Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Moon landing Hoax

Reminds me of the movie "Capricorn One"
( I thought it was a great
fantasy movie. (I remember a clue was insufficient delay in the

I haven't seen the Fox prgm. or read any of the arguments of moon landing hoax
proponents, but I suggest that they use non falsifiable arguments -- that's
enuff for me to dismiss anyone using them.


P.s. last I heard (credulous Cleyet) magnetic fields promote bone repair (not
cure arthritis though).

Some one suggested that it'd be impossible to do the guinea and feather trick
on earth. Maybe, the strength of an evacuated room would necessarily be
great. Do they have such a room to test the "space suits?" I'd certainly
hope so.

Jim Green wrote:

At 01:39 21 02 2001 , Larry Smith wrote:

I think the onus for evidence is on the hoax believers. As Sagan kept
saying, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" and I think
the hoax claim is even more extraordinary than the claim that we achieved
what NASA says we did.

Larry! Which hoax believers -- or possible hoax are you referring to? Are
you saying that I should believe the Federal Government carte blanche until
I can conclusively prove them wrong???? Why is it that I can't insist that
NASA prove FOX wrong? On which side does the onus fall? I am willing to
look all the evidence of both sides.

But I do agree with Jim that it is very unphysics-like to automatically
reject claims out of hand just because we don't like them or because we
don't understand them. Of all people, physicists should be open-minded.

Well thank heaven, someone in this discussion is willing to open his mind
to possibilities beyond the traditional. Think of where we would be if
Aristotle still held sway.

Consider the first person to the North Pole: Tradition holds that it was
Robert E Peary, in 1909, but subsequent analysis shows that he never
reached the North Pole -- close but no cigar -- as if a cigar was worth
something. Will the list rise up in indignation at this revelation. This
is/was a major hoax that prevailed for many years. And his companions
never publicly revealed the truth.

And Larry is quite right about the arthritis thing -- But be careful
,Larry, look what they did to Galileo when he had all his nutty ideas. I
did attend an arthritis/magnet home presentation once. Many of the local
college science faculty were involved in promoting this stuff. They seemed
to be all het up about it. It didn't seem to work for anyone at the
presentation I saw. I did not get the magnets.

On the other issue, I _do_ think we (including Jim) ought to care. If we
went to the moon then that is not only important historically and socially
but also scientifically. And if we really didn't then that is even more
important in all three areas! I'm betting Jim would agree with that, so
maybe he can elaborate on what he means by "I don't care if it is true or

Larry, I don't doubt that we eventually went to the Moon -- I am not quite
sure just why -- and FOX did not suggest that we haven't. It is only the
possible fudging of the first trip that is in question. And no one has
said that the ship didn't take off. It is only suggested that they didn't
land on the Moon that time. There was extreme political pressure at the
time viz a viz the Soviet Union. And 400000 people need not have been
tricked to do this.

Consider the first submarine under the North Polar ice cap. How many would
have needed to be in a conspiracy to fake such a trip. How many of Peary's
co-travelers? For that matter I wonder, if the first Moon landing was
fudged, how many conspirators must there have been . My heavens there have
been major movies made of large scale conspiracies.

And Larry, I don't care if the first trip was valid -- well ok I guess I
do: the politics involved would be valuable history -- It would make a very
interesting West Wing episode -- if it were a hoax, it would be very
valuable to know how it was done -- but there is no innovative science
impact. It did keep the Soviets off our backs for a while, and I suppose
that this would be important. It is also important the we _did_ at lest
eventually get there -- I suppose -- but we haven't done much since then.

So, no, I don't much care.

Jim Green