Strong arguments versus weak arguments.

[Glom]

Also, if 9/11 was an inside job, why couldn't that involve arming patsies with box cutters?

I read that as 'arming pasties with box cutters?'

Well they have to fight VAT rises somehow.

[LunarOrbit]

Before going into moonhoax I would like to ask all of you the following question. This is an off-topic question, but by answering it, it will  help me to understand if you truly represent science and reasoning, or you represent sides. One must understand, the testimony of people whose paychecks are dependent on their picked sides, is irrelevant. It would be irrelevant to ask a NASA employee if he believes in moonlandings. Anyway, the question is the following- ` 9/11- an inside job or terrorists with box cutters?`

Please, your answer is very crucial for me ! It is not for discussion, just shoot a straight answer. Thank you!

No. This is completely irrelevant and off topic for this section of the forum. 9/11 has nothing to do with Apollo. Continuing to venture into off topic areas will get you banned. Consider this your only warning.

[gillianren]

Also, if 9/11 was an inside job, why couldn't that involve arming patsies with box cutters?

I read that as 'arming pasties with box cutters?'

That would be much more interesting, certainly.

[VincentMcConnell]

9/11- an inside job or terrorists with box cutters?`

Get over that nonsense. There is no evidence to suggest 9/11 was an inside job. The fact of the matter is that it was a small terrorist group from the middle east that simply hated America. You DO realize that terrorist attacks happen, right?
That's completely off-topic and I see exactly where you're going with this. This thread is going to "devolve" into you peddling bullcrap conspiracy theories until we entertain your nonsense. It's clear how you feel about 9/11, and if you really think the US Government would do something like killing 3,000 innocent Americans and destroying billions of dollars worth of property, you can screw off.

[LunarOrbit]

9/11 is off topic in this section for everyone, Vincent, not just advancedboy.

[VincentMcConnell]

9/11 is off topic in this section for everyone, Vincent, not just advancedboy.

That's why I said he should drop that nonsense. The name of the website even has "APOLLO" in it.
I just don't understand what the point of his post was... He came here to rate theories in which he
probably believes, calls them weak, uses them later and then starts bringing up other whacky theo-
ries.

[DataCable]

One must understand, the testimony of people whose paychecks are dependent on their picked sides, is irrelevant. It would be irrelevant to ask a NASA employee if he believes in moonlandings.

NASA employees' paychecks are not dependent upon their belief in the authenticity of the Apollo program.

` 9/11- an inside job or terrorists with box cutters?`

Irrelevant, off-topic, and a false dichotomy.

So, on to a strong argument.  Footage of the lunar rover shows lunar regolith kicked up by the wheels with absolutely no sign of fine particles billowing in a persistent cloud, indicating that this footage was filmed in a vacuum.  There is no vacuum chamber on Earth anywhere near large enough to construct such a set.  One hoax proponent claimed that the "sand" used on the lunar set could have been "washed and sifted" to remove all particles fine enough to arisolize.  However, he could not provide examples of this process ever being performed, declined to demonstrate such a process himself, and could not explain how to prevent new fine particles from being formed by mutual abrasion of larger particles from simple handling the processed material (transporting, pouring, etc.)  In fact, he was completely incredulous that the latter would even occur. 

[SolusLupus]

Three pages so far.  Hum.  Wonder if we'll hear more from him.

[advancedboy]

I already told you I am not going to discuss 9/11. it was a question of how `investigative` as a person you are. I can`t prove that you are credible, but I can draw som econclusions by asking a simple 9/11 question. All you had to do is simply say `yes` or `no`. You don`t have to twist and twitch in endless comments how it is off topic .it is the same as if you claimed to be a physicist, and I asked a question of what does 3.14 represent, and you would endlessly comment how much it is off topic.

Alright, as I see you are soooo much afraid to answer the question, i already have my own suspicions. Let`s leave it at that. At least , thank you  Vincent for showing where you stand. Let`s talk moonlandings.
Let`s start with very simple assumtions.
Assumption 1. Russians would have complained about Apollo, had it been faked.
Possible variations. Having proof about your adversary faking moonlanding would be used as an asset without an expiry date. What does mafia do to coerce people in committing murders and other crimes? They let you commit one( by hefty bonusing) and collect evidence for later blackmailing. Once you are in the fold, you are in the fold.If I were Soviet Union, I would use it for the good of our own people, and would demand in exchange for silence `price negotiations` for raw material purchase.
Why would I need an intangible consolation that I have won a mystical cold war? People individually don`t care about winning, they care about income, utilites, their families and health. Pride comes after a paycheck, so does religion.
It doesn`t mean US didnt have intelligence data on USSR, that would be less compelling. Go figure.

[SolusLupus]

Sigh, you really do have to realize that we're used to this kind of game.  "I was expecting X reaction, I did not receive it, so you must not know what you're talking about" -- your post was very much an obvious set-up.  Also, how would a physicist being queried on pi correlate?  It's more like going up to someone and saying you want to talk about China, and then asking them, "Was India Hindu?  Yes or no?"  Leading to the Historian going "Buh?  What's that have to do with China?"

It also isn't endless commenting, but more like several historians all collectively going "Wait, what?"  There's more than one poster, I think you'll find.  The more than 24 hour wait for a response also will necessarily lead to more people posting to amuse themselves.

Also, "yes or no" didn't apply, since you did not frame it as a yes/no question, but that's small potatoes.

Assumption 1. Russians would have complained about Apollo, had it been faked.
Possible variations. Having proof about your adversary faking moonlanding would be used as an asset without an expiry date. What does mafia do to coerce people in committing murders and other crimes? They let you commit one( by hefty bonusing) and collect evidence for later blackmailing. Once you are in the fold, you are in the fold.If I were Soviet Union, I would use it for the good of our own people, and would demand in exchange for silence `price negotiations` for raw material purchase.

  Speculation.  This is entirely an "If I Ran The Zoo" form of argument.  What actual data would support your view of events?

Why would I need an intangible consolation that I have won a mystical cold war?

For that matter, then, why would either side spend so much time and money on getting into space?  The US wasn't the only one getting up there, and even if you argue that it was all done in a film studio, the amount of effort and money to spend to truly simulate 0 gravity, fake all that telemetry being constantly sent that was nearly impossible to fake, etc. would have been massively expensive (and quite implausible, at that); it was rather obvious, from events, that both sides took the space race very seriously.

[Jason Thompson]

I already told you I am not going to discuss 9/11. it was a question of how `investigative` as a person you are. I can`t prove that you are credible, but I can draw som econclusions by asking a simple 9/11 question.

No, you can't. The question tells us far more about you than anything else. If you are claiming to be able to deduce from a 'yes or no' answer just how 'investigative' we are, then you are presupposing that any investigation must lead to the same conclusion you already have drawn. Since you will not tell us what that conclusion is (and since we have seen this tactic used before), I see no reason to play that kind of game. 9/11 is irrelevant.

it is the same as if you claimed to be a physicist, and I asked a question of what does 3.14 represent, and you would endlessly comment how much it is off topic.

No, it is nothing like that. 3.14 is a universal constant that any physicist would recognise. 9/11 is an irrelevant tangent to a discussion about Apollo.

Assumption 1. Russians would have complained about Apollo, had it been faked.

And eveything else that follows that is very very weak. The US could have no guarantee that the USSR would maintain their silence even if they did pay for it. The risks involved in faking Apollo are simply too great when compared to the benefits of doing the work to actually land men on the Moon. And since the stated political purpose of Apollo was to show the worl that the US was better than the USSR, if the Russians ever find out then it's game over.

In any case, you have yet to demonstrate that Apollo was faked. Debating possible motives and means of coverup is rather like debating my means and motive for murdering my wife and disposing of the body, and trying to secure a murder conviction from it, before checking to see if she's actually dead.

[nomuse]

I already told you I am not going to discuss 9/11. it was a question of how `investigative` as a person you are. I can`t prove that you are credible, but I can draw som econclusions by asking a simple 9/11 question. All you had to do is simply say `yes` or `no`. You don`t have to twist and twitch in endless comments how it is off topic .it is the same as if you claimed to be a physicist, and I asked a question of what does 3.14 represent, and you would endlessly comment how much it is off topic.

How does "yes" or "no" prove an ability to discuss evidence and use science?

It doesn't.  The only thing a binary answer of this kind can serve as is a litmus test for political bias.

Probing for knowledge of physical constants (or irrational numbers) is different.  That can show the other party has some familiarity with at least that subject.

Alright, as I see you are soooo much afraid to answer the question, i already have my own suspicions. Let`s leave it at that. At least , thank you  Vincent for showing where you stand. Let`s talk moonlandings.
Let`s start with very simple assumtions.

And thus begins the Gish Gallop.

How about, stop playing games, and present your case simply and directly, concentrating on what you think is the strongest evidence for your point?

All these meta discussions and off-topic questions and pretending to play both sides of the fence are distracting, annoying, pointless, and boring.

Assumption 1. Russians would have complained about Apollo, had it been faked.
Possible variations. Having proof about your adversary faking moonlanding would be used as an asset without an expiry date. What does mafia do to coerce people in committing murders and other crimes? They let you commit one( by hefty bonusing) and collect evidence for later blackmailing. Once you are in the fold, you are in the fold.If I were Soviet Union, I would use it for the good of our own people, and would demand in exchange for silence `price negotiations` for raw material purchase.
Why would I need an intangible consolation that I have won a mystical cold war? People individually don`t care about winning, they care about income, utilites, their families and health. Pride comes after a paycheck, so does religion.
It doesn`t mean US didnt have intelligence data on USSR, that would be less compelling. Go figure.

And?

Yes, it is vaguely possible there could be compelling short-term gains in staying silent and using blackmail.  But suggesting it is far from showing it.  Political power IS economic power and vice versa.  Looking bad before the world -- losing the space race -- loses them political swing in places that also are important to them economically.

And by the by, your Maslov's hierarchies are flawed here.  If everyone put a paycheck ahead of all other possible goals, there would be, for instance, NO TEACHERS.

[SolusLupus]

I always wonder if HBs in this kind of situation imagine themselves as Juror 2 from 12 Angry Men?  That they "just ask simple questions" bit by bit, but by the end of the movie they find they've convinced the whole jury that there was a conspiracy?  Then they naturally get frustrated when it doesn't work out that way, especially when they get confronted by obstacle after obstacle in actual evidence.

[advancedboy]

All I need is a plausibility for the scenario given. Plausible or not? No twitching, please!

Question 2. Engineering legacy. As we know Russians sold their RD-180 to Americans so they could use it for their rocketry. You might argue that it was a much newer engine venture spun  off from 80ies, while F-1 was much older design. yet consider RD-180 is a modernised engine of Apollo era Soviet design. We might Ask where are the endless improvements of F-1 that would be used today in American rocketry? I know that F-1 was supposedly very powerful with a lift of about 600 tons, while Rd-180 is a much weaker design. Now you will try to prove finance issues by telling that Russian design is simply cheaper, and that`s all.  Interestingly how much money did they save by building Space Shuttle complex with a completely different engines than f-!. With a superb reliability of F-1, it seems odd it hasn`t found its application nowadays. Might we say- it was too good and too powerful?

[SolusLupus]

Really, no, "Question 1" is not too plausible, especially if you want to argue they kept it a secret indefinitely.  No records?  No one coming forward, even after the fall of the USSR?  This is even ignoring the logic of them concealing it in the first place, which doesn't make much else.