Originally, the tag of “lunatic” was applied to those who worshipped the Earth’s Moon -- in much the same manner as an extreme “fan” becomes a “fanatic”, and one who criticizes others becomes a critic. [Okay... so the latter example is idiotic. What are you, a critic?]
But the Early Lunatics may have had justification. For those around When the Earth was Moonless, the arrival of a luminary lighting the night would have had considerable awe associated with it -- if only that an “arrival” implies the possibilities of a “leaving” or other more up-close-and-personal events. But there is also literary evidence, traditions and historical sources that strongly imply (see http://www.varchive.org/itb/index.htm):
aThe Moon was once much brighter and appeared larger than the Sun, and that the Sun and Moon were equally bright, but that the Moon had lost a large part of its light and became much dimmer in an earlier age. [The change may have been due to whatever caused the Moon to have such dissimilar appearances on its near and far side!]
aThe worship of the Moon by ancient peoples gave it priority over the Sun and the various planetary gods -- much to the bewilderment of modern day scholars.
aAdam is reputed to have come from the Moon and endorsed its worship.
aThe Earth of Adam’s initial days was geophysically and biologically radically different from today, and that upon his (and The Adam's Family) “expulsion from the Garden of Eden”, a whole lot of things changed big time!
Okay... What in the world are these lunatics talking about!?
Well... in order for the Moon to be much brighter and give off comparable light to the Sun, this would imply that the Moon once has a much higher albedo (even an atmosphere), and/or was closer to the Earth when it first arrived in the neighborhood. The latter is evidenced in part by the fact that the Babylonian astronomers -- noted today for their measurement precision of things astronomical -- had computed the visible diameter of the Sun to be only two-thirds of the visible diameter of the Moon. Inasmuch as the modern day approximate equality of the two luminous orbs can be easily seen during an eclipse, the Babylonians’ calculations are a considerable mystery to modern scholars.
As for worshipping the Moon when the Sun had already clearly demonstrated its prowess in delivering life-giving energy for warmth, crops, and other beneficial purposes, this would seem to be almost a contradiction in terms -- unless the Moon had by some means made its significance readily apparent to Earthians. Being larger, and making a dramatic entrance on the solar system stage would account for a lot! (But there might be more!)
<http://www.varchive.org/itb/index.htm> notes that:
“In Babylonian cosmology the Moon-god Sin (Nanna) was considered to be the father of the Sun-god Shamash (Utu) and was commonly addressed as father Sin.
Cumont noted the prominence of Sin in the earliest historical period in Babylonia and found it “remarkable that at first the primacy was assigned to the Moon.”
According to the Dabistan, a Persian work of early Islamic times, the Ka’abah of Mecca was originally dedicated to the worship of the Moon.
The Greeks regarded the Moon as of greater importance than the Sun: “The sun’s subordination to the moon... is a remarkable feature of early Greek myth. Helius was not even an Olympian, but a mere Titan’s [Hyperion’s ] son.”
Christoval de Molina described sacrifices to the Moon by the natives of Peru in the sixteenth century. Also the Indians of Vancouver Island assigned greater importance to the Moon than to the Sun, as did several tribes in Brazil.
The Moon-god was also the supreme deity, before planetary gods came to dominate the world ages (such as the Age of Pisces), and both the Assyrians and Chaldeans considered the time of the Moon-god as the oldest memory of their peoples. Mount Sinai owes its name, for example, to Sin, the Moon-god. And in typical patriarchal fashion, the Moon-god was masculine (i.e. bigger and more imposing -- the one to really get in your face), while the Sun was more feminine (i.e. keeping the home warm and well stocked with food). Then when the Moon moved (by some unknown force or reason) to a greater distance from the Earth, the Moon became a feminine, less threatening cosmic influence.
[For your homework assignment, describe when, how, and why the Moon’s orbit was increased to the extent of decreasing its apparent size from Earth by fifty percent. Having any credible evidence will earn you additional points. Send your answers, with subject title: “Yureka, I have found it”, to <email@example.com>.]
As for the biblical Adam being the first “lunatic” (and presumably his companion Eve), http://www.varchive.org/itb/index.htm quotes the medieval Arab scholar Abubacer as noting the ancient traditions of ascribing early Moon worship to Adam, saying:
“They [the Sabaeans] say that Adam was born from male and female, just like the rest of mankind, but they honored him greatly, and said that he had come from the Moon, that he was the prophet and apostle of the Moon, and that he had exhorted the nations that they should serve the Moon... They also related about Adam that when he had left the Moon and proceeded from the area of India towards Babylonia, he brought many wonders with him.  [emphasis added]
Perhaps you missed that particular lesson in Sunday School. Or that Hebrew mythology describes a radically different Earth prior to Adam’s expulsion from the Garden of Eden -- including: 1) the Sun always perched (relative to Eden) in the East in a perpetual Dawn, 2) no rain, but watering by mist ascending from the ground and condensing as dew, 3) humans being much larger in size (“gigantic” dimensions), and 4) Adam’s body “overlaid with a horny skin” [reptilian?]. But then something hit the fan! Adam made a mistake!
The free lunch ended, a day arrived when there was no celestial illumination (i.e. dark!), Adam became concerned, even terrified, and “the illumination of the first period never returned. The sky that man was used to see never appeared before him again.” “The firmament is not the same as the heavens of the first day.” The sun set for the first time (or at least possibly for the locals who had no hint of pre-Moon days), Adam learned the hard way: the day-night cycle, seasonal changes, rainy days (except in Indianapolis), an amazing shrinking species of mankind, and the loss of his “horny skin”. At the same time, the Moon lost it brightness; “The very angels and the celestial beings were grieved by the transgression of Adam. The moon alone laughed wherefore God... obscured her light.” But not just Adam and the missus. Tradition ascribes to Adam the invention of seventy languages [an early Tower of Babel?], such that it was the whole of humanity that painfully discovered the new state of affairs.
What was the manner of this catastrophe? Being ante-deluvian (before The Great Flood/ Deluge), the Adamites (or Adamatics, if you like) were quite possibly not the first human beings on the planet. There is also the possibility of there being catastrophes prior to the “expulsion from the Garden of Eden”. As http://www.varchive.org/itb/index.htm so succinctly notes:
“It depends on the memory of the peoples which catastrophe they consider as the act of creation. Human beings, rising from some catastrophe, bereft of memory of what had happened, regarded themselves as created from the dust of the earth. All knowledge about the ancestors, who they were and in what interstellar space they lived, was wiped away from the memory of the few survivors. The talmudic-rabbinical tradition believes that before Adam was created, the world was more than once inhabited and more than once destroyed.” [emphasis added]
Slowly, the possibilities begin to take shape. As briefly discussed in When the Earth was Moonless, it is possible the Moon is an artificial device created by an advanced technology which may have been used to maintain the Earth in a mode which facilitated a “perpetual dawn”, and that a serious infraction or animosity between different groups went ballistic and fairly well turned the Moon into a no-longer functioning artifact, its seas the marks of missiles’ aftermath, and its orbit increased to where it no longer might serve in its former capacity. This at least explains the difference between the near and far side!
The “horny skin” may have been reptilian (the reason for the “reptilian brain” of modern day human beings?), and the creatures substantially larger. It has even been surmised by such individuals as Richard Hoagland <http://www.enterprisemission.com> that a closer Moon might have been necessary from a Hyperdimensional Physics point of view to provide the means by which dinosaurs (big reptiles!) could have functioned -- i.e. based on current theories about Jurassic conditions, the dinosaurs would have been unable to stand up against gravity, let alone run about feeding on each other.
When one of the first modern day missions to the Moon (apparently, it is now necessary to distinguish between modern day and ancient lunar missions) conducted an experiment by allowing a spacecraft to crash into the Moon, the result was notably surprising. As one scientist noted, the Moon “rang like a bell.” Bells tend to be hollow, and thus speculation about the possibility of the Moon being hollow ran rampant, including the possibility of the Moon being artificial! The next obvious question would then be, “Where’s the door”.
What is the likelihood of the last three paragraphs being even remotely accurate? Slight? Or quite probable? Consider, for example, the idea that any intelligent civilization in the process of exploring the galaxy would be unlikely to roam about in nifty looking space ships designed like Star Trek’s Voyager, Enterprise, Birds of Prey, or most of the Star Wars variations. These designs show no stealth, ingenuity, or intelligence, and in fact are targets and might as well paint a bullseye on their broadest side. They represent the height of arrogance in that they make the assumption that if we arrive on the doorstep of another planet, then we must be technologically superior to that planet’s inhabitants and thus have no fear in announcing our arrival -- a fundamentally flawed, short-sighted assumption. There is, for example, the very real possibility of meeting a new race in deep space -- where our nifty looking spaceship would be readily obvious to them, but not necessarily give away their location or presence.
On the other hand, a large asteroid-looking object, or for a larger scope of mission, a moon-like object could roam about essentially unremarked and pass through a solar system with little or no notice -- other than perhaps by an astronomical community intent upon increased funding for the alleged purpose of detecting potential “planet killers” and other destructive objects which just might collide with the observer’s home planet. Note that in Star Wars fourth episode, the “Death Star” was at first mistaken for a moon. Had its surface been less obviously technological, it might have gotten away with accomplishing far more of its agenda by not being noticed until it was too late. A reality-based example is that one or more of the “lesser moons” of Saturn, when relocated by subsequent Viking style missions, were found to be in essentially new orbits -- as if they had simply moved or changed their orbits in some manner. The key to going undetected is to avoid approaching one’s goal on a collision course -- one which would be guaranteed to attract the attentions of the goal’s inhabitants.
The argument against such a concept is the arrogance-based view that it would be much too difficult to propel a lunar-sized spaceship about the galaxy. This essentially silly argument assumes only one form of propulsion, i.e. that which uses “reaction mass”. This basis of antiquated propulsion systems utilizing Newton’s Laws to achieve propulsion by either pushing against another mass, or throwing mass which is not an integral part of the space ship in the opposite direction of the desired travel, i.e. a rocket ship, is passé.
Basically, the current design is to create a series of explosions, which hopefully push that portion of the space craft in the desired direction, and without ripping it to shreds. Alternatively, an Inertial Propulsion system based on state-of-the-art new physics and utilizing in part the science of The Fifth Element is a propulsion system which does not require the use of “reaction mass”. Combined with a universally-connected energy source, there is really no limit as to what size or mass of an object one might be able to propel about the galaxy.
In the interim, it might be instructive to note in passing the activities of those modern day Lunatics, who in the practice of Wicca, are in the habit of “Drawing Down the Moon”. Do they perhaps know something we don’t?
Count on it.
 Quoted in Athanasius Kircher, Turris Babel sive Archonotologia (Amsterdam, 1679).
 Ginzberg, Legends, I.
2003© Copyright Dan Sewell Ward, All Rights Reserved