• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Photo: Apollo 11 landing site

Until they are all squashed without a doubt and with proper evidence, there will always be doubters.

They are all squashed beyond a reasonable doubt. Anyone doubting it is not being reasonable. Hell, you can doubt the World Trade Center ever existed in New York. You could say all the "evidence" (and use quotes around 'evidence' in case anyone is uncertain about your beliefs) is rusted metal that could have come from anywhere, thousands of hours of footage that can be faked, and a hole in the middle on Manhattan that could have been anything before it was dug out.

But that wouldn't be reasonable to believe.
 
The laser reflectors that the astronauts set up are sufficient. Because if the astronauts didn't put them there, then how did they get there? :)

Ah see.... this and a number of other previously provided examples of "Proof" can be explained in a number of ways that are still quite logical.

Just playing devil's advocate cuz I like the role..... those laser reflectors and everything else on the surface of the moon could have been easily placed there the same way as we got equipment on Mars without any humans being on the planet.

Okay... so? If your argument is correct, it means we still reached the moon one way or another. What conspiracy do the whackos have left to argue about? "Yeah, we sent a craft to the moon... but we covered up the fact that there weren't any people aboard!" Huh??? What kind of conspiracy is that? :confused:

You can play devil's advocate all you want, but only if you ignore that there are guys alive today who claim to have walked on the moon. Armstrong, Aldrin and the others can simply say, "I was there", and provide photos, moon rocks, postcards and T-shirts. No other proof is required. If people continue to doubt, the burden of proof is on the doubters.

This isn't a scientific debate, because only one side has evidence of their story. The other side doesn't have any of their own. All they can do is try to find holes in the first side's case.

So, why are you interested in photographic anomalies, but you don't say anything about the astronauts who say they were there? That's like looking for murder suspects and clues while ignoring the guy with the bloodstains on his hands, jumping up and down yelling, "It was me! I did it!" :vulcan:
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top