[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

You have just hit the nail in the head over one of the major problems. Prime example is r/science.

Arrogance always makes enemies.

[deleted]

Most scientists are great thinkers. However it is apparent they lack the social skills of learning to be tactful in their assertions. It tends to rub people the wrong way even if if that person is wrong. Because like I told you sometimes the truth hurts. It's like how Creationism fails, but I have to do it tactfully as there are times I deal with religionists to get things accomplished.

Comparison of one who is not arrogant in his explanations is Neil Degrasse Tyson explaining to religionists on how things work in physics. However concerning Dawkins though correct on his Evolution assertions. It is how he comes off as arrogant. That's why he has problems getting his POV across. I even watched Tyson tell Dawkins on his demeanor was not appropriate in a video that I saw. However Tyson did it so tactful that Dawkins did not get upset at the critique. Now it seems Dawkins has really toned it down on the attitude.

I have such discussions among anthropologists in relation to Polynesian history and Archeology. Such as digging in burial caves etc... that come across as arrogant. That's another lengthy diatribe though.

IMO though it would be easy to lay all the fault of the person themselves. However I do believe there are contributing factors toward scientists who are arrogant. There is no argument that their education in that field is excellent. However I think that educational field directs that energy toward that discipline so much that other areas of development get left behind. When the youth are sent to school they need to learn the art of tactfulness and sensitive conversing skills. It's not just debating facts but the art of selling the fact.

I watch so many discussions in the Anthropology field come up, and when an accepted current theorem is challenged. Then the traditionalist rear back and get too defensive. Then they start snobbery, sarcasm and ridicule in their forums. Not even listening to another set of evidence proposedm and not even explaining their evidence to counter because they are the expert ,and should not have to explain themselves to the common layman.

It's that way now with the current system on the development of civilizations even among archaeologists. Evident by the recent discovery of Gobleki Tepe. Which demonstrate that civilization is now 7000 years older than previous thought. It was always presumed that agriculture was the driving force to developing cities, and then religion would follow. However Gobleki Tepe shows no agriculture among its vast cities and religious temples. They were all hunter gathers by evidence shown and no agriculture was shown to exist. They showed by art that they were driven by the need for religion first. The arrogance by Egypyoloists not accepting such as it would deprive them of there Sphinx might be older than Egypt is now in jeopardy by geologists.

Sorry the discussion is going wayward.

The discussions are not civil either.

There you have my say on the problem. Arrogance always seems to set in on many when you challenge them and their theorems. They resort to treating people like libervore says. Not all but, a good majority. If you want more proof. Like I said go to r/science and read some OP's.

I'd disagree. The moon landing hoax may not be as popular with people under the age of say 30, but it still has lots of adherents. It's not crazy popular like 9/11 truth or grassy knoll but it's up there if you take into consideration people over the age of 30.

Have you read this series: http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html

If so - care to rebut any specific points?

[deleted]

What about all the technical details in the article? Could you please comment to that? I think that if you have the patience to read the whole thing, if you read it with an open mind, you'll start to question the official story too.

[deleted]

So? Any thoughts on the article?

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

Why are you spamming so much of the same answers? ಠ_ಠ

[deleted]

Hmmm, I'm not too sure since he's saying the same answers over and over. >.>

AND this being /r/conspiracy anything goes...

Hopefully youre right

The biggest problem I've found when talking to moon hoaxers is that when they don't understand something it must be impossible.

Same as the average sceptical person who you talk to about UFO's.

The big difference is that there's overwhelming evidence that moon landings actually happened. With UFOs there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

reminds me of young earth creationists.

Pfft moon landing conspiracies were so last decade.

Because people like you think they know it all. No use talking to a brick wall.

[deleted]

I'm just a college student studying a subject I've always had a passion for since I started playing with Legos as a little kid.

So, unlike many of us, you weren't even born until after the moon missions had been terminated.

Okay... let's get to a question...

Russia was kicking the US's ass in the space race.

Is it inconceivable that the first lunar landing (Apollo 11) was faked in order to ward off the Russians? Historically (in the sense of world politics), this would actually fit and the fairly well documented interaction between Stanley Kubrick and NASA at this time having me asking: Did the US 'cheat' in order to win?

I don't care too much about the subsequent missions. I can comfortably believe that NASA did put men on the moon. But, I can also comfortably believe that the US government cheats at international [hot or cold] wars. I'm not even going to ask about the Van Allen radiation belt... I'll just assume it wasn't as big an obstacle as some of the conspiracy theorists claimed. I'm just thinking.... the US had lost every previous race to space (first satellite, first animal in space, first man in space, and first man to orbit the earth)... and they had a serious boner to get to the moon first. Additionally, every time I see a "debunker" providing "evidence" about moon landings, they offer up photos clearly labeled Apollo 12 (and later), but... no other hard evidence about Apollo 11 (other than the exposed hoax of how they put a cardboard cutout in front of the window to make it look like they were farther away from the earth than they were -- which isn't in NASA's favor).

Care to comment specifically about Apollo 11? (EDIT: I watched the Apollo 11 "landing on the moon" live when I was in gradeschool -- they brought a B&W TV into our classroom and let us watch it during school.)

[deleted]

As for Apollo 11 vs 12, there are extensive libraries of every image taken on Apollo 11, none of which are labeled Apollo 12, so I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about.

Well, let's start here...

This photo was posted as "proof that the moon landings weren't faked". And, as I said, my only query is about 11 (due to the space race). And this photo is 12, not 11.

if you believe that Apollo 12 and all subsequent missions landed on the moon, why would you not believe Apollo 11?

As I said, the space race, but nice try with the incredulity argument.

11 happened only 3 months prior to 12, so there would be almost no change in technology or anything over that time.

I'm not saying 11 wasn't capable of making the journey.

But, I am hypothesizing that it didn't actually do it ... instead... they (just guessing) they did separation and re-docking practice (for the orbiter and lander) in earth's orbit ... so that they'd have the kinks worked out ... 3 months later ... for 12. And that the "trip to the moon, the landing, and exploration" were conceivably (and for the time, believably) faked.

And, .... so...

you didn't actually address my query, but ... instead you tried to make me look like a crackpot for asking. (ala "How can you possibly believe that shit?!?!") That's fine you can play that game, but... here in this subreddit... unlike the science and space circlejerks which revel in those kinds of comments... that kind of response costs you on the credibility scale.

Thanks for responding.

[deleted]

Okay. No worries. Apology accepted.

Perhaps it would help you to understand the actual conspiracy theory I'm referencing. It is theorized that (due only to the space race) Stanley Kubrick was contracted (during the filming of 2001: A Space Odyssey) to "ensure the success of Apollo 11". It may have only been a backup plan, or it may have been a backup plan that actually got used. I do not know. But... I think you'd be better equipped to address this specific question if you knew the details of the conspiracy theory behind it (which I cannot explain in one -- or even 100 - reddit comments).

I looked for links, but... Sadly, it appears that the two feature length videos explaining Kubrick's involvement and the clues he left behind in his films (specifically, The Shining) have been removed from free access (one now costs $10 on DVD. Greed is an amazing thing, eh?)

I'm still looking for links, though. so don't give up on this yet.

Meanwhile, here's a teaser from the video referencing the clues in The Shining.

[deleted]

I see no reason to suspect that 11 was faked but 12 was real.

And you haven't seen the Kubrick films (films about Kubrick) that I'm referencing. There are two...

one is about 2001: A Space Odyssey, the other is about symbolisms in The Shining. And neither of them seems to be available for free now (I found the submitted video links on reddit and they no longer function).

So, although it may sound like I'm just rambling... there WERE two (free) videos I was going to link. But... they're gone (into the pay to play world). One of them shows very shocking footage in which you see the following....

Camera looking out window into dark space at the earth. Appears to be from a great distance... like half way to the moon. Accompanied by Astronaut voices describing their trip and giving the impression of that (that they're half way to the moon), then... at the end of the clip... your mind will be blown...

The astronauts (not knowing the camera was still running) pulled a piece of cardboard (crescent shaped) out of the window, revealing they were still in low earth orbit <-- i.e., THEY LIED.

For what reason, I do not know.

But that one clip alone (Apollo 11) is what made me start paying attention to the Apollo 11 conspiracy theory with reference to the space race. And, again, I repeat: I do not think man hasn't set foot on the moon. I just have questions about whether or not it actually happened during Apollo 11 -- because Apollo 11 was the "victory over the Russians" -- guaranteed by Kubrick, whether they went there or not.

In fact, I'm even willing to believe that Apollo 11 did land on the moon, but ... there does seem to be serious question about whether the rest of humanity actually got to see that or.. did they see Kubrick's version of that.... or some combination of the two? There's plenty of evidence that Kubrick was in direct contact with NASA during the entirety of the filming of 2001. There was a NASA operations director (forgot his name/title) on set, every day... and for several days/weeks, during the making of 2001, the studio was closed and given over to NASA for the private filming of ... something.

This is all documented in the films I am referencing (but can no longer find for free on the internet).

[deleted]

Heck, I have direct contact with a great number of NASA individuals. And I'm not talking about just engineers. I have contact with some of the administrators, and I've meet some of the heads of the Apollo projects themselves.

Can you find out if they're using my AI yet? I know some corporations are working on it. (Just kidding about finding out. If they were using it, they wouldn't tell you, because it's stolen IP.)

[deleted]

Agreed/ditto. Please, though, look for that footage (the window shot). It will make you wonder WTF (that's Why, not What) they did that. <-- It's what made me crawl down that particular rabbit hole.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFKVpqYB9cE

[deleted]

I'm excited to have gone through enough school to start building these incredible pieces of engineering and send them to distant moons and planets. Hopefully you can respect that, especially since people like myself work so hard to get where we're at.

If I ever sounded disrespectful, I didn't meant to. I've repeatedly stated that I don't think all of the moon landings were faked (in my most recent comment I even acknowledge that Apollo 11 may have actually landed on the moon). But, there does seem to be a LOT of incriminating evidence about what the public got to see (some of which has been proven to be faked - not "fake"... but "faked" as in the image looking out the window example in my other comment).

So, yeah... the technology is real. It's really complicated. Smart people work on it. And you should take pride in the fact that you're part of that sector.

But, that doesn't change the fact that the US government lies... a LOT.

Because the truth hurts.

Besides Hanahou has a rule for you to remember. "There will always be a certain percentage that will never agree with you no matter the facts in your favor presented".

[deleted]

It would also be enormously easier to be debunked by the Russians, who could actually track the capsule and communications at the time.

What reasons do you have, exactly, for questioning it?

[deleted]

"So do you believe humans landed on the Moon in 1960?"

Nope they landed in 1969.

"What dit they have back then, 4 bit or 8 bit computers with 16k of ram, assembler only programing?"

More than likely, and if you read the biographys of Aldrin and armstrong the computer usually froze up.

That's why they pick pilots educated in Trig and Calculus. You pick up a pencil and paper and slide rule and due the math. They used it at mission control also. You should try it. It's not that hard for some.

[deleted]