Conspiracy Hypothesis (Hoax Hypothesis) - Did we land on the moon?

[3mmanu3lrc]

On February 15, 2001 the FOX television network aired a program titled Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land On The Moon? This program showed alleged evidence that NASA faked the moon landings. This hoax theory has been around for several years.

Here are the links:

Documentary - Moon Landing - Conspiracy Theory - Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5MVVtFYTSo

Documentary - Moon Landing - Conspiracy Theory - Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b309_YspwMk

Documentary - Moon Landing - Conspiracy Theory - Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1CpNoI4WGc

Documentary - Moon Landing - Conspiracy Theory - Part 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8qzDJwYjro

Documentary - Moon Landing - Conspiracy Theory - Part 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiCKy41zZMU

Well, even there're some clear points in those videos above, it's also a fact that we all may not think the same, as most of the people in the world says that we did make it to the moon, while just a few others says we didn't.

Are the advocates of the "hoax theory" wrong?
Did the NASA really fake all this "successful" moon landing thing?
Did we really land on the moon?

What do you think about this?

 

[metalreflectslime]

I agree with you. I don't think we landed on the moon. Reason for this is because if we landed on the moon before, why is it so hard to do it again? Shouldn't it be easier as time progresses because technology improves?

 

[ballin4life]

If you are serious about that, then yes we could easily go to the moon again. But it was a big waste of money then and it would be a big waste of money now, so we don't bother.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Yeah, no. Look, conspiracy theories are nice, but when a mission is launched, and the results are used by academia, then that's a pretty good indicator that it wasn't a hoax. Plus, the insane amount of money that went into it... and for what? What's the motive?

This thread is bad, and you should feel bad.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

Why? Because of NASA laying to humanity, or because they spent money instead of giving it tu us?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Because this is a completely baseless, fear-mongering conspiracy theory up there with chemtrails and the area 51 cover-up!

 

[Spire]

The truth is, the government just isn't as corrupt as people make it out to be. Humans like to get lost in fantasy and staging a national uprising versus corruption scenario speaks to people. Seriously, the media controls people more than the government (oh but the government controls the media, Spire!) No it doesn't. If you want to battle anything, fight the Federal Reserve. And may the force be with you.

America is run by corporations. The government is but one of them.

 

[GwJ]

Are people still thinking we didn't go? I thought we'd all understand by now.

 

[Crimson King]

I agree with you. I don't think we landed on the moon. Reason for this is because if we landed on the moon before, why is it so hard to do it again? Shouldn't it be easier as time progresses because technology improves?

We've been back to the moon several times since Apollo 11.

Every single conspiracy theory is based on misinformation or just wrong facts. From Kennedy's assassination to 9/11, and for the rest of time, it'll be the same way.

The major reason the moon landing is thought to be faked is that we were in a race with Russia. Russia also went to the moon, and had we actually faked it and there had been no US flag, they would have brought that evidence back and showed the world.

Follow Occam's Razor, and all theories will fail.

 

[asianaussie]

Hey guys, the movie Titanic was actually a scheme designed to lure us away from the fact that cruise liners are human abduction schemes that take people on vacation, replace them with bioroid clones, then experiment on their internal organs. Proof?

ZOMG NO WAIIIIII

Honestly, conspiracies like this are nothing to debate about. Going to the moon is a tremendous waste of time and money, and we did it just to show that we could. We could easily do it again, but why bother? There isn't any need to go to the moon to prove our ability to go to the moon. Every conspiracy out there is a result of someone noticing and publicizing misinformation, a series of coincidences or simply blatantly lying.

Spoiler

thebestpageintheuniverse.com is pretty cool

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

Yeah, well, We're constantly discovering new species at the bottom of the sea, and we're thinking about going out of our very own world that we fully don't know yet... The moon... I don't think so.

 

[asianaussie]

So you're saying that until we find everything there is to know about this planet, we shouldn't leave it? That's not even an argument, that's just game perfectionism in the real world. How do we know we've found everything in the world? Is there some sort of progress meter that we can fill?

People were curious about the moon for millenia. There is plenty of incentive to go out to the moon. Do you dispute the existence of satellites? We can put huge metal signalling arrays in space, so why can't we send a few people a bit further out to land on that big rock we call the moon?

I'm tempted to disregard your video evidence completely - plenty of documentaries by respectable knowledge channels such as NatGeo (Fox supports idiots like Glenn Beck, for crying out loud) have debunked a lot of these hoax claims. Not even that, a quick search on Wikipedia of all places has plausible and substantiated reasoning behind all of the apparent flaws this conspiracy's proponents point out.

Occam's Razor, as mentioned before. Shave away all the unnecessary assumptions until you find the solution with the lowest necessity for assuming. The simplest solution is generally the correct one.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

No, that's something like what some of you are saying here, just: "yes, we made it to the moon" which is what the NASA defender said in the vid: "We went to the moon, end of story" which is not an argument either.

People just say that we went to the moon because that's what they saw on the movie, and what they teach in school, probably all faked though as shown in the vids.

 

[GwJ]

Like stated before, why didn't the Russians rat us out? Are they in on it too?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Yeah, well, We're constantly discovering new species at the bottom of the sea, and we're thinking about going out of our very own world that we fully don't know yet... The moon... I don't think so.

Because it's definitely possible to know everything about this planet. It's actually easier to design a ship to work in a vacuum than in incredible depths. Like most conspiracy theorists, you have a weak understanding of science, and are making baseless assumptions.

No, that's something like what some of you are saying here, just: "yes, we made it to the moon" which is what the NASA defender said in the vid: "We went to the moon, end of story" which is not an argument either.

You'd have to assume that the government has been lying to you. Then you'd have to assume that the russians are doing the same or are in on the conspiracy... despite the fact that when they went to the moon, they were still in the space race with us. You'd have to assume that all of the money spent on rockets, rocket fuel, astronaut training, etc. was wasted.

When investigating a theory such as this, a conspiracy and crime, one important question is, "Qui Bonis". English: "who benefits". Just to put things in perspective here. You are proposing that the united states government threw billions upon billions of dollars out the window (that money for jet fuel? It's not coming back, and it's demonstrably spent), then that the russians, and everyone else who has been to the moon have done the same. But for what gain? The ability to claim "we went to the moon"? Seriously, what's more realistic-a massive, world-wide staging event (which is rejected by virtually every establishment in the world) co-conspired by one of the most hostile nations in the world at that time, costing billions of dollars for no evident gain whatsoever, or that it actually happened?


Hell, you want to prove the moon landing? Get a (ridiculously good-have an observatory in your area?) telescope, locate the patch on the moon where the lunar lander supposedly was, and look for the flag.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

I think you're the one who should do that to really proove it other than just saying "yes, we went to the moon, watch the movie to realize it" since that's kind of in a doubt right now, what's your point in saying we made it other than that?

 

[GwJ]

You didn't answer my question. Why haven't the Russians spoken up? Are they in on it too?

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

I haven't answer you because I simply don't know abut the Russians.

Any way, this thread was meant to see what your point of view is about this guys, not to see who's right or wrong, I'm just speaking from what I've seen though.

 

[GwJ]

The Russians went to the moon also. That's what I'm getting at.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

That was pretty clear in your last few posts, it's me the one who don't know about it, that's why I'm not saying anything about that.

 

[Savon]

The claims made by most conspiracy theories are so off the wall and wild that they often make less sense than the event that actually happened.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

That's why I rather to write "theory" in the title, since it's either could be true as it could also be false, just a theory.

 

[Savon]

True, but theories should not be considered JUST because it is a theory. The evidence needs to be solid and convincing.

I have a theory that Nintedo is trying to brainwash kids injecting mind control juice into mario cart cases. It is a theory, but without any real solid evidence it should not be taken into consideration in even the slightest.

 

[GwJ]

It's more like a conspiracy hypothesis. Theory implies probability or at least some truth.

 

[asianaussie]

Actually, a theory implies that the hypothesis has been tried and has been found difficult or impossible to disprove. In this case, you cannot prove it because it is a case of history, but you also cannot disprove it.

The word theory is used far too lightly.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

I wrote "theory" because that was the tv shows title, but I could change it to "the conspiracy hypothesis" if you want to.
As I said before guys, I just want to see your opinion about this theory/hypothesis.

 

[GwJ]

Yeah, as everyone's said, you'd have to be pretty hard pressed to deny that we went to the moon.

 

[GoldShadow]

If you're going to make a thread that involves videos, could you provide a brief summary of the videos next time? I say this because there are numerous pieces of so-called evidence that moon landing conspiracy theorists use, and these have been disproven time and time again.

I (and probably others) don't have time to watch all those videos, and that's especially true if the videos just rehash all the same old, same old that has been done in the past.

So just a friendly reminder to include key points from the videos if you're going to link to them (this goes for any video link in any debate, not just this one).

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

@GoldShadow Thanks, advice taken.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I think you're the one who should do that to really proove it other than just saying "yes, we went to the moon, watch the movie to realize it" since that's kind of in a doubt right now, what's your point in saying we made it other than that?

You're missing what we're trying to say... specifically: "It is more likely that the moon landing happened than that it was faked, even without any definitive proof, due to the effort stuck into it by the government for no tangible reward". You're proposing a ridiculously expensive and massive crime that has no motive, and not only that, there's no advantage from uncovering it. The only "evidence" you've put forward is a movie that I'm simply not willing to spend time watching, because it appears ridiculously long and is without a doubt flawed in the extreme-like a creationist trying to get you to watch "Expelled-No Intelligence Allowed" as proof for creationism.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

@BPC Ok, that's your opinion and I respect it, but if you are not gonna watch "The only 'evidence' you've put forward" please, don't argue about it.
And sorry if that makes you upset, that's not the intention of this.

As I said before guys, I just want to see your opinion about this theory/hypothesis.

^^^ inb4.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

@BPC Ok, that's your opinion and I respect it, but if you are not gonna watch "The only 'evidence' you've put forward" please, don't argue about it.
And sorry if that makes you upset, that's not the intention of this.

^^^ inb4.

TL;DR version would really help. It's very long and I can't be ****ed because you'd need ridiculously solid evidence to convince smart people and overcome this common-sensical barrier in place that stops people from looking at a conspiracy theory like this and saying "several billion dollars out the window for no real gain? What a joke." I'm not going to waste that much time watching something like that. You might as well put forward a 2000-page textbook as evidence and then exclude anyone who hasn't read it from the discussion. No, not when the answer is this obvious. Sorry.

It's not even a conspiracy like the 9/11 inside job conspiracy theory. That one also has little to no evidence that makes any sense, but it would be a huge deal if it turned out that that was actually true.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

If you think it's a waste of time, why are you here?
Again for 4rth time, I'm not trying to convince anybody, or wasn't that clear in the quoted messange in my previws post?
And if not, I just wanted to see/read your opinion which I already know what it is, because you've beeing saying kind of the same over and over again.

Moreover:

Forum Rules

-Please DISABLE all signatures. You can do this in the User CP or per-post by ensuring "Show your signature" is UNCHECKED under "Miscellaneous Options."

 

[Reaver197]

There are reflectors on the moon, placed there by several of the Apollo missions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2004/21jul_llr/

 

[Sucumbio]

I was really not going to even post in this topic and yet here I am, posting. You'll pay for this.

People just say that we went to the moon because that's what they saw on the movie, and what they teach in school, probably all faked though as shown in the vids.

Yeah, but... what about the moon rocks! Like the one at the Smithsonian?

I remember someone years ago telling me the footage of the landing was fake because the US flag was "blowing" as if it were windy on the moon and there being no atmosphere on the moon meant that couldn't have been "blowing."

Conspiracy: When the astronauts are assembling the American flag, the flag waves. Kaysing says this must have been from an errant breeze on the set. A flag wouldn't wave in a vacuum.

Truth: Of course a flag can wave in a vacuum. In the shot of the astronaut and the flag, the astronaut is rotating the pole on which the flag is mounted, trying to get it to stay up. The flag is mounted on one side on the pole, and along the top by another pole that sticks out to the side. In a vacuum or not, when you whip around the vertical pole, the flag will ``wave'', since it is attached at the top. The top will move first, then the cloth will follow along in a wave that moves down. This isn't air that is moving the flag, it's the cloth itself.

Plenty more of that here: http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

In short this is not really a debate topic, more of a "in your opinion." And so, on topic, I think people have wild imaginations, too much time on their hands, watch too much TV, and are generally idiots.

 

[TimeTemporal]

One thing the theorists like to point out is how the flag was waving when it was placed in the moon, claiming that it couldn't due to the absence of wind. However, low gravity would allow the motion of the flag being thrust into the sand to continue to shake the flag after being placed, thus facilitating a waving flag.

EDIT: Aw, beat me to it. Oh well.

 

[Sucumbio]

You so got ninja'd

 

[GwJ]

Wow, what were the chances of both of you on the same topic?

 

[Sucumbio]

I think it must be the most popular of the "theories" out there. That article I linked to mentions a lot about dust and crap, but meh. The flag, man. The flag.

 

[TimeTemporal]

Wow, what were the chances of both of you on the same topic?

And both post the same thing at that!

Let us not forget the assumption that there should have been stars in the moon landing vid.
Again, theorists claim that we should have seen stars, and the lack of them indicates it being staged, but the opposite is true here.
The moon reflects light that shines from the sun (as we all know), thereby lighting up the sky around it. It causes stars to become too dim relatively to be seen, for the same reason we can't see stars on earth in daylight, or at night in well-lit cities.

EDIT: hooray, no ninjas.