Did Apollo 11 land on the moon?

[Phi for All]

14 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

Perhaps “deep fakes” technology was available decades ago…

!

Moderator Note

You need to stop doing this. This is why we don't indulge conspiracy discussions, because you introduce suspicions you have no intention of supporting with evidence. Merely mentioning it seems to be the intellectually lazy alternative. NO MORE, PLEASE!

 

[Janus]

On 7/31/2022 at 6:34 AM, exchemist said:

You can read about it here: https://bletchleypark.org.uk/our-story/bletchley-park-and-d-day/

Though what this has to do with moon landings, or secrets kept by the state. I don't know - unless you mean the Enigma-coded  messages sent by the German military.   

 

If the US had such an ability, capable of fooling not only the experts of the time, but for decades afterwards, as early as the 1960's, It wouldn't have taken so long for the USSR to fall.  Heck, they'd be ruling the World by now.  This is such a conspiracy theory trope: Claim that the conspirators have the capability of pulling off the near impossible, but they only used it for something relatively trivial. 

[Joshcitylife]

16 hours ago, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

You need to stop doing this. This is why we don't indulge conspiracy discussions, because you introduce suspicions you have no intention of supporting with evidence. Merely mentioning it seems to be the intellectually lazy alternative. NO MORE, PLEASE!

 

I just wanted to express freedom of speech. If you want to delete the thread then by all means I have no control over that. I believe you have the power of censorship and you can utilize that in any way you deem appropriate.

[exchemist]

1 hour ago, Joshcitylife said:

I just wanted to express freedom of speech. If you want to delete the thread then by all means I have no control over that. I believe you have the power of censorship and you can utilize that in any way you deem appropriate.

What sententious garbage. Freedom of speech does not require that you be free to talk crap wherever you like. 

[joigus]

Perfect example of a botched debunking that results in rebuking for ignoring well-known rebuttals to well-known pre-existing debunkings.

3 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

I just wanted to express freedom of speech. If you want to delete the thread then by all means I have no control over that. I believe you have the power of censorship and you can utilize that in any way you deem appropriate.

Really? All your speech is still here for everybody to read.

[swansont]

4 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

I just wanted to express freedom of speech.

!

Moderator Note

You are free to post your musings on a blog somewhere, and the government can't throw you in jail to stop that. That's freedom of speech (here in the US, at least). This freedom does not involve being free from repercussions for that speech.

But this site is not the government. We have rules, designed to facilitate discussion, and you are expected to follow them. Included in those rules is providing evidence to back up what you say. 

 

[Phi for All]

7 hours ago, Joshcitylife said:

I believe you have the power of censorship and you can utilize that in any way you deem appropriate.

I believe conspiracy rhetoric increases ignorance and fear, and if you're doing it on purpose, I believe you're a manipulative monster. I believe in the intelligence of the other members here and their ability to see the shaky foundations of your arguments, but too many young students come here to learn, and I'm afraid those are the people you've set your sights on. And I believe, rather I know, that you don't know what censorship is, even though you probably use the word often.

[Sensei]

C'mon guys. We are on a scientific forum. If he has doubts about the photographs delivered by the Apollo 11 team, then you should ask him what is wrong with them.. analyze photo by photo, issue by issue..  Let's keep the discussion at a high level, not at the level of preschoolers in the sandbox who one shouts "yes", the other shouts "no", without any serious arguments.. Let's learn in detail about his arguments against the moon landing..

[Phi for All]

7 minutes ago, Sensei said:

C'mon guys. We are on a scientific forum. If he has doubts about the photographs delivered by the Apollo 11 team, then you should ask him what is wrong with them.. analyze photo by photo, issue by issue..  Let's keep the discussion at a high level, not at the level of preschoolers in the sandbox who one shouts "yes", the other shouts "no", without any serious arguments.. Let's learn in detail about his arguments against the moon landing..

Great idea. While we're at it, let's take another look at Intelligent Design, and some of the other doubts regarding evolution. Have doubts about relativity, by all means let's go over the arguments against phlogiston again. Let's waste our time taking another long look, photo by photo, of something that's already been debunked ad nauseam over the last 50 years. Because all the evidence shows that the OP is totally sincere about expressing their freedom of speech, and isn't interested in casting doubt over one of humankind's greatest accomplishments for their own purposes without providing a shred of evidence.

I know a few of the 400,000+ people who worked on Apollo. I know one of Buzz Aldrin's biographers, and I've met Buzz's son Andy. I'm going to step out of this discussion as a member and a moderator because it literally makes me ill to see the accomplishments of these brilliant people drug through the dirt by members of this board. Enjoy your mockery and disinformation!

[joigus]

7 hours ago, joigus said:

Perfect example of a botched debunking that results in rebuking for ignoring well-known rebuttals to well-known pre-existing debunkings.

Really? All your speech is still here for everybody to read.

I totally agree with you that in general we should give people the benefit of the doubt and try to concentrate on scientific arguments. I for one am sorry that I haven't contributed much in the way of scientific arguments here. But answers have been provided --the one by Janus particularly thorough, including reflections on plausibility of the whole thing-- that should be enough to entice a scientific discussion on the part of the OP if they are interested in anything other than pushing forward this running nonsense no matter how much common sense and facts you throw at them. That hasn't happened.

Besides. It's not only that, eg, the flag argument, whoever formulated it originally, can only come from a complete ignorance of classical physics of motion in the vacuum. It's the fact that it's not original, it's been repeated to death. And it's been answered many times in many places.

I've never had any particular interest in this particular conspiracy theory, and even I am familiar with the argument.

But I do believe the OP should be given a fair shot at trying to regroup and start answering the scientific questions.

[swansont]

2 hours ago, Sensei said:

C'mon guys. We are on a scientific forum. If he has doubts about the photographs delivered by the Apollo 11 team, then you should ask him what is wrong with them.. analyze photo by photo, issue by issue..  Let's keep the discussion at a high level, not at the level of preschoolers in the sandbox who one shouts "yes", the other shouts "no", without any serious arguments.. Let's learn in detail about his arguments against the moon landing..

This stuff is debunked elsewhere, so there's nothing new, but more to the point, there hasn't been any evidence presented! Trying to cast this as a discussion that has any merit is foolhardy.The OP was afforded an opportunity to present evidence and they chose to not even try.