Moon Landing CTers

[Spindrift]

NASA is currently planning on returning to the Moon by 2020. Will Apollo Moon Landing CTers finally give up if that happens? Or will they morph their delusions into something new? Or will they claim the new missions are hoaxes as well?

I not talking about the exceedingly wacky claims, like an ancient civilization, just the run of the mill claims, like no stars or man couldn't survive the Van Allen belts.

I'm sure at some point if NASA returns to the moon that they will visit an Apollo site. One would hope that that would put to bed all the hoax claims, but somehow I doubt it.

I would guess that there will be some diehards and that they will latch on to differences between the programs to prove Apollo was a hoax. Kind of like claiming that Lindbergh couldn't have possibly have flown across the Atlantic because he didn't have GPS or radar or something.

 

[CHF]

If anything it might just fuel the CTs.

"They're going back because they didn't go in the first place!!!"

 

[Horatius]

I'm sure at some point if NASA returns to the moon that they will visit an Apollo site. One would hope that that would put to bed all the hoax claims, but somehow I doubt it.

If we could fake an entire moon landing program back in the 60s, surely by 2020 we'll be able to fake a landing site.

Or so they'll claim.

 

[Tweeter]

They already did!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CNBealx6jY

 

[Spindrift]

If we could fake an entire moon landing program back in the 60s, surely by 2020 we'll be able to fake a landing site.

Or so they'll claim.

Since several of their claims state that a moon landing could never ever happen how would they reconcile the new landings?

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Since several of their claims state that a moon landing could never ever happen how would they reconcile the new landings?

they are fake too

although i dont think ive seen anyone claim total impossibility, mostly impossible with 60s technology, or with the apollo craft (due to computer limitations, radiation shielding, etc)

 

[Monza]

I am sure the CT'ers will continue their denial of the moon landings. These are people who believe that somehow the US government decided to take the risk of faking a moon landing at a time when the USSR would have been able to detect and willing to expose such fakery. And then the US continued to fake more and more landings for no apparent reason other than to risk getting caught.

 

[JEROME DA GNOME]

They already did!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CNBealx6jY

The symbolism is quite dramatic in that video.

 

[dudalb]

I really like the Buzz Aldrin way of handling the Moonbats.....

 

[eromitlab]

Since several of their claims state that a moon landing could never ever happen how would they reconcile the new landings?

A combo of TV fakery and CGI.

 

[Wolverine]

NASA is currently planning on returning to the Moon by 2020. Will Apollo Moon Landing CTers finally give up if that happens? Or will they morph their delusions into something new? Or will they claim the new missions are hoaxes as well?

I think we'll see variety.

Optimistically speaking, I'd hope a successful return to the lunar surface might make enough of an impression to force some HBs to reconsider their position (especially after multiple missions). Should something go awry on the initial flight though (perish the thought!), their numbers will surely grow exponentially.

Some will undoubtedly cling to the "impossibility" claims no matter what. I've seen people claim that current robotic missions are hoaxes (don't ask me how they rationalize this); a certain minority will seemingly reject anything involving a government agency.

Some will likely maintain that the Apollo landings were hoaxed while accepting the new. I suspect many more will behave as "partial" CTers though, a position similar to the Hoagland stance: "Yes, the missions are authentic, but NASA's hiding _______ from the public!".

I'm sure at some point if NASA returns to the moon that they will visit an Apollo site. One would hope that that would put to bed all the hoax claims, but somehow I doubt it.

I'd be surprised if NASA plans a return visit to any of the existing sites. It's my understanding that the new landing sites will be selected once Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter completes its mapping objectives. With the benefit of oodles of brand-spanking-new high resolution imagery, I bet they'll locate a number of more scientifically interesting venues than the places we've already been. Even if they do return to the existing sites, I doubt that would put a dent in the skulls of the die-hard -- if they're willing to deny the overwhelming existing evidence, they're unlikely to be receptive to anything new.

LRO should be able to resolve hardware at the existing landing sites from orbit. I'm really looking forward to seeing those shots (and the HB reactions).

 

[OldTigerCub]

I really like the Buzz Aldrin way of handling the Moonbats.....

Me too!
With a mean right jab!

 

[PhantomWolf]

I'd be surprised if NASA plans a return visit to any of the existing sites. It's my understanding that the new landing sites will be selected once Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter completes its mapping objectives. With the benefit of oodles of brand-spanking-new high resolution imagery, I bet they'll locate a number of more scientifically interesting venues than the places we've already been. Even if they do return to the existing sites, I doubt that would put a dent in the skulls of the die-hard -- if they're willing to deny the overwhelming existing evidence, they're unlikely to be receptive to anything new.

From what I have seen they don't, which is a real shame, I'd love to see a return to Hadley Rile. Even at the time the crew were saying that they felt that they didn't have the time to do everything there that needed to be done and perhaps a future mission could return and do things like going down into the rille. Perhaps once the base is up and running and there is time we might see a return to Hadley, Descartes, or Taurus-Littrow.

 

[Wolverine]

Perhaps once the base is up and running and there is time we might see a return to Hadley, Descartes, or Taurus-Littrow.

I drool at the very thought.

 

[JEROME DA GNOME]

THE TRUTH!!!

 

[Jennie C.]

I'm sure at some point if NASA returns to the moon that they will visit an Apollo site. One would hope that that would put to bed all the hoax claims, but somehow I doubt it.

Well, remember if they go back to Apollo 11's site, the footprints got wiped out by the Roswell aliens when they returned, only to be defeated by Will Smith and Randy Quaid.

Sigh, as a self-styled space cadet (i went to space camp 3 times ... as an adult), it's a sorrow to me that we still aren't out of the gravity well since Apollo 17 (1972? I think?)

yeh, Wiki says I'm right and Wiki wouldn't lie.

 

[Corsair 115]

A combo of TV fakery and CGI.

And to claim either is to demonstrate an utter lack of understanding of both of those subjects. (It also ignores the thousands of 70mm and 35mm film photographs taken on the Apollo missions.)

 

[PhantomWolf]

And to claim either is to demonstrate an utter lack of understanding of both of those subjects. (It also ignores the thousands of 70mm and 35mm film photographs taken on the Apollo missions.)

Apollo HB already do that.

 

[twinstead]

the 911 truth movement owes its very existence to the intrepid Apollo Hoax Believer.

 

[PhantomWolf]

the 911 truth movement owes its very existence to the intrepid Apollo Hoax Believer.

I wouldn't say that, though a few of the Apollo HP's did or still do promote 9/11 theories, some, like Eric Hufschmid, quite early on, however the mind set is very similar indeed. Of course it's not that different from even earlier conspriacy theories such as JFK and Pearl Habor as well, and likely had they had photos and film of the event probably Archduke Ferdinand's assassination too. I think that as long as people distrust their governments there will be conspiracies and conspriacists. The reason that 9/11 took off was not that it has anything real to it, but that it occured at exactly the right time. Serious distrust in the US Government mixed with the explosion of broadband allowing the message to get out faster and easier. Today any Joe can make a 10 min movie and have it being consumed by hundreds of people in mere minutes, something impossible even 10 years ago.