Mythbusters vs the Moon Hoax tonight!

Comsat Angel said:
Does it have an acknowledgement to Phil Plait (who is the Bad Astronomer, if you didn't already know) in the credits? Huh? Huh? Huh?
Click to expand...

Not only do I know, I read his blog where that very question is answered here.

mythbusters_credit.jpg


How cool is that? Nice one prez.
 
I caught the last few minutes of the show again... and Adam and Jamie distinctly said that the laser experiment proves that there is man-made equipment on the Moon. They did not specifically say, or at least I didn't catch them say, that shows that astronauts were on the Moon. That was a little jab at the notion that we could never get man-made craft there in the first place, I guess. But they were careful in their wording.
 
AboveTopSecret is curiously silent about this...

I'm thinking they plan on ignoring it so that, in a few months, they can pretend it never happened.
 
Last edited:
1337m4n said:
AboveTopSecret is curiously silent about this...

I'm thinking they plan on ignoring it so that, in a few months, they can pretend it never happened.
Click to expand...

Right. The Mythbusters Moon-Landing Hoax episode is really an animation created by the "Robot Chicken" people using toys and stop-motion photography. :-)

Unfortunately, I doubt the cross-section of Mythbusters viewers and moon-landing doubters is very large. So, they probably didn't convince very many people to change their mind directly. But, the episode will be handy for responding when people bring up those CT nuggets. The show provides simple, and dramatic, explanations for why those specific "theories" don't hold water.

--Roger
 
They haven't been that quiet. I just did a quick search on their forums and found multiple threads. I wish I could link them.
 
Last edited:
Tortan said:
They haven't been that quiet. I just did a quick search on their forums and found multiple threads. I wish I could link them.
Click to expand...
Just put the URL in without the http://www. part. Some nice person will fill in the rest for you. Or I'll do it.
 
technoextreme said:
I think it's because he actually had a legitimate excuse to wear his space suit.
Click to expand...

Since when the hell has he ever needed a legitimate excuse to do something :D?? The whole frikkin' show's built on a marginal excuse - blow stuff up to bust myths - which is why I love the schlebeeble outtuv it!

No excuse needed Adam! Wear the suit with PRIDE!!!
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Gotta link? I'd like to read the humiliation debate.
Click to expand...


You gotta sign up (http://www.joerogan.net), and since I like the guy I'd rather not post his comments out of context since they're mainly responses to other posts.

ETA: And I forget the exact number, but if you want to comment more than a certain amount of times you must post hardcore pornography to demonstrate you're not too much of a prude to be there... which is awesome. :D
 
Last edited:
Drudgewire said:
You gotta sign up (http://www.joerogan.net), and since I like the guy I'd rather not post his comments out of context since they're mainly responses to other posts.

ETA: And I forget the exact number, but if you want to comment more than a certain amount of times you must post hardcore pornography to demonstrate you're not too much of a prude to be there... which is awesome. :D
Click to expand...

So in other words, not safe for work :eye-poppi. Thanks for the warning; I was about to go chase the posts down here where I'm at. I'd have never been able to explain that if it happened.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
So in other words, not safe for work :eye-poppi. Thanks for the warning; I was about to go chase the posts down here where I'm at. I'd have never been able to explain that if it happened.
Click to expand...


Special thread for it. The front page and moon hoax pages are safe for work as far as I've seen.*


ETA: *Well, beyond the thread being in a forum with a dirty word in the name.
 
Last edited:
So I'm browsing ATS now. There are exactly 0 well-thought-out rebuttals. All the arguments against Mythbusters are summarized as follows:

1) "The evidence that the Mythbusters debunked isn't the evidence that I, personally, believe in!!!" (no true Scotsman, anyone?)

2) "It was a Discovery Channel 'hit piece'!1!!!!1!1!1" (whatever that means)

3) Blind religious faith, ie "Well, uh...its all BS! I can't explain why I think it's BS but it must be! I mean, it MUST BE!!!"


Also, none of them even acknowledge Kari's hawtness :D


Adam Savage was right: No matter how solid your case is, the nut-cases will never, ever be convinced.
 
Last edited:
1337m4n said:
S
1) "The evidence that the Mythbusters debunked isn't the evidence that I, personally, believe in!!!" (no true Scotsman, anyone?)

2) "It was a Discovery Channel 'hit piece'!1!!!!1!1!1" (whatever that means)

3) Blind religious faith, ie "Well, uh...its all BS! I can't explain why I think it's BS but it must be! I mean, it MUST BE!!!"
Click to expand...

Wait!!! It gets even better!

When I wrote this post, I had not yet examined the timestamps on the posts at ATS discussing this. Upon closer inspection, it appears that the honest Truth-seeking people of ATS had come to these three conclusions before the episode even aired!

Making up your mind about a piece before even seeing it! What rational, honest people CTists are!
 
technoextreme said:
Aparently, no because they missed the part about the lunar reflectors. Any conspiracy theorists will point out that you can use a lunar reflector that was placed by the Soviets. True it greatly complicates the conspiracy but the Mythbusters neglected that fact. Though now I remember that there was a difference between the Lundstok and Apollo reflectors. I don't remember what though.
Click to expand...

Since you don't actually see the beam itself bounce back, only the blips recorded on the instrument, wouldn't it be simpler just to say that the printout was faked? That was my immediate thought about what the conspiracy theorists' response would be.

ETA: Just read this post from "Above Top Secret":

This will be very interesting indeed, especially since the mythbusters have this policy not to tackle controversial myth such as 9/11 "myths".
Click to expand...

Is this actually a Mythbuster "policy"? I knew they have said they wouldn't try to debunk the 9-11 myths but thought that was more out of respect for the victims and their families (not wanting to profit from the tragedy) than any reluctance to take on "controversy."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom