Anytime a hoaxer harps on about the cost of space programs and how the money should be better spent; I immediately dismiss anything else they have to say, for in that first premise lies all the evidence I need that the person has no clue what they are talking about.
The video is long winded and often rambles on tangents that do nothing to support the claim of hoax.
Never before in all of recorded aviation has a flying machine worked on its first attempt
And neither did any of the apollo program equipment, that's why there was a system of testing performed on earth, this is just another claim from ignorance.
This two part video (1,2) makes a much better refutation of this bunkum than I have the will to commit time to.
The old faked lighting and shadows argument is wrong, false and full of more wishful thinking.
It is my job to create images that convince the general public that a fictional image, or video is real. I work in VFX creating these fictions and I know for a fact that the claims dealing with the imagery being fabricated are, simply, full of shit.
I'm all for assessing the claim the moon landing as being faked. There are plenty of very good reasons the US would have to perpetuate a lie of such magnitude. Yet every hoaxer video I see trots out the same tired, uninformed, ignorant and ultimately, illiterate bullshit.
I know the US is capable of wide scale conspiracy to deceive (bay of pigs, gulf of tonkin, the entire NSA, etc etc). I don't doubt it possible to create a system of conspiracy to hoax a moon landing, but this video presents nothing to support the claim.
Do you know what they call "science" that cant be replicated by other scientists? All that time learning about "science" and you still dont know about the scientific method?
I recommend crack to people removed from reality in the way you clearly are.
Nothing in your original comment makes any sense and is disconnected from rationality or reasoned discussion.
If you were to expand on your premise I may be able to understand it, but at this point you're just another crackpot crazy person screaming from a street corner.
well when the facts aren't breaking your way, just resort to diagnosing mental illnesses and name calling. sounds like a good way to increase your credibility among the lurkers.
That's a good comparison list, thanks I'll use it in future discussions.
But none of it works to bolster your argument, because the core of your argument is the moon landings are not reproducible.
And in a sense this is true, but it is due to the complexity and cost of the experiment, not because it isn't possible.
I understand that you've completely bought into the idea that the moon landings were faked and no amount of discussion can turn you away from that, I'm not trying to change your emotional investment.
But you go on about the scientific method as if you actually understand it and how it applies to this discussion.
I encourage you to use the list you've given and apply it to your earlier comment link, http://davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html.
What ever facts you think you have you are still falling for the same old lie of 'booo it's too hard and I don't actually understand complex engineering so it's fake'.
I'm very willing to entertain the notion that the apollo program was a hoax, but so far the only evidence for the claim is provided as argument from ignorance.
I know the government has the capacity and will to pull of something like that, I don't doubt it's possible to fake a space program, I just don't think it's probable in this case.
I personally don't seek credibility, because the truth and facts speak independent of anything I say.
view the rest of the comments →
VictorSteinerDavion ago
Anytime a hoaxer harps on about the cost of space programs and how the money should be better spent; I immediately dismiss anything else they have to say, for in that first premise lies all the evidence I need that the person has no clue what they are talking about.
The video is long winded and often rambles on tangents that do nothing to support the claim of hoax.
And neither did any of the apollo program equipment, that's why there was a system of testing performed on earth, this is just another claim from ignorance.
This two part video (1,2) makes a much better refutation of this bunkum than I have the will to commit time to.
The old faked lighting and shadows argument is wrong, false and full of more wishful thinking.
It is my job to create images that convince the general public that a fictional image, or video is real. I work in VFX creating these fictions and I know for a fact that the claims dealing with the imagery being fabricated are, simply, full of shit.
I'm all for assessing the claim the moon landing as being faked. There are plenty of very good reasons the US would have to perpetuate a lie of such magnitude. Yet every hoaxer video I see trots out the same tired, uninformed, ignorant and ultimately, illiterate bullshit.
I know the US is capable of wide scale conspiracy to deceive (bay of pigs, gulf of tonkin, the entire NSA, etc etc). I don't doubt it possible to create a system of conspiracy to hoax a moon landing, but this video presents nothing to support the claim.
poly ago
Do you know what they call "science" that cant be replicated by other scientists? All that time learning about "science" and you still dont know about the scientific method?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducibility
VictorSteinerDavion ago
Whatever crack you're on, you should up the dose.
poly ago
why would you recommend crack to someone else when it obviously hasn't solved your problems?
VictorSteinerDavion ago
I recommend crack to people removed from reality in the way you clearly are.
Nothing in your original comment makes any sense and is disconnected from rationality or reasoned discussion.
If you were to expand on your premise I may be able to understand it, but at this point you're just another crackpot crazy person screaming from a street corner.
poly ago
well when the facts aren't breaking your way, just resort to diagnosing mental illnesses and name calling. sounds like a good way to increase your credibility among the lurkers.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CKQC7iKUkAE4zzc.jpg
VictorSteinerDavion ago
That's a good comparison list, thanks I'll use it in future discussions.
But none of it works to bolster your argument, because the core of your argument is the moon landings are not reproducible.
And in a sense this is true, but it is due to the complexity and cost of the experiment, not because it isn't possible.
I understand that you've completely bought into the idea that the moon landings were faked and no amount of discussion can turn you away from that, I'm not trying to change your emotional investment.
But you go on about the scientific method as if you actually understand it and how it applies to this discussion.
I encourage you to use the list you've given and apply it to your earlier comment link, http://davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html.
What ever facts you think you have you are still falling for the same old lie of 'booo it's too hard and I don't actually understand complex engineering so it's fake'.
I'm very willing to entertain the notion that the apollo program was a hoax, but so far the only evidence for the claim is provided as argument from ignorance.
I know the government has the capacity and will to pull of something like that, I don't doubt it's possible to fake a space program, I just don't think it's probable in this case.
I personally don't seek credibility, because the truth and facts speak independent of anything I say.
Anyone with a sufficiently powerful telescope and laser can check for them selves.