Oxford University are in on the hoax too.

[Luke Pemberton]

Looks like my alma mater are in on the hoax too.

Telegraph Article

[Peter B]

From the linked article:

"A number of conspiracy theories revolve around science. While believing the Moon landings were faked may not be harmful, believing misinformation about vaccines can be fatal,” said Dr Grimes.

“However, not every belief in a conspiracy is necessarily wrong - for example, the Snowden revelations confirmed some theories about the activities of the US National Security Agency (NSA).

"It is common to dismiss conspiracy theories and their proponents out of hand but I wanted to take the opposite approach, to see how these conspiracies might be possible. To do that, I looked at the vital requirement for a viable conspiracy - secrecy."

Nicely put by the professor.

[bknight]

Looks like my alma mater are in on the hoax too.

Telegraph Article

The number of conspirators versus the length of time is impressive, not that the HB,s will admit those conclusions.

[HeadLikeARock]

Looks like my alma mater are in on the hoax too.

Telegraph Article

The number of conspirators versus the length of time is impressive, not that the HB,s will admit those conclusions.

Hoax Believers always claim that only a small handful of people would need to be in on the hoax to make it viable. But with every claim they make, they fail to realise that the number of people "in on it" would increase - and not just NASA staff from the 1960s. There's all the people involved since, for example, everyone involved in the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter mission, including those from Arizona State University. That's dozens more people involved, decades after the original conspiracy, without a single whistle-blower. There would also have to be the people within NASA or the US Government who would have had to "persuade" everyone on the LRO team to be involved in fakery or deceit, people who weren't around in the 1960s. That's just the LRO. Moon rock analysis by hundreds of scientists? All needed persuading and paying off. PLSS wouldn't work in space? The sub-contractor must have known this and is therefore also in on the scam. Laser reflector experiment? Still paying them off now, unless you subscribe to the theory that there was another secret mission to place a reflector on the moon, requiring further levels of secrecy over the decades.

Layer upon layer of involvement in the deceit, putting to bed the claim that there was a very small number of people in on the scam. And guess what? The moon will always be there, just waiting for the country or organisation with the knowledge and money to look in close detail at the Apollo landing sites, blowing the lid off it all once and for all. Of course, any 3rd party that verifies the landing sites will once again be labelled as in NASAs pockets. Jarrah White raises his $500,000,000 and survives his flight to the moon? They drugged him, or he's in on it too.

[raven]

Not to mention that, if the signs of a hoax were what myth mongers and their conspiracy theorist followers say, then the former USSR would have had all the evidence they needed to blow open the hoax, but did not. Which means all those people need to be convinced to keep quiet as well. And then there's all the scientists studying the moon rocks. Since any fake, whether Earth rock or even lunar meteorite,  would have many things going against it, that a close examination would reveal the hoax, they need to be convinced as well to keep their mouths shut also.

[HeadLikeARock]

Not to mention that, if the signs of a hoax were what myth mongers and their conspiracy theorist followers say, then the former USSR would have had all the evidence they needed to blow open the hoax, but did not.

They agreed to keep quiet in return for wheat.

And then there's all the scientists studying the moon rocks. Since any fake, whether Earth rock or even lunar meteorite,  would have many things going against it, that a close examination would reveal the hoax, they need to be convinced as well to keep their mouths shut also.

Scientists can be bought, so they shouldn't be trusted.

Not my opinions of course, straight from the hoax believer paradigm!

[bknight]

And then there's all the scientists studying the moon rocks. Since any fake, whether Earth rock or even lunar meteorite,  would have many things going against it, that a close examination would reveal the hoax, they need to be convinced as well to keep their mouths shut also.

Scientists can be bought, so they shouldn't be trusted.

Not my opinions of course, straight from the hoax believer paradigm!

But snake oil salesman like Bart Sirel, Marcus Allen and David Percy SHOULD ALWAYS BE BELIEVED

[Cat Not Included]

While I think this article is saying something fairly straightforward, I really cringe at it.

"Oxford University physicist Dr David Grimes worked out a mathematical way to calculate the chances of a plot being deliberately leaked by a whistle-blower or accidentally uncovered."

And what is its accurate prediction rate so far?
How many past, known conspiracies that were not included in the baseline calculations has it been applied to and successfully matched up with?

OK, maybe I'm totally wrong about this, but I really feel like this is "Oxford University physicist Dr David Grimes made an educated guess about a formula to calculate the chances of a plot being deliberately leaked by a whistleblower or accidentally uncovered".

When it gets portrayed as hard science we can count on...I feel like that is more likely to make people distrust ACTUAL hard science we can count on.

Or am I way off base here?

[Luckmeister]

One problem in this case is that when dealing in probabilities, the larger the sample size the better for odds calculation and reliability. And this sampling would be quite small statistically.

[raven]

Not to mention that, if the signs of a hoax were what myth mongers and their conspiracy theorist followers say, then the former USSR would have had all the evidence they needed to blow open the hoax, but did not.

They agreed to keep quiet in return for wheat.

Which raises the question of why they didn't spill the beans when the US created a wheat embargo under Jimmy Carter, or try to prevent it by forcing the issue in secret.

And then there's all the scientists studying the moon rocks. Since any fake, whether Earth rock or even lunar meteorite,  would have many things going against it, that a close examination would reveal the hoax, they need to be convinced as well to keep their mouths shut also.

Scientists can be bought, so they shouldn't be trusted.

Not my opinions of course, straight from the hoax believer paradigm!

Ooh, but of course! [/sarcasm]

[JayUtah]

Here's the actual paper.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147905

I see it as something of a Drake equation.  It properly shows the relationships among the estimable quantities in the model, and explains some ways one might estimate them. But it stops short of being a workable model simply because not everything in it is presently known or estimable.

[bknight]

Here's the actual paper.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147905

I see it as something of a Drake equation.  It properly shows the relationships among the estimable quantities in the model, and explains some ways one might estimate them. But it stops short of being a workable model simply because not everything in it is presently known or estimable.

I have never taken a statistics course and the paper is mind-boggling to me.  I'll take your evaluation.

[BertieSlack]

They agreed to keep quiet in return for wheat

I looked into this claim a little while ago, and found out the following:

1. The Soviets didn't start importing U.S grain until 1972
2. They paid for it using their foreign currency reserves, thus weakening their international position
3. These trades neatly solved a problem for the Nixon administration - bumper harvests had threatened over-supply in the domestic market and the consequent price falls would break one of the first rules of politics: don't tick off the farm lobby in an election year

So, overall, these grain trades were more valuable to the USA than the USSR - domestically, internationally and financially.

[Cat Not Included]

Saw this blog post discussing (and questioning) the paper:
http://littleatoms.com/david-grimes-conspiracy-theory-maths

They agreed to keep quiet in return for wheat

I looked into this claim a little while ago, and found out the following:

1. The Soviets didn't start importing U.S grain until 1972

Clearly, the secret soviet psychic precognition program was working quite well.
Of course you've never heard about it. There was a conspiracy to cover it up.