Complete Lunacy

The Dihydrogen Monoxide Research Division has officially been topped. Many thanks to David Frum for pointing out the Mad Revisionist, the ultimate in satirical lunacy. Yes, the Mad Revisionist denies the existence of the moon. No, not the Apollo moon landing, the moon itself. Really. (Though of course, not seriously). 

Why, you may ask. Well, apparently a conference of historians retorted to Holocaust deniers (or, as they call themselves, Holocaust Revisionists) by calling for serious study of the Holocaust, presumably on the theory that the more extensive and detailed the study, the more indisputable. Someone asked why the conference never explicitly affirmed the existence of the Holocaust. Exasperated, the leader said that for a conference of historians to affirm the existence of the Holocaust was like a conference of astronomers affirming the existence of the moon. To which the Mad Revisionist said, “[W]hy did this scholar single out the moon? Why would a scholar, so familiar with academic standards of evidence, use such language to imply that the existence of the moon, unlike any other issue was a given and not subject to proof? What, in other words, was he trying to hide?” And further:

But don’t all qualified scientists and astronomers agree that there is a moon? Indeed, but shouldn’t one be suspicious of such unanimity, when universities are supposed to be forums for open debate of controversial issues. Even a layperson like myself knows that scientists are not supposed to approach issues with preconceived notions. Yet this principle is cast aside when the moon is at stake. You will never see the revisionist perspective on the moon being taught in institutions of higher learning, even as a controversial opposing view. In fact, in order to even become a recognized scientist in the current atmosphere of academic repression, one must pay lip service to the establishment’s orthodoxy. Could you imagine a student who argued the revisionist viewpoint on the question of the moon being awarded a degree? He would be hounded out of the university in an instant! How can one explain such behavior from institutions that are supposed to serve as forums for the free exchange of ideas, except to conclude that the establishment has something to hide? 

Needless to say, no attempt is made to explain what this so-called “moon” that we think we see actually is. Mad Revisionist contents himself with attacking the theory of the moon’s existence. It ends with an offer of $100,000 for anyone who can prove the existence of the moon.

Mad Revisionist apparently came up with the site specifically as a satire on Holocaust deniers, but let’s face it. It works just as well to mock creationists, truthers, birthers, Birchers, people who think the moon landing was faked, people who think Elvis is still alive and really, anyone who is unwilling to let mere evidence stand in the way of belief. 

Perhaps, though, I was wrong to say that The Moon: A Propaganda Hoax tops the Dihydrogen Monoxide Research Division. Both are brilliant and hilarious works of satire, but in different ways. Dihydrogen Monoxide is meant to be convincing. Scientifically illiterate suckers are actually supposed to fall for its scary-sounding pronouncement and realize they have been punked when they find out what H2O really is. The Moon, by contrast, is intended to sound just like conspiracists, yet offer a satire so broad that no one could possibly fall for it. Consider it an attempt to refute Poe's Law. I guess we will see if it succeeds.*

___________________________________________________
*Not that I think anyone could possibly be convinced that the moon does not exist. But could anyone be convinced that someone is seriously arguing that? To just from some of the responses Mad Revisionist has gotten, the answer appears to be maybe.