Anyone here think the moon landings were faked?

[RJDiogenes]

EP, are you joking or just an idiot?

Framing it as a question does not make it less of a Flame. Please be careful with that.

in the 60s it was like a religion to believe what the government fed you on TV.

You obviously weren't around in the 60s.

Apparently we're talking about an alternate history now... that statement is so utterly rediculous and hysterical I can't believe I missed it before

Seriously. It must be the Mirror Universe.

 

[Jetfire]

A waving flag = FAKE

Yes because the government would go to all that trouble of faking it and let some gust of wind in to move the flag People are idiots.

Wait till we go to Mars, people will say it was James Cameron and his CGI machine.

In 3D!!!

 

[Trekker4747]

I seem to recall an EPIC fake moon-landing thread on this board some years ago. Truly lolsome. Anyone remember it (or better yet, have it saved)? Might have been a Barcalow or Quacker thread?

I'm pretty sure JohnM was our resident moon truther.

I remember that. I had taken him to task on it and he had, infact, PM'd me to tell me that he was taking he piss on everyone because he thought it was fun.

 

[RAMA]

No of course not. I saw a documentary that explains some of the shadows in photos that some people question, and other so-called "inconsistencies" its all makes sense when you see it. People prefer to believe in nonsense rather than reality.

RAMA

 

[auntiehill]

Hell, we can't even get people to merge in traffic; I doubt we could ever get that many people to keep a secret.

I have never understood conspiracy theorists. It's like life itself isn't interesting enough for them, or they have to have conspiracies to make themselves feel like all their failures aren't really their own fault. It's the "government" or "aliens" or "illuminati" or whatever.

Apparently, the world itself, and all the people and animals in it, isn't wondrous enough for them. How sad.

 

[Trekker4747]

It's interesting to me how much and how often people want to call the moon landings a hoax. Ignoring many aspects, one of which being we traveled to the moon multiple times and landed on it multiple times. Which means they had to fake it, perfectly, each of those times. Does that even seem plausible?

And we've all seen movies from the 1960s do we really thing the special effects techniques of back then could even approach what was seen in the landings? Do we have even now the ability to practicaly, in-camera, show the effects of 1/6th gravity on a small car?!

Forget needing real "proof" that it happened, how about people use their own minds and reason this out and then, of course, employ Occam's Razor.

Occam's Razor says that with all things being equal the simplest explanation will be the right one. So what is simpler?

That a group of countless people built these rockets and ships and stuff and staged a "launch" while another group of people perpetrated an elaborate hoax on a sound-stage. This hoax would involve countless people including family members of those involved. It was an event watched by many people and monitored by many nations. Yet they were all fooled by this perfect hoax of which nothing was revealed save the occasional person who is easily discredited.

Or, that we simply flew up to the damn moon (a chunk of rock 250,000 miles away with practically nothing between here and there), landed, fooled around for a little while, turned around and came back.

I mean what is it people think would've been so "hard" about going to the moon? Is physics that hard to understand?

And then when you have these people who belive in conspiracy theories like the moon landings being faked, JFK's murder being an inside-job, 9/11 "Truthers" etcetera they really believe it's possible to get a group of 100 people on the same page to hide information and keep a conspiracy alive.

But, yet, the same government cannot break into an election office without bringing down the President or the President can't get his willie suckeled without the media having a field day with him.

But, nope, a massive conspiracy involving 100s of people, governments, factories, manufactuerers, contractors, news outlets, publically highly-regarded newsmen and the very best of 1960s special effects persons (they can do stuff with fishing string you've never even heard of!) that we can pull off.

 

[Goliath]

Pfft. That's just a contingency theory.

 

[Shatnertage]

I'll say this: conspiracy theories are entertaining enough. This thread has been a real winner.

 

[Robert D. Robot]

^ True- but 40 years from now, there will be people that will claim that this threat never happened....

 

[PsychoPere]

Actually, this is a point that David Aaronovitch addresses in his book Voodoo Histories: people who buy into one conspiracy theory often buy into others as well. Once you get into the conspiracist mindset, you start to see them everywhere.

This is a book that I'd easily recommend to anyone interested in conspiracism. It's one of the textbooks for a Scandals & Conspiracies political science class that I'm taking right now, and I'm looking forward to having time to read the entirety of the book following the conclusion of this semester. So far I've only read (some of) the sections that have been assigned in the class, but it really is a very interesting read nonetheless.

 

[Tora Ziyal]

in the 60s it was like a religion to believe what the government fed you on TV.

You have got to be kidding! The moon landing was in 1969. That was after JFK was assassinated; after MLK, Jr. was murdered; after RFK was assassinated; well after the Vietnam War protests had started. Were you alive then? What universe were you living in?

I've never understood the mindset of someone wishing to discredit the coolest thing humans have ever done.

Me neither.

 

[Orcus]

Why was MLK only "murdered" when the two Kennedy's were "assassinated"? Surely all three of them were assassinated as they were killed for politically motivated reasons?

John Lennon was murdered (though some might argue a case for assassination).

 

[Trekker4747]

I've always heard it said that MLK was assassinated.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ So you believe that conspiracy theory, then?

 

[Trekker4747]

^ So you believe that conspiracy theory, then?

That MLK was assassinated by James Earl Ray in 1968?

Yes... I believe it.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The term 'conspiracy' implies that more than one person was involved. Who do you think Ray was conspiring with?

 

[Trekker4747]

The term 'conspiracy' implies that more than one person was involved. Who do you think Ray was conspiring with?

You said "conspiracy", not I.

Throughout my life I've heard MLK's death as being an "assassination" (not a murder as the poster above said, and implied it's always called.) An assassination is the killing of a public figure for political reasons, a murder is the killing of another personal for private reasons (be it revenge, rage or any number of things.)

MLK Jr. was killed because of a disagreement with his politics (namely Civil Rights and equality). MLK was assassinated and that's how I've always heard it, I've never heard that he was "murdered."

You mentioned "conspiracy", I believe no conspiracy exists in the deaths of Martin Luther King, Jr or with John F. Kennedy. Both men were killed by cowards who were afraid of political change in the national landscape.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I always thought that only a conspiracy could perform an assassination. If it is done by a private individual, murder is murder, regardless of motive.

I mean, if James Earl Ray disagreed with MLK's politics, that is still his private reason to kill him.

 

[Trekker4747]

Know what words mean.

An assassination is the killing of someone while being driven by political motivations (no multi-person "conspiracy" required.) Lincoln, Kennedy and Martin Luther King were all assassinated as all were killed for political reasons.

Murder is killing someone just 'cuz.

If one wants to be pedantic, yes all assassinations are "murder" but not all murders are "assassinations."

Assassination

Murder

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

^ True- but 40 years from now, there will be people that will claim that this threat never happened....

They'll be claiming that this thread was on the grassy knoll.