Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

[W.D.Clinger]

This is by far the silliest argument you've made yet.

There's a lot of competition.

BTW, it's just been proven beyond all doubt that I am a human being. ISF software made sure of it before it let me post this message. Can you say the same? 99.9% sounds Alien or super advanced AI to me.

If you could select ten thousand people at random, and rank them on any linear scale you like, you'd expect about ten of them to come in at 99.9% or above.

For example, at a major university with 20,000 students, you might expect about 20 to have IQs of 146 or above, because that's the 99.9% mark on the Wechsler scale with mean 100 and standard deviation of 15. But when you take into account that the students are not only self-selected, but have probably survived a competitive admissions process, you'd expect a lot more than 20 with such IQs.

Having served on a number of admissions committees, I have seen tens of thousands of SAT and GRE scores. Until 1994, the SAT was basically an IQ test, so it wasn't hard to convert from SAT scores to IQ scores. Before 1994, an SAT Composite score (Verbal + Math) of 1600 corresponded to an IQ of 166 (well over 99.99%), an SAT of 1550 to an IQ of 155 (over 99.99%), an SAT of 1500 to an IQ of 150 (99.96%), an SAT of 1450 to an IQ of 145 (99.87%), and an SAT of 1400 to an IQ of 140 (99.61%).

Starting in 1995, SAT scores were rescaled to make it much easier to achieve a composite score of 1600, which (because of the rescaling) roughly corresponded to an IQ of 138 (99.43%). There have been a number of changes since, but the main thing to know that is that SAT scores from 1995 or later are not as highly correlated with IQ scores as they were before 1995.

It seems that acceptance into the triple-nine club doesn’t consider reading comprehension as an asset. Big on deliberate obtuseness though.

All the non-999ers here understood both the content and the intent of the post.

Such incidents do cast doubt upon self-reported percentiles and IQs. It seems to me, for example, that a self-reported IQ of 1600 might not be entirely plausible, but hey, maybe that's just my inexperience showing: I had never before run into anyone with an IQ of 1600 or higher. On the other hand, I have known and worked with many people who are generally regarded as highly intelligent. @Vixen has been making a very strong case for a degree of intelligence that sets her well apart from those people.

Look, I guess it's okay to identify as stupid in 2026, but your willing ignorance is breathtaking.

Please understand, embracing the Apollo Hoax foolishness forever destroys any credibility you might have.

As choices go, foolishness might be more attractive when there is so little to lose.

It's hard not to conclude that you are simply being petulant at this point. How long have people been calling into radio stations and having their calls broadcast over radio? Do you think they somehow dialed a number and called your car radio directly? What witchcraft could enable a telephone network to interface with radio transmitters?

Are you really going to play this dumb?

But does she have a choice?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Telephone all used to be by wires, remember. So a story had to be conjured up that er, his 'direct line to Apollo 11' went via bouncing around various radio stations instead. Well, it has plausible deniability.

This is stupid even for you.

"Telephones all used to be by wire" before radio was invented. So was telegraphy. But then, a bit later, radio *was* invented. AT&T was using microwave relays for telephone commercially by the 1950s.

If you're seriously suggesting that a telephone call from the President couldn't be relayed by radio in 1969, then your best seriousness isn't serious enough for serious people to take you seriously.

 

[catsmate]

"On July 20, 1969, President Richard Nixon literally placed an out-of-this-world phone call when he rang-up the Apollo 11 astronauts on the moon."

So you are too stupid to understand radiotelephony.

 

[catsmate]

"
OOOH. Get Randal Munroe's Thing Explainer. Things explained in the 1000 most common English words. See in particular "Up-Goer Five"!

Or just https://xkcd.com/1133/

My first thought too.

 

[catsmate]

This is stupid even for you.

"Telephones all used to be by wire" before radio was invented. So was telegraphy. But then, a bit later, radio *was* invented. AT&T was using microwave relays for telephone commercially by the 1950s.

If you're seriously suggesting that a telephone call from the President couldn't be relayed by radio in 1969, then your best seriousness isn't serious enough for serious people to take you seriously.

The first transatlantic phone calls, in 1927, were carried by long wave radio. It took nearly twenty years for a cable to replace them.

 

[Helen]

So I am obviously not the brightest tool in the box of bulbs in the elevator that's going up to the belfry, but I have honed one skill to near perfection during my life - I have learned to pick out the people who are clever, and who actually know things, from the ones who aren't, and don't. This thread, sadly, is a terrible waste of my carefully refined expertise.

 

[catsmate]

So I am obviously not the brightest tool in the box of bulbs in the elevator that's going up to the belfry, but I have honed one skill to near perfection during my life - I have learned to pick out the people who are clever, and who actually know things, from the ones who aren't, and don't. This thread, sadly, is a terrible waste of my carefully refined expertise.

But there in fascinating detail for those interested in the minutia.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Let's give the triple-niner a big hand, folks.

Okay

 

[SuperMurrio]

Phew, 20-odd pages over the weekend and the same drivel.

So to summarise, the Moon landings must be fake because:

• there are no stars in the photos taken in daylight
• none of the Apollo 11 crew ever stated explicitly that they had been on the moon
• the Lunar Rover didn't go into mass production
• the crackly 'deep macho-US radio voices' sounds like they were using a voice-changing loudhailer
• radiation would have fogged the negatives and made the astronauts radioactive
• the lack of wind is a fixed variable so there should be no rooster tails
• the first man on the moon wasn't behaving like an Olympic gold medalist
• Nixon didn't realise there were no telephone wires on the Moon.

 

[Andy_Ross]

And why is that, exactly? And why couldn't 1969 technology, designed in 1965 or earlier, put men on the moon?

Because 1950s and 60s engineering and technology was so crude. They could barely get off the ground

 

[Reformed Offlian]

The first transatlantic phone calls, in 1927, were carried by long wave radio. It took nearly twenty years for a cable to replace them.

At a mere $75 for the first three minutes! In 1927! MCI could do it cheaper! Of course, then they'd have to change their name to LWCI.

 

[Vixen]

There's a lot of competition.


If you could select ten thousand people at random, and rank them on any linear scale you like, you'd expect about ten of them to come in at 99.9% or above.

For example, at a major university with 20,000 students, you might expect about 20 to have IQs of 146 or above, because that's the 99.9% mark on the Wechsler scale with mean 100 and standard deviation of 15. But when you take into account that the students are not only self-selected, but have probably survived a competitive admissions process, you'd expect a lot more than 20 with such IQs.

Having served on a number of admissions committees, I have seen tens of thousands of SAT and GRE scores. Until 1994, the SAT was basically an IQ test, so it wasn't hard to convert from SAT scores to IQ scores. Before 1994, an SAT Composite score (Verbal + Math) of 1600 corresponded to an IQ of 166 (well over 99.99%), an SAT of 1550 to an IQ of 155 (over 99.99%), an SAT of 1500 to an IQ of 150 (99.96%), an SAT of 1450 to an IQ of 145 (99.87%), and an SAT of 1400 to an IQ of 140 (99.61%).

Starting in 1995, SAT scores were rescaled to make it much easier to achieve a composite score of 1600, which (because of the rescaling) roughly corresponded to an IQ of 138 (99.43%). There have been a number of changes since, but the main thing to know that is that SAT scores from 1995 or later are not as highly correlated with IQ scores as they were before 1995.


Such incidents do cast doubt upon self-reported percentiles and IQs. It seems to me, for example, that a self-reported IQ of 1600 might not be entirely plausible, but hey, maybe that's just my inexperience showing: I had never before run into anyone with an IQ of 1600 or higher. On the other hand, I have known and worked with many people who are generally regarded as highly intelligent. @Vixen has been making a very strong case for a degree of intelligence that sets her well apart from those people.


As choices go, foolishness might be more attractive when there is so little to lose.


But does she have a choice?

Put simply, it runs in families. Like height (= tall people come from tall families). That is all there is to it.

 

[Vixen]

Let's give the triple-niner a big hand, folks.

Please can you not mention it again, thanks.

 

[Vixen]

It's hard not to conclude that you are simply being petulant at this point. How long have people been calling into radio stations and having their calls broadcast over radio? Do you think they somehow dialed a number and called your car radio directly? What witchcraft could enable a telephone network to interface with radio transmitters?

Are you really going to play this dumb?

I can recall as a kid listening to my little tranny under the sheets desperately waiting for Radio Luxemburg to play Homeward Bound again, which was on a half hour loop. The sound was dreadful, coming in and out, with all kinds of crackling and hissing. It was transmitting from the North Sea (to beat the broadcasting laws).

So yeah, 250,000 miles to the Moon's surface...doddle. I feel sorry for the poor crew of the 2028 Artemis who will have to suffer a real phone call from the current White House incumbent, probably in the early hours...They could just take the headphones off and let him ramble on...

 

[Vixen]

The first transatlantic phone calls, in 1927, were carried by long wave radio. It took nearly twenty years for a cable to replace them.

<sfx vague beeps and crackling>

COMING THROUGH, A DEEP BOOMING NON-HUMAN-SOUNDING VOICE: This-is-the-voice-of-the-Mysterons! Earthlings-can-you-hear-us...?

RADIO ENTHUSIAST: Hold on...just let me get the right wavelength and frequency...need to adjust the antenna a bit...hello? Are you there? Hello...?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Radio Luxembourg was broadcasting from Luxembourg. Not from the North Sea.

 

[Pixel42]

Put simply, it runs in families. Like height (= tall people come from tall families). That is all there is to it.

No, that is not all there is to it. Not by a long chalk.

Once again you post a simplistic claim you've probably always believed as if it is a fact, without bothering to first check to see if it is true.

Intelligence quotient - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

IQ scores have been shown to be associated with factors such as nutrition,[7][8][9] parental socioeconomic status,[10][11] morbidity and mortality,[12][13] parental social status,[14] and perinatal environment.[15] While the heritability of IQ has been studied for nearly a century, there is still debate over the significance of heritability estimates[16][17][18] and the mechanisms of inheritance.[19][20]

 

[Vixen]

This is stupid even for you.

"Telephones all used to be by wire" before radio was invented. So was telegraphy. But then, a bit later, radio *was* invented. AT&T was using microwave relays for telephone commercially by the 1950s.

If you're seriously suggesting that a telephone call from the President couldn't be relayed by radio in 1969, then your best seriousness isn't serious enough for serious people to take you seriously.

Of course they managed to explain it.

Of course Nixon gave Buzz a buzz whilst he was prancing around collecting Moon rocks. Shee-eesh!

 

[zooterkin]

I can recall as a kid listening to my little tranny under the sheets desperately waiting for Radio Luxemburg to play Homeward Bound again, which was on a half hour loop. The sound was dreadful, coming in and out, with all kinds of crackling and hissing. It was transmitting from the North Sea (to beat the broadcasting laws).

Proudly adding to your record of an average of at least one error per post.

As its name suggests, Radio Luxembourg broadcast from Luxembourg, not the North Sea.

 

[Pixel42]

Radio Luxembourg was broadcasting from Luxembourg. Not from the North Sea.

She's probably confused it with pirate radio stations like Radio Caroline.

Pirate radio in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Once again the great lesson that fails to be learned: check before posting.