Is this a decent argument for moon landing hoax debate?

[spaceviking]

In response to moon hoax believers: If the Americans faked the moon landing how come the only "proof" comes from fringe Scientists. If the moon landing had really been faked shouldn't the Soviet Union (scientists/ intellectuals) been all over it since they would have the most to gain in discrediting the Americans.

[Chris OFarrell]

Yeah, its one of the more clear points to make, that the USSR would have gone nuts showing how the moon landings were false if indeed it was all staged...

But as people who thing the moon landing is a hoax despite quite literally vast amounts of evidence against them, its really a pointless debate to make as they clearly DON'T accept the evidence.

[Sky Captain]

I have never understood people who claim Moon landing was faked. Let`s face it, US spent dozens of billions of $$$ to develop and test a Saturn V rocket, Moon landers and all asociated hardware. Then what`s the point when you have all the necessary equipment and capability to go to the Moon suddenly change mind and try to fake it? It just sounds silly. It would be like building a Large Hadron Collider and when it`s up and running decide to not use it and fake the results.

Not to mention the fact Russians (and every other nation that had necessary capability) closely followed Apollo missions and if they would had even slightest doubt something is not like it should be they would be gone crazy. It was a Cold War after all.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

In response to moon hoax believers: If the Americans faked the moon landing how come the only "proof" comes from fringe Scientists. If the moon landing had really been faked shouldn't the Soviet Union (scientists/ intellectuals) been all over it since they would have the most to gain in discrediting the Americans.

The Moon Hoax counter-argument would go as follows: Mainstream scientists are part of the vast scientific conspiracy to cover up this fact. The Soviets went along with the cover-up, since being all over the Americans hoaxing their landing on the Moon would only serve to discredit their own efforts. Ergo, the only sources of proof are from the heroic crusaders for truth who aren't constrained by reality the orthodoxy of the scientific mainstream.

Yours is a decent argument to make, but just be warned that these people are True Believerstm, and that making such an argument would be analogous to asking the fundamentalist Christian why, if God exists, the only real 'proof' of him can be found in the Bible.

[Zixinus]

Would it be fair to say that behind Moon Hoax arguers, there is usually an anti-intellectual motivations or rhetoric at work?

[Darth Wong]

Would it be fair to say that behind Moon Hoax arguers, there is usually an anti-intellectual motivations or rhetoric at work?

Let's just say that I've never run into a well-educated Moon Hoax person.

I'll also point out that it was much more common when I lived in a rural community for a few years.

[Darth Wong]

In response to moon hoax believers: If the Americans faked the moon landing how come the only "proof" comes from fringe Scientists. If the moon landing had really been faked shouldn't the Soviet Union (scientists/ intellectuals) been all over it since they would have the most to gain in discrediting the Americans.

Are you asking if this is a decent argument from a logical standpoint, or whether it would be effective at changing Hoaxers' minds? From a logical standpoint, it's a sound argument. But as far as changing Hoaxers' minds, I don't see what difference it would make. They'll just claim that the Americans sent an unmanned probe to fool the Soviets. Even the Hoaxers admit that NASA was capable of sending spacecraft to the vicinity of the Moon; they just deny that they landed humans on it.

Of course, that begs the question of why NASA would expend such money and effort to grant themselves the technical capability to land men on the Moon and then fail to actually do it, but the Hoaxer position is based on an assumption that you must disprove their position rather than them having to disprove yours. And since their argument is carefully crafted in order to eliminate any requirement for evidence, that puts them in a comfortable position. Assuming you let this grotesque double-standard slide.

[open_sketchbook]

You can really divide the moon landing deniers into two camps; the right wing, religious camp that doesn't believe it's possible to leave the Earth (you often see the belief that there is a mysterious ionic field that kills any that go through it above our atmosphere, which sounds "science-y" enough for these people) and the left-wing ones who believe it was part of their overarching aliens/UFO/secret government projects thing with the vague undefined world government motivations. The two overlap a lot, but that's generally how it goes.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Ask them if all the moon landings were hoaxes, because there's only ever "evidence" of the first one being staged as far as I've seen.

[Crossroads Inc.]

I would like to ask them if We successfully pulled off the Hoax... How come the Russians didn't do the same? Especially if they were "In on it" as well?
I mean if we are to seriously believe that NASA fooled the ENTIRE WORLD not just once, but on several "Moon Launches" and we are to seriously believe Russia knew then why wouldn't Russia stage the same Hoax ot increase their own image?

[Napoleon the Clown]

Another response I've heard to the "Why didn't the Soviets call us on it?" is that the US was supplying the USSR with grain, and that they didn't want to lose that, so they remained quiet.


Really, the Moon Landing Hoax people are like religious fundamentalists. Either too stupid/uneducated to know better, or they're trying to cling to a belief that's become a very strong part of their identity.

[PeZook]

I would like to ask them if We successfully pulled off the Hoax... How come the Russians didn't do the same? Especially if they were "In on it" as well?
I mean if we are to seriously believe that NASA fooled the ENTIRE WORLD not just once, but on several "Moon Launches" and we are to seriously believe Russia knew then why wouldn't Russia stage the same Hoax ot increase their own image?

Especially since Russia was so much better at bullshit, and nobody would question the fact they kept a lot of stuff secret. Since it was, you know, Soviet Russia.

But of course, the Soviets knew the US would be easily able to find out the attempt was faked. There's just too much of a footprint left by a Moon program: from technical manuals through hundreds of thousands of workers to hardware and Moon rocks themselves.

The entire thing is based on the same premises as any conspiracy theory: the thrill of "discovering" something other people don't know anything about, supported by incomplete knowledge of the subject matter and dubious experts (who mostly laugh all the way to the bank) to convince an army of retards that you're right.

Some of the hoaxer arguments are ridiculous even to cursory reader: they can claim that photographs were faked because some items appear in front of the photogrammetric marks (because there was such a great need to paste random pieces of equipment into the pics), that you can't see the stars, that there is no flame under Apollo 17's lander.

Other are outright lies, like "nobody's ever built a rocket as large and capable as the Saturn V since the landings", or "photo experts say the photographs were faked" or "all the photos are perfectly framed and exposed" or "you can see the lines they used to simulate low gravity" or "you can fake Moon rocks in a radiation oven" or "Van Allen belts would kill you if you tried to cross them".

Logical arguments won't work ; They'll simply invent some bullshit hand-waving explanation and challenge you to disprove it, or demand you show tremendous technical knowledge to disprove any "flaws" they point out in the evidence material.

Of course, if you accuse them of lying (see my examples), they will get offended. Apparently, calling Apollo astronauts liars and fraudsters is ok, but pointing out the True Believers' lies is bad form and, like, rude.

[Zixinus]

Of course, if you accuse them of lying (see my examples), they will get offended. Apparently, calling Apollo astronauts liars and fraudsters is ok, but pointing out the True Believers' lies is bad form and, like, rude.

Of course. They are the independent and unshakable seekers of truth.

Or rather, idiots that come up with stupid shit like this precisely because they want to feel intellectually superior and clever. A lot of pseudo-science can be put down to that desire: a feel to need to be smart, courageous and strong.

I often feel that there is no point is trying to argue with them logically.

[Neko_Oni]

My friend who is a moon-landing hoax believer linked me to this gem. I'm currently plowing my way through it so as I can at least address his bullshit next time he brings it up.

Moon Rising Pt. 1

On the topic of hoaxes I called him on the sheer size of the conspiracy that would be necessary to pull this off (including only American engineers and scientists the number is huge). His reply was basically "lol I dunno".

[PeZook]

Yep. See what I wrote about the "True Believers": that little clip was so throughly discredited it's not even funny, and of course your friend demands you watch a clip and then disprove its claims, rather than presenting those claims to you himself: because he knows you will need to wait untill you get home, then watch the movie, make notes, then argue against it, so he gains an instant victory for the moment.

Note other dishonesty in the film, from the very start:

1. "Dedicated to the men of the space program whose deaths were unnecessary": A sly accusation that NASA murdered the Apollo 1 astronauts. In true Darkstar style, presented to appear respectable.

2. He gives no information that let you easily find the picture frames he's talking about. Only cites a huge conspiracy website, instead of the primary source.

3. Suggestions. "This may or may not be a giant humanoid". Whoops! What do you mean the audience will now see a giant humanoid where there previously was none?

4. Photoshop filter play. A common hoaxer tactic: apply random filters to a picture, then claim that any anomalies or patterns that show up prove the pictures were faked/are hiding alien bases.

5. The old and tired arguments that orbital moon photographs are of low resolution and quality. The hidden suggestion is, of course, that NASA is hiding something. Because all space agencies should always install the best possible visual spectrum cameras on their probes and fly them low over the surface, no matter what the mission profile is. I mean, it's not like Clementine had to power five different instruments and was on a mapping mission, right?

I'd recommend checking out hoaxer comments on LCROSS pictures. You'll see gems like "These images are crap, I could make better ones with a 100$ digital camera." - because it doesn't matter that it wasn't what the mission was about at all, of course The only data that matters are pictures for the hoaxers to "analyze".

[Lusankya]

My friend who is a moon-landing hoax believer linked me to this gem. I'm currently plowing my way through it so as I can at least address his bullshit next time he brings it up.

What's his reason as to why the US government later went on to not only fake five further moon landings, but also one aborted attempt that had to return to Earth before it reached the moon due to an exploded oxygen tank? Why would anyone want to fake something like that?

[PeZook]

What's his reason as to why the US government later went on to not only fake five further moon landings, but also one aborted attempt that had to return to Earth before it reached the moon due to an exploded oxygen tank? Why would anyone want to fake something like that?

To keep up the public's interest and keep the funds flowing.

Quoted verbatim.

[DPDarkPrimus]

What's his reason as to why the US government later went on to not only fake five further moon landings, but also one aborted attempt that had to return to Earth before it reached the moon due to an exploded oxygen tank? Why would anyone want to fake something like that?

To keep up the public's interest and keep the funds flowing.

Quoted verbatim.

So where did all those funs flow to, exactly?

[Face]

4. Photoshop filter play. A common hoaxer tactic: apply random filters to a picture, then claim that any anomalies or patterns that show up prove the pictures were faked/are hiding alien bases.

5. The old and tired arguments that orbital moon photographs are of low resolution and quality. The hidden suggestion is, of course, that NASA is hiding something. Because all space agencies should always install the best possible visual spectrum cameras on their probes and fly them low over the surface, no matter what the mission profile is. I mean, it's not like Clementine had to power five different instruments and was on a mapping mission, right?

I've heard these arguments hundreds of times and more besides and ignored them all. Never really gained my interest because it was such a ludicrous idea that there seemed no real point to debating it. However thanks to TV now I don't have to

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtWMz51eL0Y&NR=1

God I love Mythbusters!

The episode in question also disporved the moving flag, fake low gravity walking, and the moon boot footprint myths.

Though this still won't prove to the conspiracy nuts that it wasn't fake. I'm sure some nut case has already writen an essay debunking this episode. As conspiracy theorists are so fond of say, "There's only one explanation".... no there really isn't.

[PeZook]

So where did all those funs flow to, exactly?

This depends on the particular brand of theorist, but all explanations are equally outlandish.

They range from "nothing was really funded, you can't prove it was, since all you have to go on are publically released fiscal documents which are full of lies" to "We are fighting a secret war against aliens/Nazis and NASA needs the money".

[Neko_Oni]

What's his reason as to why the US government later went on to not only fake five further moon landings, but also one aborted attempt that had to return to Earth before it reached the moon due to an exploded oxygen tank? Why would anyone want to fake something like that?

Honestly we've only just started discussing this. But I seriously doubt his thought on the matter has progressed beyond the point of "I saw this documentary on the weekend, it says the moon landings are faked. Ergo they are faked".

[Simon_Jester]

Good; that means there's still hope. People who believe stupid stuff purely because it's the last thing they heard can often be deprogrammed, assuming they ever had two brain cells to rub together to begin with. It's the ones who've heard it so many times that they lose the ability to contemplate it not being true who are a problem.

You could get Buzz Aldrin to punch him in the face...

[Zixinus]

On a lighter note (go to 4:50 for the thread-related point):

You could get Buzz Aldrin to punch him in the face...

Actually, he already did.

Just to quote some juicy bits from the news article:

Damning emphasis in bold. Awesome emphasis in underlining.

Mr Aldrin, famous for his participation in the Apollo 11 moon landing in 1969, hit Bart Sibrel after he approached the former astronaut outside a hotel in Beverley Hills, Los Angeles and demanded he swear on a Bible that the landing was not staged.

Mr Aldrin responded by punching Mr Sibrel, but said he merely struck out to defend himself and his stepdaughter, who was with him at the time.

Beverly Hills police investigated the incident, which occurred 9 September, but said that the charges were dropped after witnesses came forward to say that Mr Sibrel had aggressively poked Mr Aldrin with the Bible before he was punched.

Witnesses also told police that Mr Sibrel had lured Mr Aldrin to the hotel under false pretences in order to interview him.

Mr Sibrel handed over the tape to police investigators, but as Mr Sibrel sustained no visible injury and did not seek medical attention, and Mr Aldrin had no previous criminal record, no charges were filed.

Mr Sibrel says his new documentary proves the Apollo 11 landings were faked by the Nasa space agency in order to fool the then-Soviet Union into thinking the US had beaten them in the space race.

The guy apparently never heard of telescopes.

[PeZook]

The guy apparently never heard of telescopes.

Or of the KGB.

The Soviet Union managed to get classified information from the US Navy, a military organization responsible for defending the US and handling parts of her US arsenal ; They managed to steal proximity fuses and complete technical drawings on your fighter jets ; They stole your fucking nuclear weapon research.

Digging up evidence that showed the landings were staged by NASA would be child's play by comparison, especially considering the sheer scope of such a conspiracy (how hard would it be to pay off a General Electric engineer?), and the fact how USSR's international prestige was at stake.

Of course, hoaxers have (many, often contradictory) explanations on why the USSR would have never done this. I particularly like the claim that the US would then expose the "fact" that Gagarin's flight was a fake: Because, obviously, the world would believe the US when they said "Ha! But you faked one of your flights, too!" right after being fingered as the biggest liars ever

The shape and amount of "fake" evidence is also rather damning and runs contrary to all fakeries ever. If you want to lie to someone, the basic rules are to be minimalistic, don't go into details and invent a story that's hard to corroborrate by independent parties.

NASA, on the other hand, apparently faked half a dozen landings, thousands of photographs from the flight, post-flight and preparatoin phases, released Moon rock samples to half the countries in the world, sent its astronauts on a round-the-world trip and let them be questioned by thousands of journalists, let the people involved write books and essays and article magazines, and even helpfully digitized most of the material so that everyone with an Internet connection can browse it at home.

They're either the most idiotic conspirators ever, or they really did it.

[Spoonist]

->Zixinus
uhm... That was what Simon_Jester was obviuosly refering to, why would you try to explain it to someone who namedrops the incident?

To the topic, the landing site has been verified by modern Russia, Japan and India. So the conspiracy is worldwide and global.