Sun and Moon Equal Divine Balanced Opposites

When you look up at the Sun and Moon you see two equally-sized equidistant circles tracing similar paths at similar speeds around a flat, stationary Earth.  The “experts” at NASA, however, claim your common sense every day experience is false on all counts!  To begin with, they say the Earth is not flat but a big ball; not stationary but spinning around 19 miles per second; they say the Sun does not revolve around the Earth as it appears, but Earth revolves around the Sun; the Moon, on the other hand, does revolve around the Earth, though not East to West as it appears, rather West to East; and the Sun is actually 400 times larger than the Moon and 400 times farther away!  That’s right, you can clearly see they are the same size and distance, you can see the Earth is flat, you can feel the Earth is stationary, but according to the gospel of modern astronomy, you are wrong and a simpleton worthy of endless ridicule if you dare to believe your own eyes and experience!  



With haughty arrogance the nearest hypnotized heliocentrist will then inform you that the Sun is 865,374 miles in diameter and 92,955,807 miles from the Earth, the Moon is 2,159 miles in diameter and 238,900 miles from Earth, and those just happen to be the EXACT diameters and distances necessary for a viewer from Earth to falsely perceive them as being the same size!  So, you see, silly Flat-Earther, it is all an illusion and the apparent equanimity of our day and night luminaries in the sky results from mere coincidental parallax perspective!  The Sun does not revolve around the Earth as it appears; rather the Earth spins 1,038 mph under your feet and revolves 67,108 mph around the Sun!  The Moon does indeed revolve around the Earth, but not as it appears!  Though it seems to move East to West just like the Sun and everything else in the heavens, the Moon actually spins West to East at 10.3 mph while orbiting Earth at 2,288 mph, which combined with the Earth’s 1,038mph spin and 67,108 mph orbit around the Sun coincidentally results in all motions perfectly cancelling out making the Moon seem to move across the heavens with similar path and similar speed as the Sun while always only showing us one side of its surface, and perpetually hiding its “dark side.”



“The Moon presented a special math problem for the construction of the heliocentricity model. The only way to make the Moon fit in with the other assumptions was to reverse its direction from that of what everyone who has ever lived has seen it go. The math model couldn’t just stop the Moon like it did the Sun, that wouldn’t work. And it couldn’t let it continue to go East to West as we see it go, either at the same speed or at a different speed. The only option was to reverse its observed East to West direction and change its speed from about 64,000 miles an hour to about 2,200 miles an hour. This reversal, along with the change in speed, were unavoidable assumptions that needed to be adopted if the model was to have any chance of mimicking reality.” -Bernard Brauer



“They want you to believe that the Moon's rotation is perfectly synchronized with its orbit so that's why we only ever see one side of the Moon, rather than conclude the obvious - that the Moon is simply NOT rotating. Moreover, they had to slow down the Moon's speed by 58,870 mph AND reverse its direction to West-East to successfully sell their phony heliocentricity system to a gullible public. I don't think there is one person in many, many thousands - regardless of education - who knows that the Copernican Model had to turn the Moon's observable direction around and give it a new speed to accommodate the phases and eclipses.” -Marshall Hall

“Astronomers tell us that the Moon goes round the Earth in about 28 days. Well, we may see her making her journey round every day, if we make use of our eyes and these are about the best things we have to use. The Moon falls behind in her daily motion as compared with that of the Sun to the extent of one revolution in the time specified; but that is not making a revolution. Failing to go as fast as other bodies go in one direction does not constitute a going round in the opposite one - as the astronomers would have us believe! And, since all this absurdity has been rendered necessary for no other purpose than to help other absurdities along, it is clear that the astronomers are on the wrong track.”  -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (82)



There are several theories about the relative size and distance of the Sun and Moon all with their points of evidence and points of contention.  Flat-Earthers throughout the ages have used sextants and plane trigonometry attempting to make such calculations, usually concluding the Sun and Moon both to be only about 32 miles in diameter and less than a few thousand miles from Earth.  Perhaps the least plausible model, certainly the most exaggerated and imaginative, is the reigning heliocentric theory claiming the Sun to be a whopping 865,374 miles in diameter, 92,955,807 miles from the Earth, and the Moon  2,159 miles in diameter, 238,900 miles from the Earth.

Heliocentrists’ astronomical figures always sound perfectly precise, but they have historically been notorious for regularly and drastically changing them to suit their various models.  For instance, in his time Copernicus calculated the Sun’s distance from Earth to be 3,391,200 miles.  The next century Johannes Kepler decided it was actually 12,376,800 miles away.  Issac Newton once said, “It matters not whether we reckon it 28 or 54 million miles distant for either would do just as well!”  How scientific!?  Benjamin Martin calculated between 81 and 82 million miles, Thomas Dilworth claimed 93,726,900 miles, John Hind stated positively 95,298,260 miles, Benjamin Gould said more than 96 million miles, and Christian Mayer thought it was more than 104 million!



“As the sun, according to ‘science’ may be anything from 3 to 104 million miles away, there is plenty of ‘space’ to choose from.  It is like the showman and the child.  You pay your money - for various astronomical works - and you take your choice as to what distance you wish the sun to be.  If you are a modest person, go in for a few millions; but if you wish to be ‘very scientific’ and to be ‘mathematically certain’ of your figures, then I advise you to make your choice somewhere about a hundred millions.  You will at least have plenty of ‘space’ to retreat into, should the next calculation be against the figures of your choice.  You can always add a few millions to ‘keep up with the times,’ or take off as many as may be required to adjust the distance to the ‘very latest’ accurate column of figures.  Talk about ridicule, the whole of modern astronomy is like a farcical comedy - full of surprises.  One never knows what monstrous or ludicrous absurdity may come forth next.  You must not apply the ordinary rules of common-sense to astronomical guesswork.  No, the thing would fall to pieces if you did.”  -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (115)



“Regiments of figures are paraded with all the learned jargon for which science is famous, but one might as well look at the changing clouds in the sky and seek for certainty there, as to expect to get it from the propounders of modern astronomy.  But is there no means of testing these ever-changing never-stable speculations and bringing them to the scrutiny of the hard logic of fact?  Indeed there is.  The distance of the sun can be measured with much precision, the same way as a tree or a house, or church steeple is measured, by plane triangulation.  It is the principle on which a house is built, a table made or a man-of-war constructed … The sun is always somewhere between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn, a distance admitted to be less than 3,000 miles; how then can the sun if it be so many thousand miles in diameter, squeeze itself into a space of about 3,000 miles only?  But look at the distance, say the professors!  We have already done that and not one of the wise men we have so often challenged, has ever attempted to refute the principle on which we measure the sun’s distance … If the navigator neglects to apply the sun’s semi-diameter to his observation at sea, he is 16 nautical miles out in calculating the position his ship is in.  A minute of arc on the sextant represents a nautical mile, and if the semi-diameter be 16 miles, the diameter is of course 32 miles.  And as measured by the sextant, the sun’s diameter is 32 minutes of arc, that is 32 nautical miles in diameter.  Let him disprove this who can.  If ever disproof is attempted, it will be a literary curiosity, well worth framing.”  -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (114-120)



Measuring with sextants and calculating with plane trigonometry both the Sun and Moon figure to be only about 32 miles in diameter and approximately 3,000 miles away.  As shown last chapter, the Moon is actually a semi-transparent luminary and not the solid, spherical, desert planet that NASA would have us believe.  In fact, it is likely that both the Sun and Moon are not densely physical at all and are simply luminous flat discs able to pass by/through one another during eclipses.

“The results of recent research prove that the heavenly luminaries are not Worlds, but lights, and should cause all men who have been led to accept as proven Copernicus’ theory of the motions of the Earth, to reconsider this subject.”  -E. Eschini, “Foundations of Many Generations” (3)

“The satellites of the earth are not masses of matter. They are luminous and transparent discs without substance. The moon, in particular, conveys the impression of being an ethereal manifestation, and the uncertain and illusive character which is usually associated with this satellite results precisely from its immaterial nature. It was recognized from the earliest times that the satellites of the earth, particularly the sun and the moon, were not solid, opaque bodies. They were first, until Aristotle, considered to be souls or spirits, which does not imply a physical nature. To the ancients, they were simply lights, and they gave the sun and the moon a very apt name. They called them luminaries.”  -Gabrielle Henriet, “Heaven and Earth” (34-36)



In the Flat-Earth model, the Sun and Moon luminaries revolve around the Earth once every 24 hours illuminating like spotlights the areas over which they pass.  The Sun’s annual journey from tropic to tropic, solstice to solstice, is what determines the length and character of days, nights and seasons.  This is why equatorial regions experience almost year-round summer and heat while higher latitudes North and especially South experience more distinct seasons with harsh winters.  



The heliocentric model claims seasons change based on the ball-Earth’s alleged “axial tilt” and “elliptical orbit” around the Sun.  Their flawed current model even places us closest to the Sun (91,400,000 miles) in January when its actually winter, and farthest from the Sun (94,500,000 miles) in July when its actually summer throughout much of the Earth.  They say due to the ball-Earth’s tilt, different places receive different amounts of direct sunlight and that is what produces the seasonal and temperature changes.  This makes little sense, however, because if the Sun’s heat travels over ninety million miles to reach the ball-Earth, how could a slight tilt, a mere few thousand miles maximum, negate the Sun’s ninety million mile journey, giving us simultaneous tropical summers and Antarctic winters?



“The earth is a stretched-out structure, which diverges from the central north in all directions towards the south.  The equator, being midway between the north center and the southern circumference, divides the course of the sun into north and south declination.  The longest circle round the world which the sun makes, is when it has reached its greatest southern declination.  Gradually going northwards the circle is contracted.  In about three months after the southern extremity of its path has been reached, the sun makes a circle round the equator.  Still pursuing a northerly course as it goes round and above the world, in another three months the greatest northern declination is reached, when the sun again begins to go towards the south.  In north latitudes, when the sun is going north, it rises earlier each day, is higher at noon and sets later; while in southern latitudes at the same time, the sun as a matter of course rises later, reaches a lesser altitude at noon and sets earlier.  In northern latitudes during the southern summer, say from September to December, the sun rises later each day, is lower at noon and sets earlier; while in the south he rises earlier, reaches a higher altitude at noon, and sets later each day.  This movement round the earth daily is the cause of the alternations of day and night; while his northerly and southerly courses produce the seasons.  When the sun is south of the equator it is summer in the south and winter in the north; and vice versa.  The fact of the alternation of the seasons flatly contradicts the Newtonian delusion that the earth revolves in an orbit round the sun.  It is said that summer is caused by the earth being nearest the sun, and winter by its being farthest from the sun.  But if the reader will follow the argument in any text book he will see that according to the theory, when the earth is nearest the sun there must be summer in both northern and southern latitudes; and in like manner when it is farthest from the sun, it must be winter all over the earth at the same time, because the whole of the globe-earth would then be farthest from the sun!!! In short, it is impossible to account for the recurrence of the seasons on the assumption that the earth is globular and that it revolves in an orbit around the sun.”  -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (124-125)



“The seasons are caused by the Sun’s circuit round the Earth in a spiral ecliptic. In the Winter Solstice (December 21st), the Sun is vertical over the Tropic of Capricorn. Looking South from London, he appears to make a small circuit in the Southern sky, during the same period he is seen to cross the sky at almost overhead in Cape Town, thus causing Summer in the Southern Hemisphere. In the Summer Solstice (June 21st), the Sun is vertical over the Tropic of Cancer, (nearly overhead in London), while looking North from Cape Town, he appears to make a small circuit in the Northern sky, causing Winter in the Southern and Summer in the Northern Hemisphere.”  -E. Eschini, “Foundations of Many Generations” (7)

“The essential feature of the year is its division into two equal periods of six months, based first on the predominating length of the days over that of the nights, and vice versa, conditions which are governed by the varying hours of sunrise and sunset; and secondly, by the either high or low height reached by the sun in the heavens at mid-day. The first cycle, during which the days are longer than the nights and the sun reaches its culminating point of the year, extends from the spring equinox to the autumn equinox, i.e. March 21st to September 22nd; and the second cycle during which, inversely, the duration of the nights exceeds that of the days, and the sun descends to its lowest point of the year, extends from the autumn equinox to the spring equinox, i.e. September 23rd to March 20th. These two six-month periods are also characterized by an opposition of temperature. During the first cycle which corresponds to spring and summer, the heat gradually rises and falls, while during the second cycle which comprises autumn and winter, it is the intensity of the cold which progressively increases and decreases.”  -Gabrielle Henriet, “Heaven and Earth” (3-4)



In the Flat-Earth model, the Sun and Moon spotlights are perpetually hovering over and parallel to the surface of the Earth.  From our vantage point, due to the Law of Perspective, the day/night luminaries appear to rise up the Eastern horizon, curve peaking high overhead, and then sink below the Western horizon.  They do not escape to the underside of the Flat-Earth as one might imagine, but rather rotate concentric clockwise circles around the circumference from tropic to tropic.  The appearance of rising, peaking and setting is due to the common Law of Perspective where tall objects appear high overhead when nearby, but at a distance gradually lower towards the vanishing point.

“Although the Sun is at all times above and parallel to the Earth’s surface, he appears to ascend the firmament from morning until noon, and to descend and sink below the horizon at evening.  This arises from a simple and everywhere visible law of perspective.  A flock of birds, when passing over a flat or marshy country, always appears to descend as it recedes; and if the flock is extensive, the first bird appears lower, or nearer to the horizon than the last.  The farthest light in a row of lamps appears the lowest, although each one has the same altitude.  Bearing these phenomena in mind, it will easily be seen how the Sun, although always parallel to the surface of the Earth, must appear to ascend when approaching, and descend after leaving the meridian or noon-day position.”  -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Earth Not a Globe, 2nd Edition” (85)



“What can be more common than the observation that, standing at one end of a long row of lamp-posts, those nearest to us seem to be the highest; and those farthest away the lowest; whilst, as we move along towards the opposite end of the series, those which we approach seem to get higher, and those we are leaving behind appear to gradually become lower … It is an ordinary effect of perspective for an object to appear lower and lower as the observer goes farther and farther away from it. Let any one try the experiment of looking at a light-house, church spire, monument, gas lamp, or other elevated object, from a distance of only a few yards, and notice the angle at which it is observed. On going farther away, the angle under which it is seen will diminish, and the object will appear lower and lower as the distance of the observer increases, until, at a certain point, the line of sight to the object, and the apparently uprising surface of the earth upon or over which it stands, will converge to the angle which constitutes the ‘vanishing point’ or the horizon; beyond which it will be invisible.”  -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (230-1)



Heliocentrists would have you believe the very opposite of what every human who has ever walked the Earth has seen with their own eyes.  It is obvious to any child and sovereign-minded adult that the Sun, Moon, stars and planets, every light in the sky above, revolves around the motionless Earth beneath our feet.  It is also plain to see that the Sun and Moon are both approximately the same size and situated relatively close to Earth, not 400 times divergent and millions upon millions of miles away.  To abandon your senses and every day experience in favor of such unfounded science-fiction fantasies is a fallacy of appeal to authority so extreme that it leaves the brain-washed believer impotent to trust his own natural instincts and forever thereafter chained to the fantastical explanations of astronomical charlatans.

“No one ever yet felt or saw the earth careering through space at the terrific rates it is credited with, but everyone who is not blind can see the sun move.  But the matter can be tested.  It may be known for certain whether the sun moves or not.  Take a school globe and place a stile on the semicircle that holds it in position.  Cause the globe to rotate against a lamp on a table, and you will find that the shadow left on the globe is always parallel to the equator, at whatever angle you may incline the globe.  Further, let the stile be of sufficient length to allow the shadow to fall on to a flat surface, moving the globe towards the lamp, and the shadow will be a straight line.  If, therefore, the shadow left on the earth by the sun be a straight line, then undoubtedly the sun is stationary.  Drive a stake into the ground in such a position as to expose it to the sun for the greater part of a day - the whole day if possible.  Mark the end of the shadow every quarter of an hour, and you will find that the marks form part of an elongated curve, clearly proving that the sun moves over a stationary earth.”  -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (113)

“The Path of the Sun is Concentric, expanding and contracting daily for six months alternately. This is easily proved by fixing a rod, say at noon on the 21st of December, so that, on looking along it, the line of vision will touch the lower edge of the Sun. This line of sight will continue for several days pretty much the same, but, on the ninth or tenth day, it will be found that the rod will have to be moved considerably toward the zenith, in order to touch the lower edge of the Sun, and every day afterwards it will have to be raised till the 22nd of June. Then there will be little change for a few days as before, but day by day afterwards the rod will have to be lowered till the 21st of December, when the Sun is farthest from the Northern Centre, and it is dark there. This expansion and contraction of the Sun's path continues every year, and is termed the Northern and Southern Declination, and should demonstrate to Modem Astronomers the absurdity of calling the World a Planet, as it remains stationary while the Sun continues circling round the heavens.”  -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (184-5)

http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2016/02/sun-and-moon-equal-divine-balanced.html

Thumbs up!

Fantastic, thanks for all of these great posts, you just keep on crushing all of their nonsensical theories!

This video really nails it home. I really enjoy that graphic demo of the Sun and Moon moving over the flat Earth while showing the dates/times of the months.

Amazing work as always Eric. The comments in the video are getting better and more conducive to getting this through to people. Thank you for your incredible commitment to Truth!

This might be one of your best videos yet, if not the best one. I'd rather watch another Eric Dubay video than the latest Hollywood blockbuster. I've scarcely watched an actual movie for entertainment in months. Everything else just seems frivolous. Watching Eric keep on keeping on with the facts and evidence is a great example to all of us. I don't want to just seem like a fan here because I have my pride. But a man's got to say something.

Thanks so much everyone, your encouraging positive comments really motivate me to do the most/best that I can, much appreciated!

Admin wrote:Thanks so much everyone, your encouraging positive comments really motivate me to do the most/best that I can, much appreciated!

Keep going, man! Don't let the bastards grind you down!

I'm starting to see a plethora of those "GIF" shared posts on social media with a clip of the "Arctic Sun never setting", which is in fact just a clip of the North Pole midnight Sun, and not the supposed South. More and more disinformation is appearing on social media in relation to Flat Earth Truths, and it's both hilarious and adrenaline-fueling.

Something is clearly gearing up behind the scenes IMHO.

Keep going, Eric!

Mind-blowing Proof that Sun and Moon both orbit Earth - FLAT EARTH
Published on Mar 17, 2016
Poor Moon, he has been slandered since 500 years and has been accused of stealing the Sun's light, which is why he is making every possible effort to guard his dignity and identity by revealing himself to us at every possible angle and show us that he is self-luminescent and not a thief, as alleged by the Masonic-Jesuit Sun-Worshipping Globalist pseudo-scientists and charlatans of NASA and modern Science!
As for the Sun and Moon revolving over and around us, I'll let the video speak for itself.

Hi everyone, I spent the last 3 months of my life attempting to open the eyes of all my friends and almost everyone I meet as I experienced that moment which I know you can all relate to when you realise in your heart the truth that is all around us. Adapting to my new perspective has been challenging but always knew there was an answer I hadn't yet found so my transition has probably not been as testing as it may be for the majority. So after months of research and becoming a member I'm daring my first effort of an input! If anyone has watched any videos about ancient knowledge/consciousness you may have come across Eric Dollard. This guy has been compared to Tesla as seems to have a deep understanding of all electrical. So after learning about the Moon and Sun and their opposite properties in recalled a statement Eric had made about the Sun not being a big ball of continuous fusion but fitted best into the model of a transformer. I've since been toying with the idea that the Sun and Moon may somehow be working together recycling all matters of energy/electromagnetism within a system environment?!? Any views on this..?

Just watched 2nd video up, got it

This is a reply to brian Mullens "fire and ice" theory.....a quick note: I have been testing the coldness of the moon in the following manner.
One 6 by 6 post set up vertically in the yard with two opposite side marked A&B. A is kept aimed towards the moonlight, B is the shady side.
Off the back of side "B" I have a shelf built where I place a convex mirror to reflect moonlight back onto the "shady" side of the post.
Last night was a waning gibbeous moon and the results were typical. An average of two degrees difference between the moon lit side and the shady side, the moon lit side being the coldest, as it usually is....but not always....
The interesting part is the reflected moonlight to the backside of the post.....I actually used TWO convex mirrors last night to really get a positive result and I "babysat" the mirrors for over two hours to keep them aimed directly on one single location as the moon did its thing....anyway..
I have done this experiment four times and the results are always the same.......NO CHANGE IN TEMPERATURE WHATSOEVER EVEN THOUGH THE SIDE "A" (THE SIDE IN DIRECT MOONLIGHT") is showing a three degree coldness compared to side "B".
This is significant....I have demonstrated that "light" from the moon is not the source of the "coldness"....it is something else...not the light itself...
the "moon light" merely marks the areas where we notice how some other force from the moon interacts with matter in an opposite way that the sun does.
I have this all documented on video....I have proven this....it is not the light that is causing the coolness....it is some other force coming from the direction of the Moon and perhaps the moon itself, but not the "moon Light"....please conduct your own experiments with convex mirrors to confirm or disprove what I have observed but don't leave them unattended the next morning.....a morning sun on those mirrors will quickly catch your testing post on fire.........thanks....Jim Fenison

reluctantsparrow wrote:This is a reply to brian Mullens "fire and ice" theory.....a quick note:  I have been testing the coldness of the moon in the following manner.  
One 6 by 6 post set up vertically in the yard with two opposite side marked A&B.  A is kept aimed towards the moonlight, B is the shady side.
Off the back of side "B" I have a shelf built where I place a convex mirror to reflect moonlight back onto the "shady" side of the post.
Last night was a waning gibbeous moon and the results were typical.  An average of two degrees difference between the moon lit side and the shady side, the moon lit side being the coldest, as it usually is....but not always....
The interesting part is the reflected moonlight to the backside of the post.....I actually used TWO convex mirrors last night to really get a positive result and I "babysat" the mirrors for over two hours to keep them aimed directly on one single location as the moon did its thing....anyway..
I have done this experiment four times and the results are always the same.......NO CHANGE IN TEMPERATURE WHATSOEVER EVEN THOUGH THE SIDE "A" (THE SIDE IN DIRECT MOONLIGHT") is showing a three degree coldness compared to side "B".
This is significant....I have demonstrated that "light" from the moon is not the source  of the "coldness"....it is something else...not the light itself...
the "moon light" merely marks the areas where we notice how some other force from the moon interacts with matter in an opposite way that the sun does.
I have this all documented on video....I have proven this....it is not the light that is causing the coolness....it is some other force coming from the direction of the Moon and perhaps the moon itself, but not the "moon Light"....please conduct your own experiments with convex mirrors to confirm or disprove what I have observed but don't leave them unattended the next morning.....a morning sun on those mirrors will quickly catch your testing post on fire.........thanks....Jim Fenison

Thanks for posting, could you please provide said video?

Took forever to upload...it is long,  boring, and not put together for entertainment but for scientific purposes.  I have had similar results all month.  The actual "evidence" of measuring the Moon spot on the backside of the post did not show up on video (bummer) but the entire experiment Is laid out in detail.

Great work sparrow, just proves were always learning and have never quite got a full understanding of the working of the luminaries

I am new to the "dark moon mythology" but ran into many inconsistencies last month I did not share in the video...such as...percentage of light from moon is not consistent with the readings...such as...14.4 % waning crescent showed just as much temperature disparity as an 85 % waning gibbous and a 14.4 % waxing crescent showed no temperature disparity at all that I could not explain with my "flywheel effect" hypothesis.....
These are clues....to something else going on, and I would like to assume another hypothesis if I may.....based on dark moon mythology perhaps....
If I had the finances I would like to build a small "dome" covered with very accurate temperature sensors.  
The sensors are built in such a way that whatever is in the sky causing the "cold effect" must be directly overhead before the sensors take a reading....that way, via the cold itself, we could "track" the exact location in the sky of the source of the "cold effect"...
If that "source" turns out to be the moon, fine.
But what if that "source" turns out to be ten degree in front of, or twenty degrees behind or above the moon?
Without such a measuring instrument we would, with our naked eye....ASSUME it is the moon causing the cold effect, but what if it is the mythological 'dark moon" causing the effect that has a path in the sky that is unknown to us?
This device would be especially interesting to monitor before, during, and after an eclipse.
I have not funds to build such a measuring instrument, but it could be easily done.
The reason I feel such a measuring instrument is needed to solve the "cold effect" mystery with the reading I had last month I could not find a consistent pattern using only the information at hand.  I need to measure the path of whatever is causing the cold effect and not merely assume it is the moon.
I have only been measuring the moon for one month and most nights were very cloudy as it is winter here in the pacific northwest...
I look forward to clear skies and the keeping of consistent records to nail this mystery down.
the "flywheel effect" is when, after an evening of temperature disparity, the object I have measured has become permeated with the cold so both sides once again have no disparity.  
This explains many of the mornings....took a reading...and there was no difference between side A or Side B.
The flywheel effect could be minimized by using a material other than wood for the measured object.
I think this "flywheel effect" also eventually permeates areas of moonshade.
A person can not just go outside, take a reading, and  form a conclusion.....unfortunately,  a lot of sleep must be lost if the mystery of the cold moon is going to be perfectly understood.....
and to possibly pinpoint a third object in the sky..(which would explain so many things)..the measuring device described above needs to be constructed.

New theory to test when the moon decides to return to us here In the pacific nw (darn clouds)  concerning convection, conduction, and radiation. My experiments showed a definite "moonlit side of objects are colder than "moonshade sides". I then used a convex mirror to prove it was not the actual "light" from the moon even though the observed coldness tracked the moons progression across the sky. But what if the coldness is not caused by anything coming from the moon? What if all I am observing is a directional heat transfer? That is brought about not by deep space at all, but by the moon itself. The Sun fills the bathtub...the moon drains it.....like a positive and negative posts on a battery, the earth being the battery? THAT is why whatever is causing the moonlit side of the post to be colder is never "reflected" by a mirror....it is not moving from the moon towards us but from us towards the moon....and it is initiated by direct exposure to the moon itself and not deep space? That is my new theory to be tested when the moon show up again....any ideas how I can further isolate the source of the "coldnessr as something that not only tracks the moon but also isolate whether the "coldness" is being applied to the post or the coldness is simply due to a voluntary heat transfer in the direction of the moon.....When that moon came up over the ridge is was like someone pulled the stopper on a bathtub of latent energy stored by the earths surface and it all began "draining" towards the moon.  I am wondering if this "flow' can be harnessed in some way? This new theory aligns very closely with What Brian Mullins is suggesting, that the latent energy stored in the earth actually returns via the moon each evening. That is why the "coldness" can not be "reflected" by a mirror.....the "coldness" is simply due to the departure of heat in the moons direction.....not a radiating force coming from the moon, but an energy transfer going towards the moon.. just a theory...

Okay, Just had the solar eclipse I shared with susan and her son, Ben.  We performed experiments and during the partial eclipse air temp dropped considerably, we all got cold, and then I remembered my moonlight experiments that demonstrated moonlight is colder than moon shade so I ran and grabbed my infrared thermometer and took readings.
no doubt about it and we got it all on video.....temperature readings of remaining sunlight on concrete were 1 degree COLDER than temp reading in Sunshade.
no question....there is no way even partial sunlight should be colder than sunshade.....not possible....it was the moon, eclipsing the sun, that totally reversed expected sunlight vs. sunshade readings....
working on the video right now...sure hope it turns out and hope others noticed this.
I took reading AFTER the eclipse and of course they were back to what we would expect, about a 5 degrees warmer in the sunlight VS. Sunshade. While during the eclipse (actually a partial eclipse where I live near Seattle,WA.) the readings were 1 degree COLDER in sunlight than sunshade. This is profoundly significant.
And all this with the moon in the new moon phase?
That cinches it. it is not the "light" we see from the moon causing the temp drop, it is the moon itself!
the time was around 11;15 AM here in the NW....it was only a partial eclipse....LOTS of sunshine left. It never did get dark here where I live, and the areas in sunshine were colder than the areas in sunshade.

my filming turned out well, should be a good video, but it was done at the last minute when I realized what was happening.
Anyone still in the path of the eclipse, or in my case, the partial eclipse (eastern USA?) that has the equipment to do so should set up to take temperature readings and get it on film before this event expires

Here is the Proof I gathered during the 2017 Solar Eclipse

Good stuff Jim.

From my own experiments, I can confirm (that w/o eclipse) the moon-shade is warmer than moon-shine . Also that even with a Fresnel lens focus of the moonlight, there was no change in temperature at the focal point. Focussing seemingly had no measurable effect.

That an eclipse makes the sunshade warmer than sunlight is a good catch/observation, and points to it not necessarily being the moon "light" that is causing the cooling effect but some other phenomena (drawing/sucking?).

A full moon seems to me to initiate a change in the latent energy of the bodies (being measured) somehow associated with a change in the states of matter (liquid, air). A full moon in summer often brings wetness (fluid) if it was dry and warm beforehand (air), or in winter it will often change to dry and icy conditions, if it was previously wet and windy.

More observations and experiments are needed in different situations and locations. Keep up the active inquiry and thanks for sharing.

That's a fantastic video, well done Sir! As you stated, that infrared thermometer is not a high-end precision instrument, but the variance was of a high enough degree to prove the theory.
For example, when you took various readings (in sunlight and shade) the variance was around 0.2 to 0.4, yet when demonstrating the shade being warmer, it was clearly a whole degree.

As for what is causing this, I have no explanation, however it may have something to do with the properties of light, as physicists debated for hundreds of years, is light a wave or a particle? Corpuscular theory shows light to be a particle, but Corpuscular theory cannot explain refraction or interference.
This is way beyond my limited understanding, but an excellent video nonetheless, and as someone who has lived in a large city all my life I can but only dream of living in a location to which you reside, it looks idyllic!

Not sure if this has been covered but I will post while I look for a previous version.

This video shows the sun rotates clockwise like the moon. Unless it is caused by location change like some think.

I am "well versed" in matters spiritual and thus it came as little surprise for me to learn that ancient agricultural folklore follows moon phases with regards to crop planting and harvesting and other stuff. I was surprised to learn however, that these beliefs and practices are still used today.

As we know moonlight is not reflected sunlight. The Moon seems to be a luminary in its own right and gives a light much different that the Sun. If you didn't know Moonlight is cold (sic) by the thermometer and fires, fruit and people it would seem, react with some known but different ways to moonlight versus sunlight.

Sunlight for certain penetrates through walls and into dark corners a fact ignored though reported and studied. The mimosa plant for example will open and close its leaves at sunrise and sunset yet in a dark cupboard but not when down a mine shaft. Moonlight perhaps also has this penetration that sunlight has.

There is some mention in the FE and spiritual communities of the role of the pituitary gland: some claim it as a third eye , others in science that it seems to require sunlight to function properly even though it is in darkness in our skulls. It's not a giant leap then to also consider if this gland responds to moonlight.


In witchcraft (no I am not) and paganism generally, moon phases and the moon are followed carefully especially the full and new moons with regard to starting new ventures, letting go of negativity and so forth. I think we dismiss these things too quickly, steeped as we are in "scientific" propaganda and its eagerness to offer explanation based on premises that are clearly false in the first place (gravity, relativity, astronomy...and probably history itself which obviously has been rewritten , completely rewritten probably!) The Moon as we are told by Them(lol) is merely a chunk of rock.

Any police officer will confirm that their "business" increases dramatically during the full moon. One copper (cop -USA) told me "people go mad".

I wonder what the Bible and other ancient scripture has to say about moon phases.

I might speculate that these changing characteristics of moonlight with her (!) phases might not be the light itself but an invisible-to-the-eye change in the influence of the Moon itself.



As ever , do your own research but you might start here:-

"For an excellent review of the subject, see Ian Cole and Michael Balick’s review article.*2[I found a link-see below] The authors discuss a range of traditional practices related to moon phase, from the harvesting of construction and thatch materials, to the planting of staple crops, to the gathering of medicines"
From:
https://permacultureprinciples.com/post/moonlight-affect-plant-growth/

*2. http://cms.herbalgram.org/herbalgram/issue85/article3488.html?ts=1525986826&signature=de67f83a7806483d50c7016f3e1087c0

Here is a concluding quote from *2 above:
"Based on our review of the literature, the authors of this article have undertaken work to test the hypothesis that the lunar phase can influence levels of bioactivity, presumably via changes in levels of chemical compounds. Working with a tropical plant species, preliminary data from bioassays have shown changes in bioactivity that correlates with particular lunar phases. We are currently repeating the experiments with a sample of plants collected in different locations."



The Moon, again to recall our FE discoveries, is a thing of some mystery and she(!) holds secrets that we acknowledge as unknown rather than adopting the head-in-the-sand "If it cannot be explained, it isn't true" attitude!

Having read around the subject a little and pondered , I think we all might be more mindful of moon phases. I begin to wonder when I should be buying food ( is that my "harvest" etc ?) and of what type with each moon phase! Certainly my local supermarket does not include information on the packaging about under which moon phase the crop was picked!

To conclude. For FE researches we can ask :
- How exactly is the Moon's influence different in character with moon phases? (It clearly is).
- Perhaps the light, the moonlight itself remains the same but the Moon emits another "vibration" or changes her "presence" to give different influences for moon phases?
- Is there mention of moon phases in ancient scripture?
- ...and what else?


Warmest regards
CR

The Moon & Sun are so important to us and the enclosed plane we reside upon.
Women menstruate every 28 days, the Moon goes through it's cycle every 28 days, the Gregorian calendar is a hack of the natural cycle of the Moon.
If we plotted our years & days by the Moon's cycles we would have 4 weeks in every month, (28 days) a new Moon every month and there would be 13 months in the year and 364 days, not 365 with 366 in a leap year every 4 years.

Jan 28 days
Feb 28 days
Mar 28 days
Apr 28 days
May 28 days
Jun 28 days
Jul 28 days
Aug 28 days
Sep 28 days
Oct 28 days
Nov 28 days
Dec 28 days
A 13th month 28 days
You do not need a calculator to work out 28 x 13 = 364 = a 'solar' year, or the full cycle

The Gregorian calendar is a hack of THE natural cycle, we have ben shifted out of phase with nature, and no surprise it was a Pope (Gregory XIII) and the Vatican who implemented this calendar.

I have not done any research in to this, but it would not surprise me if the Gregorian calendar was produced to support the Heliocentric model.