USA Basketball Player Stephen Curry (Golden State, California) doesn't think that USA Astronauts ever landed on Earth's Moon

*dont believe everything they tell you in school but do believe the alleged credentials of any anonymous person that agrees with you*

Bahahahahaha

Legit question wrote:

So, we have a Ph.D in physics who disbelieves Apollo/NASA too. Wow!

Why are you surprised?

"Still waiting for a Apollo defender explain the hammer sounds in a vacuum and the no radio delay conversations. They cannot and they pivot to something else. The laws of physics were broken- which immediately invalidates the entire narrative"

If the laws of physics were broken, as you claim, why are there any physicists that believe the moon landing occurred?

If the laws of physics were broken, as you claim, why are there any physicists that believe the moon landing occurred?

Because getting a physics credential nowadays (and physics grants too) is largely about not making waves, believing what is dictating to you, and ticking the right virtue signalling boxes (diversity etc).

Maybe it's not (yet) as bad as something like climate "science" (where non-conformists are de facto banned), but those in the field know better than to speak up at what they see and know. Remember: Social Science trumps real science every time, simply by controlling enough organs of dissemination and communication.

celery wrote: So, the real deciding factor for what is true always comes back to human testimony. [/quote] This is a good point, and not one that anti-hoax believers are likely to admit. THERE IS NO "SCIENTIFIC" EVIDENCE that USA PEOPLE LANDED ON EARTH'S MOON. Only measures of historic factitude can be applied. But we know that people (USA particularly) *do* lie.

It's the armchair skeptics on the internet, who don't actually work in that field, who coming up with the supposed physical problems.

Since when is Wernher von Braun an "armchair skeptic"?

the grand inquisitor wrote:

As with all of these threads, those supporting the case that we've landed on the moon are summarily taking the disbelievers to task. Well done.

"Yay team" fallacy.

None of us were there but I also have questions for the deniers. If you try to think one step further, you realize that what seems like good points all fall apart and leave only one or two outstanding questions, that in themselves would not be enough to hold a conspiracy theory...reminds me on the HIV-AIDS deniers. A legitimate question would be, "why haven't we returned?" That one needs a serious and believable answer from NASA. Anyway, for the landing not to have happened, a few things need to be undeniable facts. Firstly, lots of people have to keep their mouths shut. Here is a non-exhaustive list of people who would know it never happened: astronauts themselves, NASA higher ups, some NASA camera crew, or Hollywood or whoever "filmed" the hoax, some NASA scientists/employees, Russians, who would have loved to see it fail, and to watch the fallout after scandal is exposed etc. etc. That's the minimum, sure there are more. Anyone who says Manhattan Project is similar doesnt know the history well. Yes, it was considered a secret but it was well known after the fact that a lot of connected individuals to the primary actors in the Project were aware and that there were some Americans who knew of the secretive nature of the these two events would be executed at the individual level in the mind of a conspiracy theorist? Manhattan Project: "Hey Bill, we need to win this war so, we cannot talk to anyone whatsoever about what we are doing here. Now go back and make sure the centrifuge is working correctly." MoonLanding Hoax: "Hey Nelly, we cannot find a way to get to the moon, so you can never ever tell anyone as long as you live but I need you to edit that video again and make sure you slow his movements some more cause I hear there is less gravity there."

I also find it interesting in that the science questions being raised would suggest that these "mistakes/errors" did not occur to NASA scientists setting up the hoax. I am sorry but I find it hard to believe that not one but probably tens of the best physicist of the era just were this dumb...unless the hoax was carried out by just TV crew and NASA higher ups. But this again would leave NASA physicists out of the hoax but I cant imagine them not raising controversy immediately or even years later.

For the Apollo trips, we wanted to send the astronauts through a sparse region of the belts, and to try and get through them quickly. This was necessary in any case; the crafts had to make it to the Moon in a reasonable amount of time, and the shorter the trip, the less exposure to all sorts of radiation the astronauts would get.

In the end, it seemed that these tactics worked; the on-board dose counters for the Apollo missions registered average radiation doses to the skin of the astronauts of 0.38 rad. This is about the same radiation dose as getting two CT scans of your head, or half the dose of a single chest CT scan; not too bad, though not something you should do every week.

Using brain cells wrote:

Quick question- have flat earthers ever travelled to Europe and Asia — how do you explain that both is possible without a spherical earth?

Forget about travel. How about watching the video footage from rockets as they go up in space looking at the spherical earth?

Full high resolution videos of this exists yet there are well attended expensive Flat Earth Conferences in American Land (FECAL)

Given the above, how can anyone expect to explain science to these people? The moom soil scatters light, stars can’t show up with the camera setting used, condensation occurs regardless of gravity or the conditions outside a ship, NASA engineers can design a tire that wouldn’t explode on the Moon. How about high resolution color video? Naaah

Belted by van Allen wrote:

celery wrote:

So, the real deciding factor for what is true always comes back to human testimony.

This is a good point, and not one that anti-hoax believers are likely to admit. THERE IS NO "SCIENTIFIC" EVIDENCE that USA PEOPLE LANDED ON EARTH'S MOON. Only measures of historic factitude can be applied. But we know that people (USA particularly) *do* lie.

Indubitably. So let's look at the historical evidence.

How many people (USA) would have to lie about man-on-moon hoax?

1) A handful of USA astronauts.

2) A handful of USA NASA high admins.

3) A handful of entertainment production crew (likely USA, but maybe low-budget south London, for easier to "disappear" them later, see below).

That's it! Maybe 40-50 total. There's clear career incentives for #1 and #2, and to keep the hoax covered up in the long run, especially with USA govt coercion on the matter. And #3 can easily be "disappeared" as they are unknowns anyway (except maybe director Kubrick if it was him involved).

Compare this 40-50 to how many people in the similar era (60s) had to lie and keep covered Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s frequent philandering adultery with white prostitutes ("everyone knew", of course, just like Harvey Weinstein). But yet so many did! That's how groupthink mentality works, and psy-ops (CIA) exploit it all the time. Or you can use a modern example, like covering up any of modern govt crooks (HRC, Obama, Bush, Powell, WJC,. etc).

I don't see why it matters today (2018 Dec) if USA astronauts landed on earth's moon.

The whole point was to win the Cold War, at any cost. Who cares if lies were told?

Like former Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) said after his 11th hour made-up lie about Mitt Romney not paying USA taxes for 10 years: "It worked, didn't it?"

That's the basis on which we have to judge how NASA/CIA acted.

Besides Russians, that could be capped at a couple dozen people or fewer. A crew of one could simulate the fixed moon camera, one or two tech people could handle the signal. Execs and and a few managers could handle the rest.

Suppose Russians for sure knew the signals weren't coming from the moon, and could prove it (not a given at all in geopolitics). Does it follow that they would? There are other options, particularly blackmail. They could have agreed to keep quiet in exchange for concessions guaranteeing their long-term dominance of space flight, something they have achieved beyond dispute. The US can't even launch people into LEO anymore and Americans ride into space on Russian rockets. That's a major Russian victory which could well outweigh the short-term propaganda victory of revealing a hoax.

The idea that Apollo wasn't real is no "secret" either. People have been saying so for a long time. So let's please dispense with the straw man that no beans got spilt. The only question is whether they're real beans.

Maybe they did land on the moon. But ya gotta prove it! For most people this means believing something they never actually examined critically, and they hate having that pointed out to them.

This is a pertinent observation. That the education system may have fostered a generation of non-critical thinkers who are unable to challenge the veracity of "information" even on the basis of the most primitive rational observation. They require more "information" from others to update the conception - and appear to be mentally paralyzed (disengaging individual independent critical thinking).

Man in the moron wrote:

This is a pertinent observation. That the education system may have fostered a generation of non-critical thinkers who are unable to challenge the veracity of "information" even on the basis of the most primitive rational observation. They require more "information" from others to update the conception - and appear to be mentally paralyzed (disengaging individual independent critical thinking).

Further, they believe they can overcome any cogitational impediment by quoting Wikipedia.

Legit question wrote:

the grand inquisitor wrote:

As with all of these threads, those supporting the case that we've landed on the moon are summarily taking the disbelievers to task. Well done.

Actually. it is the opposite. The number of disbelievers keeps growing. Even on LR, I am no longer the sole voice railing against NASA.

OneGiantLie

That you conflate the number of anonymous messageboard postings to intellectually winning a debate helps explain why you are continually schooled.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Suppose Russians for sure knew the signals weren't coming from the moon, and could prove it . . .

For most people this means believing something they never actually examined critically, and they hate having that pointed out to them.

Don't hate me.

celery wrote:

Once in a blue moron wrote:

I have a Ph.D. in Physics from a top five University, and am a member of learned institutions, have published papers and worked on multiple European Space Agency projects. I call BS, and whilst not being completely unanimous, many of my peers also call BS.

My oh my, what a quandary. Do I believe that 'Once in a blue moron' really has authoritative expertise, and I should therefore change my opinion. Or do I ignore him because he/she posted anonymously and didn't link to anything and didn't make any arguments of his/her own?

What to do, what to do....

You mean you don’t believe a serial handle changer with “moron” in his name who never makes any scientific arguments is a learned physicist?!

Could have been fake, or could have been real, no evidence either way!

"We set up some camera lights and everything else that indicated a single-point source of light, as in the sun, and yes, you could have faked that shot, or yet, it could have actually been the real case, depending on the terrain"

To simulate the moon's gravity, the plane went into a series of parabolic arcs, as Savage was filmed at regular speed mimickiing the astronauts' movements. ...in that environment, he was able to accurately mimic the movements in NASA's footage.

"Regardless of whether conspiracy theorists are right or wrong in their conclusions, it's good to think carefully about what is told and what is out there and make up your own mind. That's all we are really pro: making sure that you just don't swallow everything that you're fed, and look at it clearly and critically."

News reporters will believe anything (Fake News was rampant in 1969 too).

Baysinger later claims to "transferred" the original tapes from 1969 to digital format.

Or did he just later tweak with the NASA "official" comms (freely available) and keep his story up that he detected them directly too? It's hard for any outsider to know, you just have to "trust" them again. Clearly he has reason (fame) to make up a story, though he hid from public view for many years rather than try to spread the story (that of/c every-one would want to hear), and only "found" more salvageable tape when BBC did a story. Odds anyone?

So this is hardly independent verification, when it could be subsidiary.

Also, if it came to that, it would be fairly easy for NASA pre-tape some astronaut crosstalk (35+ mins) and send it up with the unmanned spacecraft to Earth's Moon (Nixon would be in on it too of/c). There's many possible theories. No need to get complicated about it. Soviets could detect too like the Kentucky dude, so there's that angle too.

It would be (Baysinger) more reliable if there were *continual* recordings as the USA spaceship went from Planet Earth to Earth's Moon (plus back), and not just during the supposed "spacewalk" on Moon's surface.

Recently, Jarrah met with CSIRO professor Ray Morris, who as a kid received signals from Apollo 13 – but only during the time they were said to be in earth orbit.

In the nineties, David Percy contacted Jodrell Bank Observatory technician Robert Pitchard. He stated that they too only tracked Apollo when it was close to the moon, not the trip there and back: “The Moon probes were observed with a 50ft radio telescope which at the frequency used (2300MHz) had a beam width of 5/8ths degrees

In round terms this allowed us to pick up signals from up signals from up to about 1,000 miles above the moon’s surface, although small corrections had to be made to pointing as the probes orbited the Moon.

And even then, because NASA did not supply them with the ballistics data, the Soviets were limited to listening to it during the time Apollos 8, 10, 11 and 12 were supposedly in lunar orbit.

Only the NASA Manned Space Flight Network can 'attest' to having tracked these vehicles all the way to the moon and back. This Network comprised of Goldstone Tracking Station in California, the Madrid Deep Space Communications Complex, and various facilities in Australia; most notably Parkes Observatory, Honeysuckle Creek and Tidbinbilla. In the case of Parkes, it was (and still is) owned by the Australian government but was under control of and under contract to NASA during the time of the Apollo missions. It was NASA’s very own Robert Taylor who controlled the release of any data from Parkes during the Apollo 11 mission and his team were responsible for the reception, recording and transfer of audio, video and telemetry at Parkes. And on the subsequent flights technicians and engineers from NASA’s Tidbinbilla complex were heavily involved at Parkes. It’s essentially a fox guarding the hen house scenario.