Over the last couple of weeks I've met no fewer than four moon-landing sceptics. Three of them are actually members of my team at work, so I haven't just met them. The fourth is a new member of my board game group.

None of them seemed to be very well versed in the arguments, though. I think, in all cases, they just found the idea appealing. Probably due to some bullshit they saw on TV. I think I managed to persuade them that they might not have seen all the evidence.

Of all the conspiracy theorists out there, I often find the moon landing ones to be the most surprising. Many people I've met who believe it are actually very well educated people. However they usually are well educated laze people who don't do the legwork on the actual science or logic behind the whole affair. They just read a couple of moon hoax websites about the photos and such and say "ya, actually this makes sense". Without further investigation a somewhat smart person could get sucked in.

Recently I discovered that the flown map Michael Collins "brought with him on the Apollo 11 flight" was intentionally gridded inaccurately, mislabeled to assist in the perpetration of the Apollo fraud. It's hard evidence so a very exciting find.

Cool story, bro.

trubble76 wrote:

HughMcB wrote:I've been discussing this with my rather idiotic friend as of late. He seems convinced that the first moon landing was faked and directed by Stanley Kubrick in the desert. Honestly.

Otherwise an intelligent chap.

I sent him this link as well, a piece by Michael Shermer on the subject.

Michael Shermer´s brilliant "Moon Hoax"-debunk

I loved this part;

I once asked G. Gordon Liddy (who should know) about conspiracy theories. He said three people can keep a secret as long as two of them are dead. To think that thousands of people would keep their mouths shut is too ridiculous to consider.

The thing with Apollo is that it very much is not a secret though, that the thing was hoaxed. It is obvious.

can'tfoolme wrote:

trubble76 wrote:

HughMcB wrote:I've been discussing this with my rather idiotic friend as of late. He seems convinced that the first moon landing was faked and directed by Stanley Kubrick in the desert. Honestly.

Otherwise an intelligent chap.

I sent him this link as well, a piece by Michael Shermer on the subject.

Michael Shermer´s brilliant "Moon Hoax"-debunk

I loved this part;

I once asked G. Gordon Liddy (who should know) about conspiracy theories. He said three people can keep a secret as long as two of them are dead. To think that thousands of people would keep their mouths shut is too ridiculous to consider.

The thing with Apollo is that it very much is not a secret though, that the thing was hoaxed. It is obvious.

Apparently not obvious enough to avoid fooling the Russians.

Yeah, err I'm excited too.

I guess.

Transformers 3 was a bit long wasn't it ?

I am sure the Russians were parking equipment on the moon before us. they were a step ahead of the Americans in that.

can'tfoolme wrote:I am sure the Russians were parking equipment on the moon before us. they were a step ahead of the Americans in that.

Sooo...they might have been knowledgeable enough to spot an obvious fake then?

Wasn't fake, not in the sense that nothing was going on. Apollo was real in that it was a big project, huge project, to land military equipment on the moon. They just did not land astronauts. the Russians were doing the same. They had the first ICBM, first earth satellite, first hard landing on the moon, first soft landing on the moon. So in a sense, they won the moon race, though we/the Americans , may have parked the largest packages there.

can'tfoolme wrote:Wasn't fake, not in the sense that nothing was going on. Apollo was real in that it was a big project, huge project, to land military equipment on the moon. They just did not land astronauts. the Russians were doing the same. They had the first ICBM, first earth satellite, first hard landing on the moon, first soft landing on the moon. So in a sense, they won the moon race, though we/the Americans , may have parked the largest packages there.

Did I say that nothing went on at all, or even attribute this claim to you or other reality denialists? Did I?

Fake in the sense that it is suggested that US astronauts did not land on the moon, contrary to the claims of NASA and the US government. If it is so obvious that it was a hoax, why did the world's other superpower of the time, who you seem to suggest had a more advanced space program, did not spot it?

can'tfoolme wrote:Wasn't fake, not in the sense that nothing was going on. Apollo was real in that it was a big project, huge project, to land military equipment on the moon. They just did not land astronauts. the Russians were doing the same. They had the first ICBM, first earth satellite, first hard landing on the moon, first soft landing on the moon. So in a sense, they won the moon race, though we/the Americans , may have parked the largest packages there.

Riiiight. I'm eagerly awaiting the evidence for that. I suspect there is none though.

What, evidence for the Russians doing all of that first? It is common knowledge.

can'tfoolme wrote:What, evidence for the Russians doing all of that first? It is common knowledge.

So common that even the Russians don't seem to know about it.

You know, when throwing around terms like "obvious hoax" and "common knowledge", you might want to specify whether or not you are referring to anyone outside of the reality denialist community. Just a thought.

can'tfoolme wrote:What, evidence for the Russians doing all of that first? It is common knowledge.

If it's that easy then providing evidence should be a breeze, no?

I want to see the evidence that leads you to believe that the USA did not send astronauts to the moon, or is it just a "feeling"?

Edit for speeling

can'tfoolme wrote:What, evidence for the Russians doing all of that first? It is common knowledge.

It's that common knowledge that there has never been, to my limited knowledge, a single news item on what would have been such a huge scoop. I, personally have been reading newspapers, watching the news for 30+ years and am a reasonably astute fan of history and am completely unaware of such "knowledge". Where on earth did you dredge this up from?

I would brace yourself for much mockery of this claim until you back it up with some firm evidence. Until that point I will laugh at your assertion and treat it with a huge amount of scorn and derision.

The Russians did indeed land hardware on the moon and did return samples of moon rock.

In 1959 Luna 2 impacted the moon and Luna 3 took photos of the far side. In 1966 Luna 7 and 9 made the first landing and became the 1st permanent satelite respectively.
Luna 16 was the 1st return of moon rock from an unmanned mission however that landed in 1970 after both Apollo 11 and 12.
Lunakhod was the 1st lunar rover but again that was 1970 after the US had landed men on the moon.

However these turn out to support the idea that the US sent men there. There are two reasons for this. The conspiracy people think that radiation would kill the astronauts. However biological material can repair itself whereas electronics bombarded with radiation cannot. If you can shield electronics enough to work long term then you can shield people.

Secondly the Soviet moon rock is of the order of grams of material. The Apollo collection of moon rock is about 850 Kg. Robots of the time simply could not have returned that amount of material. A manned mission could. Add in the fact the Soviet and US material matches and thus has the same source and there is no compelling reason to think the US did not do exactly as it said.

Recently I discovered that the flown map Michael Collins "brought with him on the Apollo 11 flight" was intentionally gridded inaccurately, mislabeled to assist in the perpetration of the Apollo fraud. It's hard evidence so a very exciting find.

What specifically is wrong with this map and how does a mis-labelled map form any proof whatsoever of a hoax?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings

The Soviet Union monitored the missions at the Space Transmissions Corps, which was "fully equipped with the latest intelligence-gathering and surveillance equipment".[24] Vasily Mishin ("The Moon Programme That Faltered."), in Spaceflight. 33 (March 1991): 2-3 describes how the Soviet Moon programme lost energy after the Apollo landing.

Hmm, coincidence?

No, no - not coincidence - conspiracy! The Ruskies conspired with NASA to hide the "fact" that the astronauts never landed on the Moon.

Duh.