Conspiracy Theories, and Number of People Involved

[tsig]

You seriously think if hitler had won he'd have given free reign to the defeated allied leaders to blab about the holocaust? They'd both have been in a reverse Nuremberg for crimes against the Nazis (well not Roosevelt he was dead). Robert Harris' fatherland is a credible scenario in my opinion.

Anyway, this is a tangent from the original point and this thread. We didn't find out about the holocaust from one of the Nazi conspirators. If this assertion were that no conspiracy can be kept secret because one of the participants would talk is true, how come there were no Nazi whistleblowers when the extermination of the jews began in the late 30s? Probably the biggest conspiracy in history and yet Not one of the thousands upon thousands of Nazis involved in the holocaust sent some photos and documents to the new York times or something?

They probably didn't send anything to the New York Times because they lived in Germany.

 

[Soily]

No, it can't.

I am a practicing space engineer. I used to work (long after Apollo, mind you) for the guys who designed the Command Module and its predecessors. I've worked on civil, military, and commercial projects of varying scale, and I've worked with quite a few technicians, engineers, astronauts, and scientists. You really cannot fake a Moon landing without a lot of people being involved, and a heck of a lot of people would be able to see through it.



Except that your proposition fails on two counts:

First, we're not clever enough to fake it. I have a reasonably broad understanding of the Apollo record, and you really can't fake it - not convincingly; not to anyone who pays attention and takes a little time to understand things. Faking it is harder than actually doing it in this case.

Second, we're not clever enough to cover it up. There were many tens of thousands of people at the time who could have figured it out, both inside and outside the program. Many of them were from countries with no love for the U.S., who could have easily blown the whistle. I've heard people try to wave this away by saying the whole Cold War was a fake, but that's just piling fantasy upon fantasy.

Worse, though, the Apollo legacy is almost unimaginably vast - not just in terms of huge amounts of still and motion imagery, but also in terms of lunar samples (distributed worldwide), physical artifacts (engineering, test, and flight hardware), code (models, firmware, etc.), enormous amounts of telemetry, and all the scientific, technical, and management expertise and accounting thereof. This record is widely and deeply available for investigation. You would not only have to control all those involved (and their descendants), and fool all the engineers and scientists of the time; you'd have to fool all the engineers and scientists of the future who could see through it. That's, to put it mildly, not credible.

You did get one thing correct in your proposition, however: We were indeed clever enough to go to the Moon.

I 100% think he moon landings are genuine and find most of the conspiracy theories quite funny. But, I disagree with you. I think it might be possible, it'd be unbelievably hard but it could be done with just a handful of people. You basically do the whole thing for real including sending the boys up in the rocket. That means the vast majority of people did their bit for real and would have no knowledge of the conspiracy. The only faked bit would be the very last bit where the men actually land on the moon. How many people would then need to be involved in the lie i'm not sure but its only a fraction of those needed if huge chunks of Apollo are faked. As you quite rightly point out, outsiders would eventually rumble, but I don't think those actually involved would be the ones to whistleblow the truth. Which is what this thread is about.

 

[tsig]

Great, you HAD to mention Lockerbie to Rolfe, didn't you?

Well this thread has already been woven into a garment of conspiracy theories.

911, JFK, Lockerbie, moon hoax, all we need is some UFO,s and Bigfooters and we can make a whole suit of woo.

 

[Soily]

Even though Oswald fired three shots?

They thought the first shot missed and hit a curb, ricocheted and injured james tague. That left 2 shots. The last, obviously was the fatal shot. That left all of Kennedy and connolys wounds to be caused by either 1 bullet or more than 1 bullet. For the warren commision, the latter scenario meant there had to be more than one gunman, so they chose the former despite having not a shred of evidence that's what happened. 3 of the 7 members of the Warren commission were not convinced and neither was johnson, yet they endorsed the WC anyway, which is the very definition of a cover-up.

 

[Soily]

They probably didn't send anything to the New York Times because they lived in Germany.

Yes, in the 40s it was completely impossible for information from Germany to ever get to the US or London, that's why we didn't even know who hitler Or the Nazis were until 1972.

 

[tsig]

The single bullet theory was the absolute essence of the Warren commission, without it they believed there had to be more than one gunman. The only evidence ever offered by the warren commission for the single bullet theory was essentially the endorsment of the reputable and respected men on the committee that it was likely. That 3 of those men and the president of the united states actually did not believe the single bullet theory and kept that from the American people was a cover-up pure and simple.

And the single bullet theory is not true, thats a fact not an opinion and I'll happily prove it if you want, although this is probably not the right thread.

Here you go.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6339573#post6339573

 

[tsig]

You seriously think if hitler had won he'd have given free reign to the defeated allied leaders to blab about the holocaust? They'd both have been in a reverse Nuremberg for crimes against the Nazis (well not Roosevelt he was dead). Robert Harris' fatherland is a credible scenario in my opinion.

Anyway, this is a tangent from the original point and this thread. We didn't find out about the holocaust from one of the Nazi conspirators. If this assertion were that no conspiracy can be kept secret because one of the participants would talk is true, how come there were no Nazi whistleblowers when the extermination of the jews began in the late 30s? Probably the biggest conspiracy in history and yet Not one of the thousands upon thousands of Nazis involved in the holocaust sent some photos and documents to the new York times or something?

tsig
They probably didn't send anything to the New York Times because they lived in Germany.

Yes, in the 40s it was completely impossible for information from Germany to ever get to the US or London, that's why we didn't even know who hitler Or the Nazis were until 1972.

In your first post you referred to "thousands upon thousands of Nazis involved in the holocaust" then you build a straw man about information from Germany reaching America.

 

[Sledge]

Because the specious 'too many people' argument is often used in the jfk case. The argument as it goes is that for there to be a conspiracy to murder jfk, hundreds of people would have to be involved in said conspiracy. Which is false. 100s of people were involved in the cover-up, for a whole variety of reasons, but that's not the same thing.

So the cover up wasn't a conspiracy. How does that work? Did people just instinctively cover up the murder of the US president? Did they subconsciously hide the evidence?

And although the moon landing conspiracy is utterly ridiculous, a reasonable scenario can still be constructed that doesn't involve that many people. Hell if we're clever enough to go to the moon in the first place, we're clever enough to fake it and cover it up.

 

[Soily]

So the cover up wasn't a conspiracy. How does that work? Did people just instinctively cover up the murder of the US president? Did they subconsciously hide the evidence?

There are a whole variety of reasons people cover things up. In terms of JFK i'd say the Dallas policed were prejudiced against both Oswald and Kennedy, and also pretty damn incompetent. The CIA it was CYA and Johnson and the Warren commission it was a desperate fear of scandal, dirty linen and potential war. Nobody in that position wants the world to see their great beacon of democracy is rotten and criminally corrupt. It's not only completely credible they'd want to cover anything even remotely embarrassing up, it's understandable.

 

[drkitten]

The people at Bletchley Park knew exactly what they were doing, and were willing to keep the secret. Which shows it can be done.

However, as soon as you postulate a situation where catspaws who are ignorant of the aims of the conspiracy have to be used, or where some of those involved are unwilling to keep the secret, you're in trouble.

In the first case, all that's necessary is for one or more of the catspaws to figure out what's going on, which they will probably do after the event if not before, and go to the authorities. In the second case, the unwilling conspirator is going to leak like a sieve.

And, in point of fact, the second case is what really happened at BP.

Which is why Stalin had access to any of ULTRA that he wanted, through his "unwilling conspirator" Philby.

 

[drkitten]

You're severely underestimating our loyalty to the NWO.

Actually, I think if anything I'm overestimating it. But, then, I've read your psych evals.

 

[Sledge]

So everyone involved with investigating the JFK assassinations just happened to have a motive to cover it up? Wow. That's a pretty big coinkydink. Not one cop, reporter or politician thought "Hey, JFK was a pretty cool guy. I don't think it's right that we cover up how he really died." Wow.

 

[drkitten]

Anyway, this is a tangent from the original point and this thread. We didn't find out about the holocaust from one of the Nazi conspirators.

Only because we didn't pay enough attention to what was going on.

If this assertion were that no conspiracy can be kept secret because one of the participants would talk is true, how come there were no Nazi whistleblowers when the extermination of the jews began in the late 30s?

Largely because there wasn't anyone to whistle too; the Holocaust was organized and directed from the very top, and there was no one with the authority to tell Hitler to stop it.

Many of the countries involved did take what direct action they could against the Holocaust; for example, the "February Strike" in the Netherlands, triggered by the 1941 pograms, or the Danish evacuation of its Jews across the Strait to neutral Sweden.

The International Red Cross knew specifically about the attempts to systematically murder the Jews by 1942, but did nothing -- partly, again, due to helplessness (what could they have done) and partly because they were justifiably suspicious of wartime propaganda.

 

[Soily]

So everyone involved with investigating the JFK assassinations just happened to have a motive to cover it up? Wow. That's a pretty big coinkydink. Not one cop, reporter or politician thought "Hey, JFK was a pretty cool guy. I don't think it's right that we cover up how he really died." Wow.

Err except loads have. The 3 members of the Warren commission all publicly expressed their doubts in the subsequent years. Senator Russel even launched his own private investigation because he felt the WC was a whitewash. Gaston Fonzi who was part of the hsca investigation came out and detailed what he felt was another cover-up. Although the hsca actually eventually came out in favour of conspiracy. G robert blakey, the head of the hsca not only believes in conspiracy, but has railed against the CIA for withholding key evidence from the committee. Jesse Curry the police chief in Dallas at the time expressed his doubts about the verdict when he retired. E Howard hunt confessed to inclement on his deathbed. Of course those that do speak out are all kooks aren't they?

 

[Soily]

Only because we didn't pay enough attention to what was going on.




Largely because there wasn't anyone to whistle too; the Holocaust was organized and directed from the very top, and there was no one with the authority to tell Hitler to stop it.

Many of the countries involved did take what direct action they could against the Holocaust; for example, the "February Strike" in the Netherlands, triggered by the 1941 pograms, or the Danish evacuation of its Jews across the Strait to neutral Sweden.

The International Red Cross knew specifically about the attempts to systematically murder the Jews by 1942, but did nothing -- partly, again, due to helplessness (what could they have done) and partly because they were justifiably suspicious of wartime propaganda.

Sorry but that still doesn't explain why if someone always talks, none of the thousands of Nazis involved in the holocaust talked. Was it really impossible to get a message to the outside world? I mean lord haw haw managed to broadcast into the homes of millions of British people directly from Germany, yet none of the tens of thousands of Nazis who according to the theory must have talked could get any word out to the outside world at all? I mean the allies might not have broadcast such a message at the time, but wouldn't we have heard about the whistle blowing Nazi if he existed by now? In reality we found out about ti through other means, not because someone directly involved blabbed.

 

[sts60]

I 100% think he moon landings are genuine and find most of the conspiracy theories quite funny.

Just to be clear, I do understand that you weren't espousing that particular conspiracy, but rather arguing for its theoretical feasibility.

But, I disagree with you. I think it might be possible, it'd be unbelievably hard but it could be done with just a handful of people. You basically do the whole thing for real including sending the boys up in the rocket.

To where?

Earth orbit? Then literally anyone would be able to look up and see the nice shiny CSM stack passing overhead at night, for all the time it was supposed to be going to and from the Moon. Not to mention what you did with the LM and the S-IVB.

Translunar trajectory? Congratulations, you just launched Apollo 8 and Apollo 10. But you can't fake the signals from the LM on the surface of the Moon - the folks at the tracking stations (around the world) would instantly know if something wasn't kosher. And it wasn't just the U.S. and its allies who were able to figure this out.

That means the vast majority of people did their bit for real and would have no knowledge of the conspiracy.

But there were large numbers of people who were devoted to each phase, including the actual landings and surface operations. If it couldn't be done, they would have figured it out. That's not just a "handful of people".

The only faked bit would be the very last bit where the men actually land on the moon.

Aside from the practical objections I've sketched... Why? What would have made a landing impossible? We had already flown around the Moon, and excercised a "near touch and go" on Apollo 10, and had already softlanded robots on the Moon (Surveyor), as had the Soviets, and had characterized the cislunar environment with quite a few probes. Where was the problem supposed to be in "the very last bit"?

How many people would then need to be involved in the lie i'm not sure but its only a fraction of those needed if huge chunks of Apollo are faked.

I don't think you really grasp what's involved in that "very last bit". Tracking stations worldwide. Thousands of still images and hundreds of hours of motion imagery. Hundreds of kilograms of lunar samples distinctively identifiable by scientists worldwide as collected in situ. The collective engineering and scientific experience of thousands of people addressing the problems of landing, surface operations, and lunar ascent and rendezvous. That's just not a handful of people - it's thousands. The ability of other folks (e.g., the USSR) to recognize whether the transmissions came from the lunar surface. The lunar ranging retroreflectors, which were hand-placed and are still used today. The ALSEP surface laboratories, which operated for years and returned on the order of 30 gigabits of lunar surface science data.

As you quite rightly point out, outsiders would eventually rumble,

Inevitably. So what kind of conspiracy is that? "We're going to stake our national prestige on a massive fraud that will unquestionably be revealed by those who have the most to gain by embarrassing us?"

but I don't think those actually involved would be the ones to whistleblow the truth...

To put it as politely as possible: baloney. You're telling me that thousands of scientists, engineers, and technicians staking their will and pride to one of the great technological challenges of human history would be willing to settle for a cheesy fraud. I'm telling you, as an engineer who has worked with actual Apollo engineers, that you literally have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Rolfe]

Great, you HAD to mention Lockerbie to Rolfe, didn't you?

Sorry, shouldn't have taken that bait! Actually, it's not comparable anyway. Nobody with half a brain is in any doubt that Lockerbie was caused by a bunch of Arab terrorists. We're only arguing about which bunch. The "conspiracy" isn't the one to blow up the plane, it's the one to pin the blame on the wrong guy.

It's an example of a type of conspiracy that goes on all the time and is widely acknowledged to happen. Coppers get a plausible suspect in their sights and as far as they're concerned, case closed. It's not even original. It just happens to be higher profile than the umpty-squillion other examples.

Now if someone were arguing that the CIA blew up that plane, we could all pile in and tear him to shreds - oops sorry, that was last week's entertainment....

And, in point of fact, the second case is what really happened at BP.

Which is why Stalin had access to any of ULTRA that he wanted, through his "unwilling conspirator" Philby.

What I really meant was that the conspirators were all willing to keep the conspiracy secret from the general public, and from the Germans. Leaking the info to Stalin wasn't exactly whistleblowing, it seems to me.

Rolfe.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

You're severely underestimating our loyalty to the NWO.

and our fear of losing our cushy NWO job.

 

[Soily]

Just to be clear, I do understand that you weren't espousing that particular conspiracy, but rather arguing for its theoretical feasibility.



To where?

Earth orbit? Then literally anyone would be able to look up and see the nice shiny CSM stack passing overhead at night, for all the time it was supposed to be going to and from the Moon. Not to mention what you did with the LM and the S-IVB.

Translunar trajectory? Congratulations, you just launched Apollo 8 and Apollo 10. But you can't fake the signals from the LM on the surface of the Moon - the folks at the tracking stations (around the world) would instantly know if something wasn't kosher. And it wasn't just the U.S. and its allies who were able to figure this out.



But there were large numbers of people who were devoted to each phase, including the actual landings and surface operations. If it couldn't be done, they would have figured it out. That's not just a "handful of people".



Aside from the practical objections I've sketched... Why? What would have made a landing impossible? We had already flown around the Moon, and excercised a "near touch and go" on Apollo 10, and had already softlanded robots on the Moon (Surveyor), as had the Soviets, and had characterized the cislunar environment with quite a few probes. Where was the problem supposed to be in "the very last bit"?



I don't think you really grasp what's involved in that "very last bit". Tracking stations worldwide. Thousands of still images and hundreds of hours of motion imagery. Hundreds of kilograms of lunar samples distinctively identifiable by scientists worldwide as collected in situ. The collective engineering and scientific experience of thousands of people addressing the problems of landing, surface operations, and lunar ascent and rendezvous. That's just not a handful of people - it's thousands. The ability of other folks (e.g., the USSR) to recognize whether the transmissions came from the lunar surface. The lunar ranging retroreflectors, which were hand-placed and are still used today. The ALSEP surface laboratories, which operated for years and returned on the order of 30 gigabits of lunar surface science data.



Inevitably. So what kind of conspiracy is that? "We're going to stake our national prestige on a massive fraud that will unquestionably be revealed by those who have the most to gain by embarrassing us?"



To put it as politely as possible: baloney. You're telling me that thousands of scientists, engineers, and technicians staking their will and pride to one of the great technological challenges of human history would be willing to settle for a cheesy fraud. I'm telling you, as an engineer who has worked with actual Apollo engineers, that you literally have no idea what you're talking about.

Fair enough I'm not going to push it! I was merely indulging in some fun imaginations.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

The whole Iraq war project involved a war of aggression, blatant lies and propoganda, the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people, illegal prisons and grotesque abuses of human rights, murder and torture.

And how do you know any of that....?

Can you please answer this question, Soily?