• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

Vixen said:
This is where the avoidance of the question comes in in the OP video. Kaysing states the astronauts refuse to speak about the stars (to paraphrase his belief) yet instead of debunking the claim NASA made a 'conscious decision' to leave the stars out, according to Kaysing, Tony Cook simply launches off into a non sequitur - as does Patrick Moore - of what the human eye can and cannot see instead of answering the 'hoaxer' question. Simply adopting a condescending tone of 'let's reassure the five-year-old-children there is no bogeyman under the bed <fx ha ha ha let's just laugh it off as childlike silliness> is really what makes it a poor 'debunk' to a reasonable point. And we can see that Moore has a tone of faux-jollity to carefully place the question in a specific term rather than the broader one as set by Kaysing.

View attachment 73062


View attachment 73063

View attachment 73064

View attachment 73065


See how the claim is dismissed by instead of answering Kaysing's point, they start focusing on a very specific example of 'if you are on the daylight side of the Moon (=implying full bright sunshine and full albedo [ha! got the word in]) then the human eye <fx yawn launches into a totally obfuscating lecture on how the human eye works> so I am afraid it made me frown at how the question was neatly side-stepped and presented as a 'debunk' when it was nothing of the sort. For one, the astronauts were there at Moon dawn not 'daylight'.

You yourself handwave it away as you've taken pictures of solar eclipses and you don't recall seeing stars (er, of course not!) but these guys were the 'first men on the Moon', remember? Heightened emotions and awareness, rather like the day you got married or graduated or your kid was born. Not, oh we had a great holiday on the Moon, but can't remember whether we saw stars. 'Erm, ahem, this would be because the human eye blah blah blah...'
Click to expand...


Well done!

1783333168356.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Okay so I am out.
Click to expand...
That's honesty - there is nothing to be ashamed of if your intelligence isn't up to following a topic. I remember a thread here about a member's tired photons, I could follow up to a certain point but had to bow out and admit that the topic was now beyond my ability to understand, knowing your own limits is a good thing.
 
Vixen said:
This is where the avoidance of the question comes in in the OP video. Kaysing states the astronauts refuse to speak about the stars (to paraphrase his belief) yet instead of debunking the claim NASA made a 'conscious decision' to leave the stars out, according to Kaysing, Tony Cook simply launches off into a non sequitur - as does Patrick Moore - of what the human eye can and cannot see instead of answering the 'hoaxer' question. Simply adopting a condescending tone of 'let's reassure the five-year-old-children there is no bogeyman under the bed <fx ha ha ha let's just laugh it off as childlike silliness> is really what makes it a poor 'debunk' to a reasonable point. And we can see that Moore has a tone of faux-jollity to carefully place the question in a specific term rather than the broader one as set by Kaysing.

View attachment 73062


View attachment 73063

View attachment 73064

View attachment 73065


See how the claim is dismissed by instead of answering Kaysing's point, they start focusing on a very specific example of 'if you are on the daylight side of the Moon (=implying full bright sunshine and full albedo [ha! got the word in]) then the human eye <fx yawn launches into a totally obfuscating lecture on how the human eye works> so I am afraid it made me frown at how the question was neatly side-stepped and presented as a 'debunk' when it was nothing of the sort. For one, the astronauts were there at Moon dawn not 'daylight'.

You yourself handwave it away as you've taken pictures of solar eclipses and you don't recall seeing stars (er, of course not!) but these guys were the 'first men on the Moon', remember? Heightened emotions and awareness, rather like the day you got married or graduated or your kid was born. Not, oh we had a great holiday on the Moon, but can't remember whether we saw stars. 'Erm, ahem, this would be because the human eye blah blah blah...'
Click to expand...
Kaysing's claim can be dismissed because it's false.

We are stardust...

Apollo astronaut star quotes
onebigmonkey.com
 
Vixen said:
<snip> Simply adopting a condescending tone of 'let's reassure the five-year-old-children there is no bogeyman under the bed <fx ha ha ha let's just laugh it off as childlike silliness> is really what makes it a poor 'debunk' to a reasonable point.
Click to expand...
It's not condescending if the point being debunked is something a five-year-old can figure out though... For example:

Vixen said:
<snip> For one, the astronauts were there at Moon dawn not 'daylight'.
Click to expand...
A five-year-old could tell you it's daylight at dawn haha.

(Not to mention also read the Apollo 11 flight plan which would tell you when in the lunar day they landed).
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
,,,is really what makes it a poor 'debunk' to a reasonable point.
Click to expand...
Moore's question was reasonable. So was the answer. It wasn't the answer Kaysing wanted, so he made up a bunch of stuff.

Vixen said:
You yourself handwave it away as you've taken pictures of solar eclipses and you don't recall seeing stars (er, of course not!) but these guys were the 'first men on the Moon', remember? Heightened emotions and awareness...
Click to expand...
No, that's not how the brain works.
 
Last edited:
Apologies, but I fell behind on the thread. Could @Vixen or someone explain why we should think the behavior of reflecting light would change on the moon's surface? Do photons not reflect in a vacuum or something? I can't even loosely follow this 'pitch black' line of thinking on a daytime, sunlit moonscape.

Eta: from.memory, the regalith on the moon's surface has known and understood reflecting properties, yes? Does Vixen deny this?

Eta2: how does Vixen explain seeing a full moon from down here, if light is not reflecting off the moon's surface in that predictable way we know to be true?
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
This is where the avoidance of the question comes in in the OP video. Kaysing states the astronauts refuse to speak about the stars (to paraphrase his belief) yet instead of debunking the claim NASA made a 'conscious decision' to leave the stars out, according to Kaysing, Tony Cook simply launches off into a non sequitur - as does Patrick Moore - of what the human eye can and cannot see instead of answering the 'hoaxer' question. Simply adopting a condescending tone of 'let's reassure the five-year-old-children there is no bogeyman under the bed <fx ha ha ha let's just laugh it off as childlike silliness> is really what makes it a poor 'debunk' to a reasonable point. And we can see that Moore has a tone of faux-jollity to carefully place the question in a specific term rather than the broader one as set by Kaysing.

View attachment 73062


View attachment 73063

View attachment 73064

View attachment 73065


See how the claim is dismissed by instead of answering Kaysing's point, they start focusing on a very specific example of 'if you are on the daylight side of the Moon (=implying full bright sunshine and full albedo [ha! got the word in]) then the human eye <fx yawn launches into a totally obfuscating lecture on how the human eye works> so I am afraid it made me frown at how the question was neatly side-stepped and presented as a 'debunk' when it was nothing of the sort. For one, the astronauts were there at Moon dawn not 'daylight'.

You yourself handwave it away as you've taken pictures of solar eclipses and you don't recall seeing stars (er, of course not!) but these guys were the 'first men on the Moon', remember? Heightened emotions and awareness, rather like the day you got married or graduated or your kid was born. Not, oh we had a great holiday on the Moon, but can't remember whether we saw stars. 'Erm, ahem, this would be because the human eye blah blah blah...'
Click to expand...

Speaking of not answering questions, when are you going to answer JayUtah's about whether Marcus Allen's claim of being able to image stars with the camera settings used on the moon EVAs was reasonable?
 
Thermal said:
I can't even loosely follow this 'pitch black' line of thinking on a daytime, sunlit moonscape.
Click to expand...
It started with @Vixen trying to say you could see and photograph stars easily from the lunar surface because the sky is "pitch black," which she took to mean it's the same as nighttime on Earth. Then it changed to being able to see and photograph stars easily by stepping into the shadow of something, because she thinks "it's pitch black in the shadows" without really understanding what "it" is. Now it's just its own thing—the latest thing she's wrong about and won't let go of. But saying something newly wrong about it every day saves her from having to answer the Marcus Allen photography question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom