Hoaxesssss innnnn Spaaaaaace

King Mob · 21-07-2019 3:23pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

Ha! This is what I love about you space fanboys. If you are so confident the moonlandings happened then why do you all sound so emotional and insult anyone who questions it?

Notice how you have been unable to address any point leveled at you.
Why is that?
Why do you still cling to your silly conspiracy theory when you know you can't answer basic questions about it?

Seeing sheer uninformed opinion as if it is the equal to actual knowledge is a bit silly and annoying, yea.

SlowBlowin · 21-07-2019 3:23pm

jetfiremuck wrote: »

So food for thought..
in 2019 Elon musk can barely get a rocket to return standing up on a barge off shore.

I was so focused on your other inaccuracies that I missed this monumental statement.

A private company build a rocket that can land on a ship in the ocean, after putting satellites into orbit, can be reused in short time and you don't find that impressive ?

Is there anything you find impressive (yourself excluded) ?

Dohnjoe · 21-07-2019 3:33pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

Ha! This is what I love about you space fanboys. If you are so confident the moonlandings happened then why do you all sound so emotional and insult anyone who questions it?

What is a "space fanboy"?

Why are the only arguments for your theories (the ISS isn't manned, moon landings didn't happen) either based on emotion or incredulity?

If you haven't refuted any evidence, haven't presented any alternative theory yourself, at what point do your theories here differ from those who e.g. believe the world is flat?

Why shouldn't other posters be frustrated, you are dodging almost every question, deflecting and using every Alex Jones technique so far.. if not, then can you please answer the questions and address the points in the thread

Here are some are basics:

1. If the ISS isn't manned, then explain the live feed and how many people/countries/governments are involved in your conspiracy (properly, with sound evidence)

2. Choose one of the 6 landings, and explain with sound evidence how it was faked (conspiracy youtube videos don't count)

CoBo55 · 21-07-2019 3:50pm

Overheal wrote: »

This is indeed, totally possible. Telescope can be routinely trained to its orbital path, which is public knowledge. More powerful scopes, better view, but that's just light and optics again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNsCMBKFakk

The speed is the inconsequential part. Yes, it's going bloody fast, but it's also doing so bloody far away. You can similarly burn rubber on a motorway and still comfortably few scenery on the horizon without trouble.

This can also be independently verified.

Near and far, covered by Grover on Sesame Street... Very funny, love Grover.

skerry · 21-07-2019 3:53pm

I think it's time to stop feeding the troll :rolleyes:

bfa1509 · 21-07-2019 4:05pm

King Mob wrote: »

Notice how you have been unable to address any point leveled at you.
Why is that?
Why do you still cling to your silly conspiracy theory when you know you can't answer basic questions about it?

You think I have the time to go through 150 posts, mostly paragraphs long and prove to you why they aren't real? Why would I focus on the smoke and mirrors of NASA propaganda when there are fundamental rules being broken in broad daylight that prove the whole thing to be a hoax?

Dohnjoe wrote: »

What is a "space fanboy"?

Why are the only arguments for your theories (the ISS isn't manned, moon landings didn't happen) either based on emotion or incredulity?

You've had two engineers enter this thread, and rather than hearing what we had to say, you opted to drown us out with insults and undermine our qualifications. I already presented solid, unchallenged calculations (not based on emotion) as to why I believe it is impossible to maneuver the spacesuits in a vacuum.

What could have been a really interesting thread has been rendered a snorefest, swamped out by sheep clutching at straws.

King Mob · 21-07-2019 4:09pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

You think I have the time to go through 150 posts, mostly paragraphs long and prove to you why they aren't real? Why would I focus on the smoke and mirrors of NASA propaganda when there are fundamental rules being broken in broad daylight that prove the whole thing to be a hoax?

You've been shown these questions several times and you can't answer them.
You know you can't.
We know you can't.

If you can't defend your silly childlike conspiracy theory, why hold onto it?
Why announce that you believe something like that and have yourself filed away with people who believe the world is flat and the holocaust didn't happen and that evolution isn't real?

It's bizarre...

Cheerful Spring2 · 21-07-2019 4:12pm

jetfiremuck wrote: »

So food for thought..
in 2019 Elon musk can barely get a rocket to return standing up on a barge off shore.

The Falcon Heavy rocket with 27 engines is the most powerful rocket ever to leave the ground......where's the engineering drawings/ propellant formulas used in the moon launches? And why not used today.

That Nixon was able to have a phone conversation with the moon on July 21 1969....... Really

Where are all the rocket launches documented for all those that travel to and from the iss. YouTube videos on iss stage showing the wires etc. look at the videos and ask is it plausible.

There were six moon landings, and this would be incredibly costly to fake longterm.More people involved on each separate mission and what would be point of faking six? If was impossible to do, they would have stopped after 1 or 2 and scrapped the project.

Evidence is weak we never went. They are basing it all about shadows on the moon and lack of stars, and there explantations for this. I have not seen clear evidence it would be impossible. The moon is not far from us to get to there. It not like they went to Mars.

Just saying if the dispute is over lack of stars and placing of shadows then its fools errand. Your case is based on nothing.

skerry · 21-07-2019 4:23pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

You've had two engineers enter this thread, and rather than hearing what we had to say, you opted to drown us out with insults and undermine our qualifications.

And you've have 1 person enter this thread who's educated to PhD level who's worked on experiments which have been flown in the ISS and returned home for analysis but you chose to ignore that also.

Cork Boy 53 · 21-07-2019 4:30pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

What could have been a really interesting thread has been rendered a snorefest, swamped out by sheep clutching at straws.

The irony of this comment by you is delicious.:):)

SlowBlowin · 21-07-2019 4:47pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

I can go at it with any opposers who are willing to spend the energy!!

Why say it then do the opposite ?

Cheerful Spring2 · 21-07-2019 4:49pm

mickdw wrote: »

Well at the most basic level, I don't believe they had the ability to accurately navigate the space craft to intercept the moon on it's own path at exactly the right position to then be pulled into moons orbit and land from there. There are just so many things that could go wrong with that. I'd expect much of what they would experience would be unknown / unexpected and it would not be at all strange for them to crash, get lost/not return at all, crash into the moon and be stuck there etc.
On top of all this, they claim a computer crash and that a manual landing was performed. It just doesn't add up.
Are people happy to believe that he could have any piloting experience of how the module would behave in those conditions? The test flight footage from earth is beyond stupid.
So in summary, too many unknowns, navigation difficult to achieve with the accuracy needed- how much ability had they to alter course, timing required to intercept moon in the manner they wanted to, with minimal computing ability.
I just don't see it happening, flawlessly

Moon is a big target. It not like they could miss it from space!

Nasa used a computer guided system, new for the time, to help them navigate. Yes it was 1969, but remember the technology they build was a new invention. They were upgrading unheard of technologies to help them to do this. There were many trail and error programs throughout the sixties and was not overnight thing to place a man on the moon. Vast amounts of money was spend on this project.

Astronauts were a pick of the best fighter pilots, they were well used to manual controlling a plane in flight and landing it safetly. They were not rookies , they could handle a tough situation.

namloc1980 · 21-07-2019 4:49pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

You think I have the time to go through 150 posts, mostly paragraphs long and prove to you why they aren't real? Why would I focus on the smoke and mirrors of NASA propaganda when there are fundamental rules being broken in broad daylight that prove the whole thing to be a hoax?

Go on then - what are these fundamental rules being broken?

firemansam4 · 21-07-2019 5:00pm

bfa1509 wrote:

You think I have the time to go through 150 posts, mostly paragraphs long and prove to you why they aren't real? Why would I focus on the smoke and mirrors of NASA propaganda when there are fundamental rules being broken in broad daylight that prove the whole thing to be a hoax?

So these fundamental rules being broken, is this just your opinion or have you any links to any experts who can prove this to be the case?

If someone like yourself can point this out then surely there must be a raft of evidence online to prove your theory's are correct?

SlowBlowin · 21-07-2019 5:00pm

For those on this thread who are open to reading posts and looking at technical aspects of the Apollo program, this is great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bh_gP5aF3ys

Its the last remaining navigation computer left and they got it running...

skerry · 21-07-2019 5:04pm

SlowBlowin wrote: »

For those on this thread who are open to reading posts and looking at technical aspects of the Apollo program, this is great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bh_gP5aF3ys

Its the last remaining navigation computer left and they got it running...

Don't be spreading your government propaganda on this thread, it won't be tolerated :P

Cheerful Spring2 · 21-07-2019 5:06pm

Wibbs wrote: »

And as I pointed out earlier: Werner Von Braun and his nazi buddies were firing V2 rockets into the edge of space at supersonic speeds and doing it on the regular with over 3000 flights before the transistor was even dreamt of, never mind the integrated circuit. Unless you think that was faked?

Yep and reason i don't understand why people think its impossible for a rocket to leave Earth.

Soviets would have to have faked their space mission also. If was all fake this would have all come out after the fall of communism in Russia.

martingriff · 21-07-2019 5:17pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

You think I have the time to go through 150 posts, mostly paragraphs long and prove to you why they aren't real? Why would I focus on the smoke and mirrors of NASA propaganda when there are fundamental rules being broken in broad daylight that prove the whole thing to be a hoax?

You've had two engineers enter this thread, and rather than hearing what we had to say, you opted to drown us out with insults and undermine our qualifications. I already presented solid, unchallenged calculations (not based on emotion) as to why I believe it is impossible to maneuver the spacesuits in a vacuum.

What could have been a really interesting thread has been rendered a snorefest, swamped out by sheep clutching at straws.

you have been asked time and time what degree in engineering have you. As no university or IT gives a simple Degree of Engineering and what year. I have a degree in Engineering for Manufacturing Technology and there is no way I am cocky to say I know everything

firemansam4 · 21-07-2019 5:20pm

bfa1509 wrote:

You think I have the time to go through 150 posts, mostly paragraphs long and prove to you why they aren't real? Why would I focus on the smoke and mirrors of NASA propaganda when there are fundamental rules being broken in broad daylight that prove the whole thing to be a hoax?

But we are not only talking about Nasa, there are several space agencies involved with the ISS. Are you saying several countries are in on this conspiracy spanning over 5 decades?

Dohnjoe · 21-07-2019 5:23pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

You've had two engineers enter this thread, and rather than hearing what we had to say, you opted to drown us out with insults and undermine our qualifications.

I've asked direct questions and raised points, none of which you've answered/addressed. I've asked for evidence, you haven't provided any, at all.

I don't know if you are an engineer, you made the claim but haven't answered that either. And if you are, you still aren't addressing any valid questions/points to your theories which means you simply appear to be using (abusing) your claim to being an engineer as an "appeal to authority" fallacy

There is no need to be an engineer to understand that manned space flight has happened. You don't need to be a doctor to understand that vaccines work.

If someone is going to deliberately evade questions/points, then playing the "victim" card is yet another emotional deflection.

Might you be trolling, perhaps, but if you are serious about your theory on the manned ISS and moon landings being hoaxes, then I'll repeat the below basic questions

1. If the ISS isn't manned, then explain the live feed and how many people/countries/governments are involved in your conspiracy (properly, with sound evidence)

2. Choose one of the 6 landings, and explain with sound evidence how it was faked (conspiracy youtube videos don't count)

skerry · 21-07-2019 5:27pm

firemansam4 wrote: »

But we are not only talking about Nasa, there are several space agencies involved with the ISS. Are you saying several countries are in on this conspiracy spanning over 5 decades?

That's exactly what he's saying. Fair play to NASA for brainwashing over 400k employees over the course of the space program and not having one single leak, they really are geniuses, just not the kind we thought

Cheerful Spring2 · 21-07-2019 5:31pm

firemansam4 wrote: »

But we are not only talking about Nasa, there are several space agencies involved with the ISS. Are you saying several countries are in on this conspiracy spanning over 5 decades?

ISS was assembled in space and how could you do that without help from astronauts in the near vicinity?

The Astronauts also wear protective gear is not like they up there naked outside the station. The station was build to house astrounats from the conditions outside.

It like a house go inside your dry from rain. Go outside you be drenched by rain immediately.

Timberrrrrrrr · 21-07-2019 5:48pm

martingriff wrote: »

you have been asked time and time what degree in engineering have you. As no university or IT gives a simple Degree of Engineering and what year. I have a degree in Engineering for Manufacturing Technology and there is no way I am cocky to say I know everything

Probably got it in a kinder egg.

Overheal · 21-07-2019 5:51pm

mickdw wrote: »

No men lost, no crash landings, no suit failures, no health issues on return.

This is pretty ignorant of the history of the space program. Capsules blew up, rockets blew up. People died. And yes, the astronauts that came back from Apollo 13 (oh, which also was plagued with a slew of disasters) with health issues, including UTIs and kidney issues because they had to store urine in every random baggie and bottle they could find because they were told to stop dumping the pee to space: the heater for the valve consumed power. One of the guys, forget his name, basically just started wetting himself for a while and soaked in his own urine.

Overheal · 21-07-2019 5:56pm

mickdw wrote: »

I have not claimed to be an expert in Rocket Engineering but have an Engineering Degree and as such have a general understanding of Maths and Physics beyond what much of the population will have.

Which engineering discipline and from what university thanks

SlowBlowin · 21-07-2019 6:02pm

The OP started this by saying he wanted to discuss, and he wont. No relevant points are being won, conceded or discussed by the OP, even when there is no doubt they are wrong (laser reflector, etc). They have already stated that they cant be bothered to read all the posts, they are just a wind up.

I think its 100% obvious that she/he is just trolling and this thread is dysfunctional, although enjoyable as I have some great links to read/watch on vintage space. If it was not for all the great info this thread should be closed.

Overheal · 21-07-2019 6:17pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

As I heard it put yesterday by one of the great minds who has worked on space exploration, "having to defend our work to people who dont understand the science is frustrating and sad"

Buzz Aldrin said it all when some balloon of a hoax shill confronted him years ago and asked him to swear on the bible he had walked on the moon. He right hooked him to the head.

The 2nd greatest accomplishment in his career.

SlowBlowin · 21-07-2019 6:21pm

Overheal wrote: »

The 2nd greatest accomplishment in his career.

It was a fine punch from an old man, remember watching the video on YT, a real feel good moment when you saw how he was being abused.

mickdw · 21-07-2019 6:34pm

Overheal wrote: »

mickdw wrote: »

I have not claimed to be an expert in Rocket Engineering but have an Engineering Degree and as such have a general understanding of Maths and Physics beyond what much of the population will have.

Which engineering discipline and from what university thanks

Pm going your way now.

Overheal · 21-07-2019 6:45pm

bfa1509 wrote: »

You think I have the time to go through 150 posts, mostly paragraphs long and prove to you why they aren't real?

Ahem:

Your original post, you wrote,

"I can go at it with any opposers who are willing to spend the energy!!"

Why would I focus on the smoke and mirrors of NASA propaganda when there are fundamental rules being broken in broad daylight that prove the whole thing to be a hoax?

You haven't stated which fundamental rules.

You've had two engineers enter this thread, and rather than hearing what we had to say, you opted to drown us out with insults and undermine our qualifications.

We've had more than 2 engineers, but yes 2 CT people claiming to be 'engineers' but neither of whom feel confident enough to share what engineering they do. For the record, I am a Mechanical Engineer, B.Sc also working on my MS, from Clemson University. And you? You've gone from 'I have a background in engineering' to just simply referring to yourself as an engineer, and yet...

I already presented solid, unchallenged calculations (not based on emotion) as to why I believe it is impossible to maneuver the spacesuits in a vacuum.

Let's talk about this math, now that you've been given enough rope to hang yourself on:

"So you agree that there is 14.7 psi of pressure inside the space suit? (14.7 psi = 101,000 N/m^2, which would be the equivalent of 1.1 tonnes of mass resting on a 1m^2 piece of fabric) No human could ever maneuver inside a fabric under that much tension."

14.7 psi == 101 kN/m^2, sure,
101,000 N = 1.1 tonnes of mass..... eh, wrong, no. Just, no. This is basic physics math that nobody past their first semester would ever submit as work, in an actual engineering field. Basic unit conversion like this is taught to *every* engineer that goes through Clemson for instance, irrespective of the discipline you go into in your 2nd year and beyond.

Plus, you even did *that* part wrong: 101 kN != 1.1 of anything, it would be 1.01....

...if you had even gotten your orders of magnitude correct. But we will get back to that:

Second, let's edumacate you on the difference between newtons and mass. the Newton, I shouldn't need to tell any engineer, is the derived SI unit of force, while kilograms are the SI base unit of mass.

1 Newton = 1 kg*m/s^2.

Force [N] != Mass [kg].

Second point, the argument about 1.01 tonnes of mass sitting on a m^2 of fabric: where? In Earth gravity? The Moon? Jupiter? On Earth, 1.01 tonnes of mass (1.01 thousand kg or 1010 kg) would weigh only 9,908.1 Newtons. So let's revisit our orders of magnitude in reverse: 101,000 Newtons, on Earth, would be the weight of 10,295.6 kg of mass, or 10.26 metric tonnes, actually.

So, I reject your argument and laugh at your alleged background in engineering. Not to mention any actual Engineer practising in their profession would know not to meddle in fields they are not competent in: it is for example patently unethical for a Bioengineer to design a suspension bridge, or a Civil Engineer to feign expertise in organic chemistry. And, demonstrably, you lack the competence to argue matters of aerospace, or indeed, Physics 201.

Fortunately though, as I and others widely suspected,

What could have been a really interesting thread has been rendered a snorefest, swamped out by sheep clutching at straws.

bfa1509 wrote: »

Ha! This is what I love about you space fanboys. If you are so confident the moonlandings happened then why do you all sound so emotional and insult anyone who questions it?

The mask slipped off you rather quickly. Banned 3 months for trolling. Thanks for playing.

Overheal · 21-07-2019 6:49pm

SlowBlowin wrote: »

The OP started this by saying he wanted to discuss, and he wont. No relevant points are being won, conceded or discussed by the OP, even when there is no doubt they are wrong (laser reflector, etc). They have already stated that they cant be bothered to read all the posts, they are just a wind up.

I think its 100% obvious that she/he is just trolling and this thread is dysfunctional, although enjoyable as I have some great links to read/watch on vintage space. If it was not for all the great info this thread should be closed.

While the OP was indeed a windup artist there are some other folks having a somewhat more civil go at it, so I'll let it play on for the moment, as you said the debunking posts have been quite detailed and always educational to read through, like those documentary links a few posts ago.

Overheal · 21-07-2019 7:15pm

mickdw wrote: »

Pm going your way now.

Thank you, I accept that you have a degree in an engineering profession. I will note however it is not Aerospace related so bear this in mind if leaning on your background. Please report posts if they are derogatory about claiming or accusing you of not being an engineer, say, along with other reasons to report posts.

I would like to stress that Aerospace math is hard as balls, and very few of us engineers could very reasonably pretend to be experts in most of it, or even familiar with fair swaths of it.

21-07-2019 7:22pm

Overheal wrote: »

I would like to stress that Aerospace math is hard as balls, and very few of us engineers could very reasonably pretend to be experts in most of it, or even familiar with fair swaths of it.

It's not Rocket Science!... oh wait :pac:

SlowBlowin · 21-07-2019 8:13pm

mickdw wrote: »

I'm not convinced on the actual moon landing itself.
No issue with the space flight but I think going back 50 years, it was just too much.
Manually landing the capsule onto the moon, taking off and linking up with the space craft etc.

I found this video which shows just how much effort they put into lander training, and shows just what a cool guy Armstrong was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNlZXso0-I4

Dr. Bre · 21-07-2019 8:24pm

They walked on the moon - that’s news to me

Dohnjoe · 21-07-2019 8:33pm

Dr. Bre wrote: »

They walked on the moon - that’s news to me

Dare I ask why

Westernyelp · 21-07-2019 8:36pm

Has the OP done a runner and Left poor Mick defending this nonsense?

What's the Thoughts in the Mars rovers and interplanetary probes? They imaginary too? Apologies if covered already

Dohnjoe · 21-07-2019 8:44pm

Westernyelp wrote: »

Has the OP done a runner and Left poor Mick defending this nonsense?

What's the Thoughts in the Mars rovers and interplanetary probes? They imaginary too? Apologies if covered already

I'm familiar with the moon landing hoaxes, but the "ISS is a fake" conspiracy is new to me, when I try to look it up, it mostly seems to be flat-earthers

I think the spiel here is manned space flight, emphasis on the manned part. Most hoaxers seem to be fine with satellites and probes, it's just man going into space they can't wrap their collective heads around

knucklehead6 · 21-07-2019 8:59pm

mickdw wrote: »

I don't think the maths involved in an IT qualification would be at the highest level but even so, if I wanted to employ someone to carry out a complex task, I'd hire you before the majority of the random population.
To take a simple example, prior to my Engineering Degree, I was 1 of 2 who took higher maths in a class of 60 at secondary school. That simple fact in itself strongly suggests that I would mathematically be ahead of a large portion of the population.

You must’ve been to a very strange school. Only 2 students took higher level maths??

We had a year group about the same size and from memory there was 18 of us.

M5 · 21-07-2019 9:42pm

Still waiting to hear how OP explains me seeing the ISS on several occasions with a scope. NB, Not a plane (Have actually seen it with Soyuz an Dragon docking and docked, that level of detail is possible with a tracking scope, I used a celestron Nexstar 11)

And, how as part of Astrophysics Masters a friend of mine has used equipment at Haute-Provence Observatory completed experiment on at least one of the moon based retro reflectors? The reflector was found at the location it was supposed to be in and the readings were as expected.

This was asked in post number 2 and still hasn't been addressed other than "that's impossible", or some guff about perpendicularity being required.

firemansam4 · 21-07-2019 9:55pm

Think op has been banned for trolling?
But thread stays open. See a few posts back post #231

firemansam4 · 22-07-2019 12:12pm

So it looks like the OP was probably just on the windup with his off the wall ideas.
But there has to be a large section of the population who believe the moon landings were faked, I've talked to people who believe this and there is no shortage of people on social media commenting as much when there is anything posted about moon landings.

I would hazard a guess that they just simply think this because it happened so long ago and the fact nobody has been back to the moon since.
I doubt many have really looked into the evidence that is there which debunks many of these conspiracy theories. It would be nice to see a good documentary doing just that, involving experts and maybe people who worked on the moon landings.

I imagine it must be very frustrating for anyone who was involved in the moon landings being labeled as liars by these people and belittling the achievements they were involved in.

22-07-2019 12:59pm

firemansam4 wrote: »

It would be nice to see a good documentary doing just that, involving experts and maybe people who worked on the moon landings.

You're dealing with a certain kind of "thick" here. If you went to the trouble of putting together a top notch documentary and get top/high profile people involved... this would be "proof" that concerted effort was needed to keep people on message.

SlowBlowin · 22-07-2019 1:24pm

I don't think its "thick", I just think some peoples desire to be a "know it all" or be ahead of the pack with their ability to see the "real" truth, Billy Liar style.

I think even if Elon Musk lands Starship next to a landing site and recovers a rover or something else, the same deniers will say it had been prepared and stowed in Starship and the video footage faked.

There is a chap I know who believes virtually every conspiracy theory, I was mentioning how excited I was to see Spacex develop starship and fly to the moon or mars and he responded with, its not possible because of the Van Allen belts. The worst thing is that he is a really nice guy, but just believes every theory on YouTube.

We can go blue in the face but as the OP has demonstrated here, they wont read the science, listen to the logic, or discuss in any reasonable way.

King Mob · 22-07-2019 1:28pm

firemansam4 wrote: »

I would hazard a guess that they just simply think this because it happened so long ago and the fact nobody has been back to the moon since.
I doubt many have really looked into the evidence that is there which debunks many of these conspiracy theories. It would be nice to see a good documentary doing just that, involving experts and maybe people who worked on the moon landings.

I don't think there's any full length documentaries like you're describing, but there's bits and pieces on youtube addressing parts of the conspiracy:
Vintage Space has a few videos on the conspiracy theories.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r45Q-MT2vfc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxoSnXZTtr4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdfSoWb6W54
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyH4Zaz3mEE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BEylTGOlQ8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLtgS2_qxJk

And she has a few addressing the concerns of some of our resident conspiracy theorists regarding navigation and computers.
The difference being that she actually knows what she's talking about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-O3Uu4DuLw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8S_T772H1c

She also just does great videos on different aspects of the space program in general.

There's also this great primer from Curious Droid who also does great ones on engineering and aerospace:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT3ferYrmgU

This one was posted earlier, but it's worth posting again as it's one of the few debunks that directly proves part of the conspiracy theory is impossible:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYFMU7XfyzE
With the follow up where he addresses a response from a well known moon hoax youtuber:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TelJ75pzP4

The Mythbusters also did an episode on it, and while it's fun and accurate, I don't think it would be convincing to most conspiracy theorists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPj60sy9Cfw

M5 · 22-07-2019 1:41pm

There's an attraction in all these theories. You know something that everyone accepts to be true, isn't. It makes you feel superior, woke.

Driving factor for the lot imo and why you see conspiracy theorists usually subscribe to several theories. Some lose this high and naturally progress to the bat**** ones.

firemansam4 · 22-07-2019 1:58pm

King Mob wrote:

I don't think there's any full length documentaries like you're describing, but there's bits and pieces on youtube addressing parts of the conspiracy: Vintage Space has a few videos on the conspiracy theories.

Thanks for going to the effort of posting these links, I'll have to have a look through them when I get a chance later...

Overheal · 22-07-2019 2:05pm

Relevant: 1970s NASA intern bought a pallet of film reels from surplus when he was there, now made off with over a million dollars because some of them had the Apollo 11 EVA on it

https://gizmodo.com/former-nasa-intern-scores-1-82-million-for-moon-landin-1836579509

mickdw · 22-07-2019 2:06pm

knucklehead6 wrote: »

mickdw wrote: »

I don't think the maths involved in an IT qualification would be at the highest level but even so, if I wanted to employ someone to carry out a complex task, I'd hire you before the majority of the random population.
To take a simple example, prior to my Engineering Degree, I was 1 of 2 who took higher maths in a class of 60 at secondary school. That simple fact in itself strongly suggests that I would mathematically be ahead of a large portion of the population.

You must’ve been to a very strange school. Only 2 students took higher level maths??

We had a year group about the same size and from memory there was 18 of us.

It was common enough around the time I did it for very very few to do higher maths although I do know people who went to other schools and I was surprised at the results they achieved so yes maybe we had crap maths teachers.

The J Stands for Jay · 22-07-2019 3:51pm

mickdw wrote: »

To take a simple example, prior to my Engineering Degree, I was 1 of 2 who took higher maths in a class of 60 at secondary school. That simple fact in itself strongly suggests that I would mathematically be ahead of a large portion of the population.

That just suggests:
1. You went to a small school.
2. Either the level of the maths teachers in the school was poor, or the students were poor.
3. You believe that small sample sizes are valid, and/or that anecdotes equal evidence.

Hoaxesssss innnnn Spaaaaaace

Comments