• 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

JayUtah said:
And how exactly do you know the Apollo 11 crew was omitting something?
Click to expand...
Please see my reply in post #3663

Vixen

Post in thread 'Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk'

Worm said:
This is absolute nonsense. Have you watched the whole press conference, or even read the transcript? They confirm any number of times the full details of how they got to the moon and walked on it. If you are just talking about the single question, then they are explicit about not seeing stars from the surface without optics, but also explicit in that statement is that they were on the surface. Do you expect them to preface every answer with 'Well, when we were on the moon, which we totally were, honestly...' ?



If you want to live in the fantastical belief that none of...
Click to expand...
  • Haha
 
Vixen said:
If you look at the video in the OP you can see Patrick Moore with a twinkle in his eye explaining why he specifically asked that question with specific wording. He was basically being sycophantic and saw himself as coming to their rescue. The question was answered in the context of the 'solar corona' causing glare and spoiling their potential view, as Moore specifically worded his 'question'. But you don't need to face the 'solar corona'.
Click to expand...
That's a monocle. No but seriously, I see no such thing. I see Patrick Moore explaining why he asked a particular question, in his own inimitable style, talking at about 1.5x speed.

Are you familiar with Patrick Moore? 'Sycophantic' was not really his bag. 'Irascible' maybe, 'Opinionated' sure. He held any number of views that I find quite repulsive, but I've never seen anyone serious criticise his scientific credentials, or suggest that he was sycophantic by any measure.
 
Steve said:
Yet again a "reply" that has no connection to the post you quoted. To repeat a pet phrase of your own - do pay attention.
Click to expand...
Indeed, micrometeoroids and radiation have nothing to do with each other. @Vixen believes Trevor Weaver is an expert on space radiation. He is not—or was not, since he is probably well into his eighties by now. Nor is Weaver apparently immune from such ordinary logical fallacies as converting the conditional.
 
Vixen said:
But you don't need to face the 'solar corona'.
Click to expand...
You do if you intend to observe it. As I have explained now at length twice, Moore asked a specific question that would be familiar to eclipse observers. The astronauts answered it the same way many other eclipse observers have answered it. You're desperately trying to spin it to be something else.

No, the astronauts are not furtively trying to hide some deep, dark secret. No, Moore is not throwing them a bone to rescue them from the withering questioning by the world media. No, your fantasy world alternative is not what happened or was going to happen. Your argument here is based entirely on things you are imagining. You imagine an alternate universe in which the Apollo hardware wasn't ready. In this universe there is a mountain of evidence that it was. You imagine an alternative universe in which you and others have the clairvoyance to detect deception merely by looking at the speaker. In this universe that's not a thing.

You and Weaver would get along famously. You both pretend to be neutral observers. You both pretend expertise you don't have and think you're actually getting away with it. And you both live in a fantasy world. Weaver wrote and rewrote the same nonfiction book for years trying to get it to sell. Finally he gave up and threw in with Marcus Allen to write a bad novel about an intrepid filmmaker who worked doggedly to expose the Apollo program as a hoax. You don't get any more "fantasy role play" than that.
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
This wasn't some post-match interview with a sports person literally a minute after they won. For how long after they "just got back" would that euphoric sensation last? Should we ask your psychologist? How long after they came home from the moon did that press conference happen? How excited should they have felt to be doing a press conference? The massively exciting bit was finished. This was back to work on the dull but necessary stuff.
Click to expand...
Two things come to mind.

I've heard different conspiracy theorists claim both that the Apollo astronauts were far too glum on the lunar surface - that they should have been "doing back flips from sheer joy", and that they were far too casual about the danger they were in - that they should have been "literally ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ their pants in terror" while on the moon.

The other thing that comes to mind are the post-race Formula 1 press conferences featuring Finnish double world champion Mika Hakkinen, who was famously breviloquent during most such press appearances, even after winning races or qualifying on pole. It's not that he couldn't speak more (as sometimes he was more verbose than usual, and was noted as quite pleasantly conversational by people who knew him), he just found these interviews to be rather boring most of the time. But I'll always remember fondly the time Peter Windsor asked a detailed question, obviously expecting a detailed explication, and Mika leaned toward the mic, smiled his famous half-mouthed smile, and said, "yes...".

For lack of their ability to construct arguments based on empirical evidence, most conspiracy theorists resort to more nebulous foundations for their narrative, claiming to be able to divine someone's detailed thoughts based on the most vague body movement. There is a science regarding body language, of course. But the notion that you can reliably and authoritatively identify deception from subtle body movements is a load of ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ that people who either should know better, or are self-deluding themselves, sell to people who want to be assured of something they already believe.
 
Vixen said:
The Moon is under a constant barrage of micrometeorites.
Click to expand...
As is the earth. But how constant is "constant". If the barrage was of a high enough density to pose a genuine risk to the Apollo crews, then the earth's atmosphere would be ablaze with streaks of light every night. And the ISS would have long since been rendered unusable by micrometeorite impacts.
 
Foster Zygote said:
.

The other thing that comes to mind are the post-race Formula 1 press conferences featuring Finnish double world champion Mika Hakkinen, who was famously breviloquent during most such press appearances, even after winning races or qualifying on pole. It's not that he couldn't speak more (as sometimes he was more verbose than usual, and was noted as quite pleasantly conversational by people who knew him), he just found these interviews to be rather boring most of the time.
Click to expand...
 
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