Originally posted by @humy
-erroneously by some people yes. So what? The fact remains it definitely isn't physically 28 days. That 28 days is imaginary, not the actual physical lunar cycle period, no matter which type you are talking about.
and yet you persist in dwelling on other types of lunar cycles.
you mean 'other' types of lunar cycles other than the none-p ...[text shortened]... at is such that that the mere existence of that discredited theory "proves" it wrong? Specify...
The fact remains it definitely isn't physically 28 days. That 28 days is imaginary, not the actual physical lunar cycle period, no matter which type you are talking about.
Is it more than 27 days?
Yes.
Is it less than 29 days?
Yes.
The facts--- which can be verified by literally anyone on the planet, except, apparently you--- all point to the several lunar months, all factored at 28 days, since they exceed 27 days and--- if my math is correct--- the number next closest to 27 is... 28.
Anomalistic, sidereal, tropical, draconic and synodic are all considered lunar months.
They all have just a smidgen more than 27 days and are generally considered a 28 day cycle.
Well, except for one: the last one is a mix of lunar and solar, as it calls it a cycle dependent upon the relation between the sun and the moon, and it lasts a little more than 29 days.
and I said it was false and then I noticed there is no correlation anyway! Which confirms it is false! So I was right all along.
So what is your complaint?
You have the reasoning of a child.
You introduced something which assumed that the lunar month is on a 28 day cycle.
The theory was not discredited because the 28 day cycle doesn't exist; the theory was discredited because the suggested causal aspect fell apart under closer scrutiny.
Clearly, others have noticed the correlation between a woman's cycle and the lunar cycle, thus the suggestion that one caused the other.
But when the data doesn't support the claim, one must find a different solution to explain the correlation.
To date, no explanation has been suggested or accepted.
Your solution is to eliminate the 28 day cycle.
Speaking on behalf of half the world's population, I think we all would have preferred for you to have eliminated the woman's menstrual cycle instead.
Me: why did you insert that theory into the conversation?
You: in case you thought it was true.
Again, the reasoning of a child.
If I thought it was true, I would have answered my own question.
It would not be a correlation as much as it would be a causal relation, were one to dictate the other.
Why in God's name would anyone think there is anything unique about one causing another, other than perhaps the sheer fact alone?
If the moon caused a woman's period, it would explain why they're both the same in length.
Duh.
But when they share the same number and then that number is found in the human body, well, one can begin to see there is something else afoot.
Well, except for your mind.
What "claim" are you referring to here that you say I made and that is such that that the mere existence of that discredited theory "proves" it wrong? Specify...
I already did, several times.
If there was no correlation--- i.e., if you were actually right and the lunar month wasn't a 28 day cycle--- then I would be wrong.
But others pointed specifically and pointedly to the shared 28 day cycle and suggested the reason for the same: causal.
By using that same theory in refutation, you are acknowledging that OTHERS in the scientific realm also considered them both as 28 day cycles.
They must have got that information from somewhere, right?
Of course they did: references to a 28 day lunar month abound in history, dating back to the earliest of all human communication.
Clearly, who ever thought that perhaps the lunar cycle prompted the female cycle must have considered there to be a correlation, otherwise they wouldn't have attempted to provide a reason.
But that's not the end to your childish thinking.
You suggested it because (according to you)
I might think it was true?
What the hell is that!?!
That is absurdist and whacko, only deserving of a response in order to level the most emphatic degree of rejection and censure in your direction.
The bottom line is achingly clear: you have no idea how it is that the moon returns to its spot in the sky in the same amount of time that a woman goes through her menstrual cycle and which both just happen to be the amount of phalanges on the human body.
No answer at all.
The Moon and Design
26 Aug '17 21:17
Back to Top