1967), without even looking at it. While commenting on a book that he has not read, Lundahl (2022w) also questioned the Moon landings:
“Mr. Henke's reference seems to be a book labelled Fundamental Physics. Fundamental seems close to starting point at explanation level, and precisely therefore very far from starting point on the proving or evidencing or demonstrating level.
If God made an exception, that would mean so much less "universality" for the law, but would not change its meaning for all masses on which it has any bearing.
To be clear, that masses usually behave like this is a fairly probable conclusion from observations (especially if Moon landing is genuine, etc, since otherwise Aristotelic gravity could hold).” [my emphasis]
Why would Mr. Lundahl question the Moon Landings by saying “if” they were genuine? What justification does he have for his unquestionable support for the baseless claims about a Talking Snake and magic fruit trees in Genesis 3, but yet question the definitive evidence for the Moon landings? What’s his justification for such an irrational double standard?
Reference:
Orear, J. 1967. Fundamental Physics, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons: New York, 472pp.