Please put my husband right once and for all

[MrsR]

I know when my husband is taking the mick and he is obvious with it with remarks about uranus!!!!!! Schoolboy humour!

He has no religious beliefs.

I think it comes down to him not having the full facts and not wanting to go too much into the science of it all - when I start talking to him with that type of stuff he switches off I think. He wants to understand but to a certain extent only I feel.

I do thank everyone for postign on this thread.

[Pakmoto]

I've gotten used to what I call the "Glaze point" it's that moment when my techno babble starts turning into noise, as demonstrated by the wife's lack of interest.

I like to feed her the info in tiny edible pieces, you know the saying "always leave em wanting more"

Good Luck Pak....

[NickMilner]

I've gotten used to what I call the "Glaze point" it's that moment when my techno babble starts turning into noise, as demonstrated by the wife's lack of interest.

LOL, I know what you mean. I get the same thing when trying to explain to my wife how stars shine due to nuclear fusion in stars. I get to the point where two protons collide causing one of the up quarks in one of the protons to become a down quark thus turning that proton into a neutron while simultaneously shedding its charge in the form of a W boson which rapidly decays into a shower of (rain this afternoon and I really wanted to go to the shops because we're running out of milk.)

Oh, and for all the evidence you ever needed that the moon landings were faked, read this:

Fake Moon Landings The moon landings are fake!

[Casus belli]

The reason that there are no signs of the moon landings is simple. The moon is just the sun at night so everything burns to atoms during the day.

I wish these conspiracy theorists would get their facts straight. D:

[rabbithutch]

It may be a bit ignorant to believe in moon landing conspiracies, but I think it's even more ignorant to mock someone for their beliefs. Far better to understand why it is that they hold those beliefs, and to tackle those issues rather than acting like we're all still in the playground at school.

For my part, I don't doubt that we went to the moon - but quite frankly, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if an already highly-pressurised NASA publicity department couldn't resist the temptation to "accidentally" (sic) slip in some impressive earth-based photos that were originally taken for testing purposes.

Witness how only 18 months ago it was that same NASA publicity department that tried to claim the full credit for Anthony Wesley's Jupiter impact discovery. The original NASA Press Release caused such an outcry from the amateur astronomy community that it was hastilly-reworded and re-released, but by then the story was already being reported as a NASA discovery, and many people (including me) felt strongly that their re-release didn't go anywhere near far enough in crediting Wesley. Fortunately, Anthony didn't hide from the press, and the media attention soon revealed that Anthony is an experienced astrophotographer with considerable knowledge of Jupiter.

The "excuse" given by the defenders of the NASA stance, is that they have to justify their enormous funding - and thus should be allowed creative licence to underplay Wesley's part in the discovery.

I thought NASA had got out of the space business and gone into international religion and politics.

[Pakmoto]

Here you go, tell him to start searching lol

LROC Image Browser - wac_nearside

[keef_uk]

Here you go, tell him to start searching lol

LROC Image Browser - wac_nearside

Loving this link

[Hobbes]

Here you go, tell him to start searching lol

LROC Image Browser - wac_nearside

Absolutely FAB link - Thank you

Rgds

Rob

[mindburner]

Ask the question: how do we know if something is true or not?

The only game in town is evidence.

What people feel in their guts or would like to be true does not matter a jot.

I first got into this moon landing hoax about 10 years ago. Before the Fox program, I never doubted the moon landings at all, never even knew there were such doubters. The program 'seemed' to show anomalies. I decided to conduct my own, rather time consuming and detailed research (to the dismay of my wife) into these so called anomalies. This was after counting the perforations in a Tetley tea bag:D

Hoax believers ‘evidence’ are a mix of old discredited crackpot ideas, bad science and ignorance packaged into a dismal diatribe with no objectivity.

One example, history deniers, i.e. hoax believers say that space suit gloves could not withstand the harsh lunar vacuum. How did they check this? By using a GARDENING GLOVE, placing said glove in a vacuum and observing that it failed. DOH NASA didn’t used gardening gloves on the moon. This is an example of hoax believers ‘science’ FFS

Hoax believers also contradict themselves. A classic:

HB – computers were pathetic in 1960’s they could never have got us to the moon. My watch, mobile has more computing power….

HB – the moon shots were faked, special FX.

Apollo fan – how?

HB – using powerful computers. NASA had unlimited budgets and therefore could buy anything.

The other classic hoax stuff, flag waving, no stars etc has been debunked more times than enough.

After a bit of time I realised that the hoax stuff was well, BS. So I wondered why so many, people particularly Americans fell for it.

There is basically a distrust of government, after Vietnam and Watergate, that was at least understandable, but government are also blindingly clumsy and inept at keeping secrets as well as being sneaky.

I mean the American government couldn’t even hide a simple burglary, never mind a huge conspiracy involving 10’s of thousands of people under the glare on international and especially Russian scrutiny. Also why fake it 9 times?

Conspiracy theories all seem to suffer from the same traits.

CT’s have inside knowledge that only they know (i.e. They are smarter than everyone else)

Their theory is usually more story like and exciting that dull ‘ol’ reality.

They suffer from confirmation bias and cherry picking of evidence. Ignore the 99 proven facts and focus on the 1% that seems to fit their pre-conceived version.

Anyway bit of a waffle, but this so called hoax has been well and truly busted.

[great_bear]

That's all very well, but whilst photos don't prove that the moon landing was fake, it's equally true the moon landing doesn't prove all photos of it are genuine.

- and having an unquestioning belief in what your government tells you is far more dangerous than believing Apollo was an elaborate hoax.

[mindburner]

That's all very well, but whilst photos don't prove that the moon landing was fake, it's equally true the moon landing doesn't prove all photos of it are genuine.

- and having an unquestioning belief in what your government tells you is far more dangerous than believing Apollo was an elaborate hoax.

As for photos photos, why would they not be genuine considering all the other evidence? check out Clavius Moon Base - debunking the moon hoax

EG lunar rock, distributed all over the world, either it's genuine or all the different scientists in the various countries are 'in on it' The Russians who collected independent samples which when compared to the Apollo samples matched. Russians must be paid off by the US too.

I mean there are actual photos of the Apollo sites taken by LRO. Short of bring all the Hb up to the moon and rubbing their faces in it, there is not much that will convince them as they, know what they believe already. If we took em to the moon they would say they were hypnotized by the CIA and were really in Langley.

As for goverment trust..

Surely that’s the whole point, don't automatically trust anything you hear, do the research for yourself. Don’t take what I say too. As Brian said in Monty Pythons Life of Brian.

You don't need to follow me.You don't need to follow anybody! You've got to think for yourselves! You're all individuals!

If you get time, check the various claims for yourself. Its fun and you get to see some whacky theories.

One point that really hit me, that if this was a hoax. It was more impressive and much harder to pull off than the actual moon landings themselves!

[JamesF]

You don't need to follow me.You don't need to follow anybody! You've got to think for yourselves! You're all individuals!

Yes! We're all individuals!

Sorry. Couldn't help it

James

[Zakalwe]

That's all very well, but whilst photos don't prove that the moon landing was fake, it's equally true the moon landing doesn't prove all photos of it are genuine.

Firstly you cannot prove a negative.

Secondly, there are NO images that have any supporting images that shows they are falsified. If there are, then please link to them.

- and having an unquestioning belief in what your government tells you is far more dangerous than believing Apollo was an elaborate hoax.

Agreed.

But because you do not believe some of what you are told does not mean that ALL of what you are told is false.

[mindburner]

Yes! We're all individuals!

Sorry. Couldn't help it

James

total classic isnt it?

[Mike_F]

PS, my wife thinks it is lucky that the ISS zooming though the sky doesn't bash into any stars.................

sort of thing my friend would say.......and shes a teacher!

I can go one better than that. Many years ago, in the midst of a thunderstorm, a former girlfriend made a comment that piqued my interest. It was clear she had some misunderstanding of what the nature of thunder was. I enquired:"So, what do you think makes the sound of thunder then?".

She responded:"Well, it's the clouds banging together isn't it?"

[Zakalwe]

I can go one better than that. Many years ago, in the midst of a thunderstorm, a former girlfriend made a comment that piqued my interest. It was clear she had some misunderstanding of what the nature of thunder was. I enquired:"So, what do you think makes the sound of thunder then?".

She responded:"Well, it's the clouds banging together isn't it?"

This thread has been running for 5 years now......

[mindburner]

I think a lot of these whacko ideas gain hold because there is a lack of basic Scientific knowledge in the general public. I know life is busy now but it's sad the way science and critical thinking have been undermined. Ask some folk why a year is 365 days long, why we have seasons or what is the age of the earth, and you will get some sadly surprising answers.

[MikeWilson]

I think a lot of these whacko ideas gain hold because there is a lack of basic Scientific knowledge in the general public. I know life is busy now but it's sad the way science and critical thinking have been undermined. Ask some folk why a year is 365 days long, why we have seasons or what is the age of the earth, and you will get some sadly surprising answers.

I did this with some people I know as well as family members and honestly, I was surprised by the responses.

Is our schooling system really so bad?

[Zakalwe]

I did this with some people I know as well as family members and honestly, I was surprised by the responses.

Is our schooling system really so bad?

"Common" sense, unfortunately is not all that common.

[great_bear]

Firstly you cannot prove a negative.

Sorry - I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you clarify?

Secondly, there are NO images that have any supporting images that shows they are falsified. If there are, then please link to them.

I think you've missed my point

But because you do not believe some of what you are told does not mean that ALL of what you are told is false.

I would be surprised if anyone believes that ALL they are told is false, so again - I'm at a loss as to what you mean here...

[Zakalwe]

Sorry - I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you clarify?

Its called Argument From Ignorance

[great_bear]

Its called Argument From Ignorance

Which expressly does NOT state that you can't prove a negative - as explained quite clearly in the link.

So I ask again, what do you mean by "You can't prove a negative" in the context of my comment, since - as a statement - that's clearly untrue.

[great_bear]

Its called Argument From Ignorance

Oh - I think you're actually making the same point that I was making. Let me re-state it perhaps more clearly.

The problem as I see it is that there's dogma on both sides of the argument and it's this dogma that's unhelpful to the debate as follows:

• The conspiracy theorists believe that photos which appear faked in someway, prove that the moon landing didn't happen. Unfortunately, even if such photos were demonstrably fake, it still wouldn't prove that the moon landing itself was faked.
  
• On the flipside, anti-hoaxers (along with intimidation and bullying) often seem to argue in principle that because there is indisputable evidence that the moon landing happened, then any suggestion that a photo is faked must therefore be ludicrous.
  

However, the suggestion that some photos may be faked or enhanced is not - in and of itself - a ludicrous suggestion. They may be a number of reasons why things are faked - such as (as an example) the TV advert for the iPhone which received complaints because it made it look like using the internet was considerably more seamless than it really was. It was - in effect - a fake demonstration of the iPhone. Those iPhone adverts now have to have "Sequence shortened" in small print at the bottom of the screen because of the complaints.

In summary, whilst it's perhaps OK to laugh off claims that the moon landing was a fake, it's perhaps less wise to dismiss queries about specific inconsistencies in specific photos or video sequences. Such inconsistencies need explanations.

I've personally always found the explanations for those inconsistencies to be technically interesting and - indeed - also learned some new things about photography in the process - and I'm glad that people were brave enough to raise questions about things that looked odd to them.

In any case, I certainly think it's wrong to foster an atmosphere of bullying and intimidation such that people are frightened to ask questions when something doesn't look quite right to their eyes.

[mindburner]

but there are not 2 sides, in this case. There is just evidence. The current evidence indicates that Apollo astronauts landed on the moon and returned. This not dogma, there is evidence. There is no credible evidence that they didn't.If new evidence appears that can stand up to scrutiny then if will be evaluated and if correct the whole moon landings can be reviewed. This evidence has not materialised! If you have any examples of fake photographs, it would be interesting to see them

by the defination of dogma in your post, stating that the earth is flat is dogma. Disagreement and telling hoax believers that their analyis and theories are wrong is not bullying IMO. After all these clowns are rubbishing one of the greatest achievements of mankind. That is anoying to say the least. Finding out what is truth or fiction is important. The 'everyones view is equal' relativist stance kills science, peer reviewed evidence is all that matters.

I mean I could say I have a giant fire breathing dragon in my garage. I know it exists, if others dont believe me then they are suffering from a dogmatic belief that dragons are works of fiction. Im not having a go here, but have you looked into the claims the hoax believers make? they really are something

[alowen]

Wow, this is becoming a loooooong thread.