Moon landing. Real or Fake?

[Gard]

I move that conspiracy theorists be used to monitor nozzle temps on the next launch.

Seconded.



(...I'm picturing a guy wearing a tinfoil hat with a rectal thermometer standing next to an F-1 nozzle... )

 

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

(...I'm picturing a guy wearing a tinfoil hat with a rectal thermometer standing next to an F-1 nozzle... )

Which one can squeeze out more hot gases?

 

[Brad Johnson]

No, but it's a list of guys who say they've been there, and we have pictures and corroborating data.

The guys themself aren't proof.

 

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

I think you pointed that out before, which is why I pointed out that which you quoted.

 

[WorkinOnIt]

If it was faked, and they got away with the first one, why try to risk it and repeat the fake 5 MORE TIMES. LOL.

Real. 100% positive. Absolutely no doubt in my mind. Nova did an excellent show debunking every single one of the hoax-fan fallacies they were presented with. Great show. I am sure the conspiracy theorists will continue to bring up more questions all the time. I guess it is human nature in some ways to question.

There might be a generational thing going on here too. Some of us old farts LIVED during the Apollo program and were glued to every aspect of the program. Nowadays the space program is not that big a deal, shuttles come and go. But then, it was HUGE and intensely covered by the press, etc. Don't you think some enterprising journalist would just LOVE to have exposed a hoax and made his/her career then?

On the other hand, some (not all) of the younger folks who are already feeling somewhat rebellious against "the system" might be more suspicious. Just an observation.

I think several posters are just kidding, but it just eggs on the actual conspiracy 'fans'. These astronauts were heroes in the highest sense of the word. All this talk of hoaxes just diminishes their accomplishment and I think that is a real shame.

 

[nortonrider]

Honestly, I never really thought about anyone faking the moon missions before this thread.
I found this link, an interesting read which raises more questions than I had ever thought to ask, and more than I am willing to spend the time typing here:

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Brad Johnson]

Since the thread was revived, have the folks who believe the landing happened generally implied that even a shred of doubt wasn't allowed? How many, if any, called everyone who doubted the slightest bit of this a moron or stupid? I'd enjoy links to those posts. There must be plenty of them, given your generalizations.

Good question... have the believers even implied that a shred of doubt was allowed, Greg? I don't see it. Where did you?

Read the thread and you'll find out just how many have called people on the other side of the argument morons... even after the thread was revived. How many tinfoil hat pics have you seen? Think that doesn't say the same thing? If you seriously don't see the derision, cool. It's there, plain as day.

That's an inaccurate portrayal. You're claiming that those on one side are "100%ers", while those on the other merely have "doubt". When in fact, there are those who are just as firmly convinced that the landing did not happen--even though the evidence on that side has generally been demonstrated to be either weak, fabricated or based on flawed assumptions or data, by numerous sources. Meanwhile, the proof that those who believe the landing occurred are "latching onto" is far more substantial.

That's an interesting misreading of what I've actually said. I did not say that any of the people on the "faked" side didn't 100% believe it was faked. I have read some express DOUBT minus actual conviction. OTOH the namecalling, tinfoil hat linking side express zero doubt and nothing seems at all out of place to them.

As Bob has since pointed out, there's plenty more proof than that--in just the last few pages of this thread. Did you miss it?

I made a pretty basic observation, that you and Bob seem to be missing. I did not say that was the entire sum of proof, I said stating that these are astronauts and who is going to question their veracity is not proof. Do you think that's proof by itself?

 

[Brad Johnson]

(For the conspiracy/hoax morons)

Coffin, meet nail:

http://news.aol.com/article/apollo-landing-sites-spotted-by-lunar/577205?icid=main|htmlws-main|dl1|link1|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle%2Fapollo-landing-sites-spotted-by-lunar%2F577205

The thread was revived with this post, Greg. The truth is out there...

 

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

I did not say that was the entire sum of proof, I said stating that these are astronauts and who is going to question their veracity is not proof. Do you think that's proof by itself?

You are correct that direct witnesses, the astronauts, are not the entire sum of proof, but they do have strong credibility and a great deal of corroborating evidence.

 

[Brad Johnson]

I like this.

Dude, if something as innocuous as this thread "infuriates" you, then you need to up your meds. A lot.

Others have gotten pretty angry about threads like this before. Insulting to the memory or xyz and that sort of stuff. My guess is the intarweb is not really for them. What with not being able to handle seeing stuff they don't like.

 

[Brad Johnson]

You are correct that direct witnesses, the astronauts, are not the entire sum of proof, but they do have strong credibility and a great deal of corroborating evidence.

Yes, they have strong credibilty... and so have others who've turned out not to have been truthful in other situations. I know this tangent is going nowhere so I'll leave it at that.

 

[john turner]

THERE ARE REFLECTORS ON THE MOON PLACED BY THE ASTRONAUTS. THEY ARE ROUTINELY CHECKED VIA EARTHBOUND LASERS.

NEXT COMES BEHEADINGS.